Effects of force-titrated valsartan/hydrochlorothiazide versus amlodipine/hydrochlorothiazide on ambulatory blood pressure in patients with stage 2 hypertension: the EVALUATE study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previous studies using the combination of angiotensin-receptor blockers and hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) have shown superior ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) reduction in study participants with stage 2 hypertension compared with monotherapy. OBJECTIVE: This multicenter, double-blind, parallel group, forced-titration study of individuals with stage 2 hypertension, compared the efficacy of valsartan and amlodipine in combination with HCTZ on ABP reduction. METHODS: After a 2-week washout period, participants (n=482) with mean office sitting systolic BP >or=160 mmHg and <or=200 mmHg were randomized to receive treatment with either valsartan 160 mg (n=241) or amlodipine 5 mg (n=241), force-titrated to a maximum dose of valsartan/HCTZ 320/25 mg or amlodipine/HCTZ 10/25 mg over 6 weeks and continued through week 10. The primary endpoint was change in mean 24-h ambulatory systolic BP from baseline to week 10. RESULTS: At week 10, changes from baseline in mean office BP were significantly (P<0.0001) decreased by both valsartan/HCTZ (-34.2/-14.2 mmHg) and amlodipine/HCTZ (-34.1/-14.7 mmHg). Changes from baseline in mean 24-h ABP were significantly (P<0.0001) decreased by both valsartan/HCTZ (-21.1/-12.5 mmHg) and amlodipine/HCTZ (-18.1/-9.9 mmHg). However, treatment with valsartan/HCTZ provided significant additional systolic BP (-3.8 mmHg; P=0.0042) and diastolic BP (-2.7 mmHg; P=0.0002) reduction compared with the amlodipine/HCTZ group. The proportion of individuals reaching the office goal BP (<140/80 mmHg) were similar in the valsartan/HCTZ (55.3%) versus amlodipine/HCTZ (54.9%) group, ABP control rates for the recommended ABP goal (<130/80 mmHg) were greater (P=0.0170) in the valsartan/HCTZ group (54.3%) than the amlodipine/HCTZ group (42.7%). Both treatments were well tolerated. CONCLUSION: On the basis of ABP monitoring but not office measurements, the fixed-dose combination of valsartan/HCTZ is a significantly more effective treatment regimen than amlodipine/HCTZ, with similar tolerability.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it