Efficacy and Safety of Coadministered Amlodipine and Atorvastatin in Patients With Hypertension and Dyslipidemia: Results of the AVALON Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The AVALON study was a randomized, multicenter trial to assess the efficacy and safety of coadministered amlodipine and atorvastatin in patients with hypertension and dyslipidemia. Phase one was an 8-week, double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled period whereby patients received amlodipine 5 mg, atorvastatin 10 mg, amlodipine 5 mg and atorvastatin 10 mg, or placebo. Thereafter, all patients received single-blind amlodipine 5 mg and atorvastatin 10 mg for 8-weeks, followed by 12 weeks of open-label treatment where doses could be titrated to improve low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and blood pressure control. A total of 847 patients entered the double-blind phase. At Week 8, 45% of the patients receiving amlodipine 5 mg and atorvastatin 10 mg reached both their blood pressure and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol goals, compared with 8.3% with amlodipine (p < 0.001), 28.6% with atorvastatin (p < 0.001), and 3.5% with placebo. At 28 weeks, 67.1% of patients coadministered amlodipine and atorvastatin (mean doses, 7.6 mg and 28.4 mg, respectively) achieved both targets. Framingham estimated 10-year risk of coronary heart disease declined from baseline levels of 15.1% to 6.9% at Week 28. Following coadministered treatment, the adverse events reported were similar to either agent alone. Concomitant administration of amlodipine and atorvastatin is an effective and well tolerated treatment for coexisting hypertension and dyslipidemia.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".