MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104819398 · doi:10.1185/03007990152005405

Eprosartan Provides Safe and Effective Long-term Maintenance of Blood Pressure Control in Patients with Mild to Moderate Essential Hypertension

2001· article· en· W2104819398 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Barton S. Levine

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Medical Research and Opinion · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHydrochlorothiazideBlood pressureAdverse effectCandesartanIncidence (geometry)PlaceboInternal medicineDiureticPeripheral edemaEssential hypertensionAngiotensin IICardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Control of hypertension is hindered by the incidence of adverse events associated with therapy, which can result in low patient compliance. Specific angiotensin II receptor subtype AT1 blockers offer an alternative to the angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors in the treatment of hypertension, as the incidence of side-effects may be lower. This open-label study was designed to investigate the long-term safety and efficacy of the AT1 receptor blocker, eprosartan, in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension (sitting diastolic blood pressure > or = 95 mmHg and < or = 114 mmHg). 706 patients from 55 centres in the USA and three centres in Canada were randomised to receive once-daily eprosartan (400-800 mg) alone or in combination with hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ). The study consisted of five periods: screening (day 1), run-in (2-4 weeks), titration (3-15 weeks), maintenance (12-24 months) and follow-up (5-7 days). Safety evaluations included incidences of adverse events and changes in laboratory tests, vital signs and electrocardiograms. Efficacy assessments included effects on blood pressure (BP) and fasting concentrations of lipids and glucose. The maintenance period was completed at 12 months by 583 (83.3%) patients and at 24 months by 311 (44.4%) patients. In total, 396 (56.1%) patients completed the study according to protocol. Once-daily eprosartan was well tolerated either alone or in combination with HCTZ, irrespective of the study dose administered. Patients treated with eprosartan had a safety profile similar to that reported in short-term placebo-controlled studies. The most frequently reported adverse event was upper respiratory tract infection. The incidence of adverse events was not affected by age or race, and, although events increased with the addition of HCTZ, they were generally not severe. The beneficial effect on BP was maintained throughout treatment. For the majority of patients, HDL cholesterol, triglyceride and glucose levels remained within the reference levels at all doses and timepoints. In summary, eprosartan provides reliable blood pressure control in a high proportion of patients, with a safety profile similar to that seen with placebo in short-term, placebo-controlled trials. By providing long-term safety and efficacy, eprosartan may have the potential to increase patient compliance, a significant issue in the treatment of hypertension in all patient types.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.311 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Medical Research and OpinionSame topicBlood Pressure and Hypertension StudiesFrench-language works237,207