Effects of Long- and Intermediate-Acting Dihydropyridine Calcium Channel Blockers in Hypertension
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers are a heterogeneous group of antihypertensive drugs. Long-acting dihydropyridine agent amlodipine is widely used for monotherapy and combination therapy for hypertension in clinical practice, while intermediate-acting dihydropyridine agents have shown inconsistent results in randomized clinical trials (RCTs). METHODS AND RESULTS: A meta-analysis of 18 RCTs enrolling a total of 80,483 patients with hypertension followed for a mean of 51.4 months was performed. Amlodipine therapy was associated with 25% higher risk of heart failure (relative risk [RR]: 1.25, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-1.49, P = .019) but 17% lower risk of stroke (RR: 0.83, [95% CI, 0.72-0.97], P = .009) without statistically significant effect on acute myocardial infarction (AMI) compared to major alternative antihypertensive therapy (MAAT), including β-blocker, diuretic, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, or angiotensin-receptor blocker. Intermediate-acting dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker therapy was associated with 25% higher risk of heart failure (RR: 1.25, [95% CI, 1.06-1.47], 0.005, P = .005) and 26% higher risk of AMI (RR: 1.26, [95% CI, 1.05-1.51], 0.019, P = .019) compared to MAAT. Results of the subgroup analysis suggested that the intermediate-acting dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker was associated with higher risk of heart failure (RR: 1.30, [95% CI, 1.08-1.56], P = .005) and AMI (RR: 1.50, [95% CI, 1.01-2.22], P = .043) compared to renin-angiotensin system blockers and a trend toward higher risk of AMI (RR: 1.17, [95% CI, 0.99-1.38], P = .064) compared to conventional therapy, including β-blockers and diuretics. Meta-regression analyses suggested that long-acting dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker is associated with lower risk of AMI ( B: -0.327, [95% CI, -0.530 to -0.123], P = .002) with a trend toward lower risk of stroke ( B: -0.203, [95% CI, -0.410 to 0.003] P = .054). CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that Amlodipine offers greater protection against major complications of hypertension compared to intermediate-acting dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers.
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 | 0.010 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.014 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".