Concomitant Treatment of Hypertensive Patients with Bisoprolol and Perindopril in Routine Clinical Practice: A Post Hoc Analysis of the CONFIDENCE II, PROTECT I, and PROTECT III Observational Studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The combination of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and beta-blockers is recommended in a wide range of patients with hypertension, including those with stable coronary artery disease and/or elevated heart rate. This post hoc analysis of three observational studies provides effectiveness and safety data on treatment with perindopril on top of bisoprolol-based therapy, in routine clinical practice. METHODS: Data were analyzed from three open-label, prospective, multicenter, observational studies of Canadian patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension, which shared the same inclusion and exclusion criteria, treatment duration, and primary outcome. This post hoc analysis focused on the subpopulation of patients treated with perindopril on top of bisoprolol-based therapy. All patients were followed for 16 weeks and underwent baseline, week 4, and week 16 visits. Primary outcomes were mean changes in blood pressure (BP) and proportion of patients achieving BP control (< 140/90 mmHg) in the full analysis set (FAS). RESULTS: A total of 845 patients (mean age 68.3 ± 11.3 years, mean baseline BP 151.5/86.0 mmHg) were analyzed in the FAS. After 16 weeks, mean SBP/DBP decreased by - 20.4/- 9.8 mmHg with statistically significant reductions observed at all visits in all three studies allowing 78% of patients to achieve the BP treatment goal. No statistically significant changes in heart rate were observed and no serious adverse events reported. The most frequent doses of bisoprolol and perindopril were 5 + 4 mg (34.9%), followed by 5 + 8 mg (16.9%), and 2.5 + 4 mg (12.5%). CONCLUSION: The addition of perindopril on top of bisoprolol-based therapy in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension was associated with significant reductions in BP compared with baseline and with achievement of BP targets in the majority of patients. The results suggest this strategy is safe and effective for use in routine clinical practice.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".