A Prospective, Randomized Open-Label Study for Assessment of Antihypertensive Effect of Telmisartan Versus Cilnidipine Using Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring (START ABPM Study)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The antihypertensive agent telmisartan is an angiotensin II receptor blocker with a terminal elimination half-life of 24 h and has a high lipophilicity, thereby enhancing its bioavailability. Another antihypertensive agent, cilnidipine is a calcium antagonist and has dual mode of action on the calcium channels. This study aimed at determining effect of these drugs on ambulatory blood pressure (BP) levels. Methods: A randomized, open-label, single-center study was conducted during 2021 - 2022 on newly diagnosed adult patients with stage-I hypertension, in a mega city of India. Forty eligible patients were randomized to telmisartan (40 mg) and cilnidipine (10 mg) groups, with once daily dose administered for 56 consecutive days. Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) (24 h) was performed pre- and post-treatment, and the ABPM-derived parameters were compared statistically. Results: Statistically significant mean reductions were observed in all BP endpoints in telmisartan group but only in 24-h systolic blood pressure (SBP), daytime and nighttime SBP, and manual SBP and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) in cilnidipine group. The mean change from baseline to day 56 between two treatment groups showed statistical significance in last 6-h SBP (P = 0.01) and DBP (P = 0.014), and morning SBP (P = 0.019) and DBP (P = 0.028). The percent nocturnal drop within and between groups was statistically nonsignificant. Also, the between group mean SBP and DBP smoothness index differed nonsignificantly. Conclusions: Telmisartan and cilnidipine once daily were effective and well tolerated in the treatment of newly diagnosed stage-I hypertension. Telmisartan provided sustained 24-h BP control and may offer advantages over cilnidipine in terms of BP reductions, particularly over the 18- to 24-h post-dose period or critical early morning hours.
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 | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".