阿齐沙坦美多米与其他抗高血压药降低轻度至中度高血压患者血压疗效的系统性文献综述和网络 Meta 分析。

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
Juying Qian, Mengjun Zhang, Zhangwei Chen
{"title":"阿齐沙坦美多米与其他抗高血压药降低轻度至中度高血压患者血压疗效的系统性文献综述和网络 Meta 分析。","authors":"Juying Qian,&nbsp;Mengjun Zhang,&nbsp;Zhangwei Chen","doi":"10.1007/s12325-024-02997-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>A systematic literature review and network meta-analysis was conducted on azilsartan medoxomil (AZL-M) versus other antihypertensive drugs’ efficacy in hypertensive patients.</p><h3>Methods</h3><p>The search utilized English platforms, from January 2000 until December 2023, resulting in 10,380 articles being screened. Screening criteria included hypertension (mild or moderate); first-line treatment and washout periods; studies (monotherapy) with AZL-M, angiotensin type II receptor blockers (ARBs), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs), angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor (ARNIs), beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers (CCBs), and diuretics, either as intervention or comparator; and antihypertension efficacy as an outcome measure. Study design was randomized clinical trials. Efficacy variables included absolute office systolic and diastolic blood pressure (BP) reductions. A total of 21 publications provided adequate data for analysis, of which 20 studies reported both systolic and diastolic BP and one study reported only the diastolic BP.</p><h3>Results</h3><p>In 21 studies on systolic BP, against the common comparator placebo, the differences in systolic BP were significantly in favor of AZL-M, amlodipine, candesartan, irbesartan, nebivolol, nifedipine, olmesartan, sacubitril valsartan, telmisartan, and valsartan. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) ranking shows that AZL-M 80 mg had the highest ranking, with a possibility of 93% being the best in all other included treatments. In 20 studies on diastolic BP, against the common comparator placebo, the differences in diastolic BP were significantly in favor of AZL-M, amlodipine, bisoprolol, nebivolol, olmesartan, sacubitril valsartan, telmisartan, and valsartan. The SUCRA ranking shows that AZL-M 80 mg had the highest ranking, with a possibility of 90% being the best in all other included treatments.</p><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>AZL-M at 40 mg and 80 mg shows favorable efficacy compared to other anti-hypertensives, and the 80 mg dosage seemed to be the most efficacious of all the included treatments in reducing both office systolic and diastolic BP in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":7482,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Therapy","volume":"41 12","pages":"4498 - 4517"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s12325-024-02997-5.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Systematic Literature Review and Network Meta-analysis of Azilsartan Medoxomil Compared to Other Anti-hypertensives Efficacy in Lowering Blood Pressure Amongst Mild to Moderate Hypertensive Patients\",\"authors\":\"Juying Qian,&nbsp;Mengjun Zhang,&nbsp;Zhangwei Chen\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s12325-024-02997-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>A systematic literature review and network meta-analysis was conducted on azilsartan medoxomil (AZL-M) versus other antihypertensive drugs’ efficacy in hypertensive patients.</p><h3>Methods</h3><p>The search utilized English platforms, from January 2000 until December 2023, resulting in 10,380 articles being screened. Screening criteria included hypertension (mild or moderate); first-line treatment and washout periods; studies (monotherapy) with AZL-M, angiotensin type II receptor blockers (ARBs), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs), angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor (ARNIs), beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers (CCBs), and diuretics, either as intervention or comparator; and antihypertension efficacy as an outcome measure. Study design was randomized clinical trials. Efficacy variables included absolute office systolic and diastolic blood pressure (BP) reductions. A total of 21 publications provided adequate data for analysis, of which 20 studies reported both systolic and diastolic BP and one study reported only the diastolic BP.</p><h3>Results</h3><p>In 21 studies on systolic BP, against the common comparator placebo, the differences in systolic BP were significantly in favor of AZL-M, amlodipine, candesartan, irbesartan, nebivolol, nifedipine, olmesartan, sacubitril valsartan, telmisartan, and valsartan. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) ranking shows that AZL-M 80 mg had the highest ranking, with a possibility of 93% being the best in all other included treatments. In 20 studies on diastolic BP, against the common comparator placebo, the differences in diastolic BP were significantly in favor of AZL-M, amlodipine, bisoprolol, nebivolol, olmesartan, sacubitril valsartan, telmisartan, and valsartan. The SUCRA ranking shows that AZL-M 80 mg had the highest ranking, with a possibility of 90% being the best in all other included treatments.</p><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>AZL-M at 40 mg and 80 mg shows favorable efficacy compared to other anti-hypertensives, and the 80 mg dosage seemed to be the most efficacious of all the included treatments in reducing both office systolic and diastolic BP in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7482,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Advances in Therapy\",\"volume\":\"41 12\",\"pages\":\"4498 - 4517\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s12325-024-02997-5.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Advances in Therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12325-024-02997-5\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12325-024-02997-5","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介本研究对阿齐沙坦酯(AZL-M)与其他抗高血压药物在高血压患者中的疗效进行了系统性文献综述和网络荟萃分析:检索利用英语平台,检索期从 2000 年 1 月至 2023 年 12 月,共筛选出 10,380 篇文章。筛选标准包括:高血压(轻度或中度);一线治疗和冲洗期;使用 AZL-M、血管紧张素 II 型受体阻滞剂(ARB)、血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂(ACEI)、血管紧张素受体肾酶抑制剂(ARNI)、β-受体阻滞剂、钙通道阻滞剂(CCB)和利尿剂作为干预或比较药物的研究(单药治疗);以及作为结果测量指标的抗高血压疗效。研究设计为随机临床试验。疗效变量包括办公室收缩压和舒张压(BP)的绝对降低幅度。共有 21 篇文献提供了足够的分析数据,其中 20 项研究同时报告了收缩压和舒张压,1 项研究仅报告了舒张压:结果:在 21 项关于收缩压的研究中,与常用的比较药安慰剂相比,AZL-M、氨氯地平、坎地沙坦、厄贝沙坦、奈比洛尔、硝苯地平、奥美沙坦、沙库比特利缬沙坦、替米沙坦和缬沙坦的收缩压差异显著。累积排名曲线下表面(SUCRA)排名显示,AZL-M 80 毫克的排名最高,有 93% 的可能性在所有其他纳入的治疗中名列前茅。在 20 项关于舒张压的研究中,与常用的参照安慰剂相比,AZL-M、氨氯地平、比索洛尔、奈比洛尔、奥美沙坦、沙库比特利缬沙坦、替米沙坦和缬沙坦的舒张压差异显著。SUCRA 排名显示,AZL-M 80 毫克的排名最高,90% 的可能性是所有其他治疗方法中最好的:结论:与其他降压药相比,AZL-M 40 毫克和 80 毫克剂量显示出良好的疗效,在所有纳入的治疗中,80 毫克剂量似乎对降低轻中度高血压患者的办公室收缩压和舒张压最有效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Systematic Literature Review and Network Meta-analysis of Azilsartan Medoxomil Compared to Other Anti-hypertensives Efficacy in Lowering Blood Pressure Amongst Mild to Moderate Hypertensive Patients

Introduction

A systematic literature review and network meta-analysis was conducted on azilsartan medoxomil (AZL-M) versus other antihypertensive drugs’ efficacy in hypertensive patients.

Methods

The search utilized English platforms, from January 2000 until December 2023, resulting in 10,380 articles being screened. Screening criteria included hypertension (mild or moderate); first-line treatment and washout periods; studies (monotherapy) with AZL-M, angiotensin type II receptor blockers (ARBs), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs), angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor (ARNIs), beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers (CCBs), and diuretics, either as intervention or comparator; and antihypertension efficacy as an outcome measure. Study design was randomized clinical trials. Efficacy variables included absolute office systolic and diastolic blood pressure (BP) reductions. A total of 21 publications provided adequate data for analysis, of which 20 studies reported both systolic and diastolic BP and one study reported only the diastolic BP.

Results

In 21 studies on systolic BP, against the common comparator placebo, the differences in systolic BP were significantly in favor of AZL-M, amlodipine, candesartan, irbesartan, nebivolol, nifedipine, olmesartan, sacubitril valsartan, telmisartan, and valsartan. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) ranking shows that AZL-M 80 mg had the highest ranking, with a possibility of 93% being the best in all other included treatments. In 20 studies on diastolic BP, against the common comparator placebo, the differences in diastolic BP were significantly in favor of AZL-M, amlodipine, bisoprolol, nebivolol, olmesartan, sacubitril valsartan, telmisartan, and valsartan. The SUCRA ranking shows that AZL-M 80 mg had the highest ranking, with a possibility of 90% being the best in all other included treatments.

Conclusion

AZL-M at 40 mg and 80 mg shows favorable efficacy compared to other anti-hypertensives, and the 80 mg dosage seemed to be the most efficacious of all the included treatments in reducing both office systolic and diastolic BP in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Advances in Therapy
Advances in Therapy 医学-药学
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
2.60%
发文量
353
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Advances in Therapy is an international, peer reviewed, rapid-publication (peer review in 2 weeks, published 3–4 weeks from acceptance) journal dedicated to the publication of high-quality clinical (all phases), observational, real-world, and health outcomes research around the discovery, development, and use of therapeutics and interventions (including devices) across all therapeutic areas. Studies relating to diagnostics and diagnosis, pharmacoeconomics, public health, epidemiology, quality of life, and patient care, management, and education are also encouraged. The journal is of interest to a broad audience of healthcare professionals and publishes original research, reviews, communications and letters. The journal is read by a global audience and receives submissions from all over the world. Advances in Therapy will consider all scientifically sound research be it positive, confirmatory or negative data. Submissions are welcomed whether they relate to an international and/or a country-specific audience, something that is crucially important when researchers are trying to target more specific patient populations. This inclusive approach allows the journal to assist in the dissemination of all scientifically and ethically sound research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信