Dataset Information

Comparative efficacy and safety of fimasartan in patients with hypertension: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

ABSTRACT: Hypertension is a prevalent risk factor for cardiovascular disease. Angiotensin II receptor blockers are widely prescribed to patients with hypertension, while new drugs are continuously developed. However, data on comparative efficacy and safety of novel agents, such as fimasartan, are scarce. Here, we aimed to collect clinical evidence on different angiotensin II receptor blockers using a network meta-analysis. Randomized controlled trials whose follow-up time is within 12 weeks were identified from eight databases via a systematic literature review. Of the 7909 possibly relevant studies, 61 studies with 14,249 adult patients were included in the analysis. These studies were further subjected to quality appraisal using Cochran's Risk of Bias, and sitting systolic blood pressure was considered the primary endpoint. A Bayesian random effect generalized linear model was used for the network meta-analysis, and the treatment rank probability was determined. Olmesartan (standardized mean difference -0.987 [-1.29, -0.729]) and fimasartan (standardized mean difference -0.966 [-1.21, -0.745]) showed the highest rank probabilities (37% and 35%) in the 4-week group, considering the primary endpoint. Furthermore, the odds ratio of adverse events for all agents did not differ significantly from that of the placebo. The treatment rank of angiotensin II receptor blockers varied depending on the outcome type and follow-up period considerably. Fimasartan rapidly lowered blood pressure in 4 weeks, which was further maintained until 12 weeks, indicating its competent efficacy and tolerability. Our findings may help medical practitioners and patients to select the best angiotensin II receptor blocker against hypertension.

SUBMITTER: Seo SM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9380168 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparative efficacy and safety of fimasartan in patients with hypertension: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Seo Suk Min SM Ihm Sang Hyun SH Yi Jeong-Eun JE Jeong Seung Hee SH Kim Bong-Seog BS

Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) 20220712 8

Hypertension is a prevalent risk factor for cardiovascular disease. Angiotensin II receptor blockers are widely prescribed to patients with hypertension, while new drugs are continuously developed. However, data on comparative efficacy and safety of novel agents, such as fimasartan, are scarce. Here, we aimed to collect clinical evidence on different angiotensin II receptor blockers using a network meta-analysis. Randomized controlled trials whose follow-up time is within 12 weeks were identifie ...[more]

PMID: 35819029

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background and objectivesElevated BP is an important risk factor for cardiovascular disease, with a prevalence of over 80% in patients undergoing maintenance dialysis. We assessed the comparative BP-lowering efficacy and the safety of BP-lowering drugs in patients undergoing maintenance dialysis.Design, settings, participants, & measurementsWe performed a frequentist random effects network meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials evaluating BP-lowering agents in adult patients undergoing maintenance dialysis. Electronic databases (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase) were systematically searched (up to August 2018) for relevant trials. The main outcome was systolic BP reduction.ResultsForty trials (4283 participants) met our inclusion criteria. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, β-blockers, calcium-channel blockers, and aldosterone antagonists lowered systolic BP to a greater extent than placebo, with effect sizes ranging from -10.8 mm Hg (95% confidence interval, -14.8 to -6.7 mm Hg) for the aldosterone antagonists to -4.3 mm Hg (95% confidence interval, -7.2 to -1.5 mm Hg) for angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. Aldosterone antagonists and β-blockers were superior to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, calcium-channel blockers, and renin inhibitors at lowering systolic BP. Compared with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, aldosterone antagonists and β-blockers lowered systolic BP by 6.4 mm Hg (95% confidence interval, -11.4 to -1.4 mm Hg) and 4.4 mm Hg (95% confidence interval, -7.4 to -1.3 mm Hg), respectively. Systolic BP reduction was not different with angiotensin receptor blockers, α-blockers, and calcium-channel blockers compared with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. Renin inhibitors were less effective. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, and aldosterone antagonists incurred risks of drug discontinuation due to adverse events and hypotension.ConclusionsBP-lowering agents significantly reduced systolic BP in patients undergoing maintenance dialysis. β-Blockers and aldosterone antagonists may confer larger reductions, although treatment with aldosterone antagonists may be limited by adverse events.

Project description:BackgroundAcupuncture therapy has been widely used to treat post-stroke cognitive impairment (PSCI). However, acupuncture therapy includes multiple forms. Which acupuncture therapy provides the best treatment outcome for patients with PSCI remains controversial.ObjectiveWe aimed to compare and evaluate the efficacy and safety of different acupuncture-related therapies for PSCI in an attempt to identify the best acupuncture therapies that can improve cognitive function and self-care in daily life for patients with PSCI, and bring new insights to clinical practice.MethodWe searched eight databases including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, China Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), China Science and Technology Journal (VIP) database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) database, and Wan fang database to find randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of acupuncture-related therapies for PSCI from the inception of the database to January 2023. Two researchers independently assessed the risk of bias in the included studies and extracted the study data. Pairwise meta-analyzes for direct comparisons were performed using Rev. Man 5.4 software. Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed using STATA 17.0 and R4.2.4 software. The quality of evidence from the included studies was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Adverse effects (AEs) associated with acupuncture therapy were collected by reading the full text of the included studies to assess the safety of acupuncture therapy.ResultsA total of 62 RCTs (3 three-arm trials and 59 two-arm trials) involving 5,073 participants were included in this study. In the paired meta-analysis, most acupuncture-related therapies had a positive effect on cognitive function and self-care of daily living in patients with PSCI compared with cognitive training. Bayesian NMA results suggested that ophthalmic acupuncture plus cognitive training (79.7%) was the best acupuncture therapy for improving MMSE scores, with scalp acupuncture plus cognitive training ranking as the second (73.7%). The MoCA results suggested that warm acupuncture plus cognitive training (86.5%) was the best acupuncture therapy. In terms of improvement in daily living self-care, scalp acupuncture plus body acupuncture (87.5%) was the best acupuncture therapy for improving MBI scores. The most common minor AEs included subcutaneous hematoma, dizziness, sleepiness, and pallor.ConclusionAccording to our Bayesian NMA results, ophthalmic acupuncture plus cognitive training and warm acupuncture plus cognitive training were the most effective acupuncture treatments for improving cognitive function, while scalp acupuncture plus body acupuncture was the best acupuncture treatment for improving the performance of self-care in daily life in patients with PSCI. No serious adverse effects were found in the included studies, and acupuncture treatment appears to be safe and reliable. However, due to the low methodological quality of the included studies, our findings need to be treated with caution. High-quality studies are urgently needed to validate our findings.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/#recordDetails, identifier: CRD42022378353.

Project description:BackgroundHypertension is one of the most prevalent disorders encountered in medical practice, yet effective pharmacotherapy options for resistant hypertension are limited. In this meta-analysis, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of aprocitentan in treating hypertension.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the Cochrane Library databases from inception to June 3, 2024, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the efficacy and safety between aprocitentan and placebo in treating hypertension. According to the dosage of aprocitentan, the study was divided into a low-dose group (10-12.5 mg), medium-dose group (25 mg), and high-dose group (50 mg).ResultsThis meta-analysis included five RCTs, which incorporated 1224 patients, and displayed that aprocitentan can reduce the mean sitting systolic blood pressure (msSBP) [(low dose subgroup: mean difference (MD): -3.85 mmHg; 95% confidence interval (CI): -7.47 to -0.23; p = 0.040; medium dose group: MD: -5.56 mmHg; 95% CI: -10.69 to -0.44; p = 0.030)], mean sitting diastolic blood pressure (msDBP) (low dose subgroup: MD: -3.95 mmHg; 95% CI: -4.06 to -3.85; p < 0.001; medium dose group: MD: -4.75 mmHg; 95% CI: -5.91 to -3.60; p < 0.001), 24-hour ambulatory systolic blood pressure (maSBP) (low dose group: MD: -4.18 mmHg; 95% CI: -4.32 to -4.04; p < 0.001; medium dose group: MD: -5.89 mmHg; 95% CI: -6.03 to -5.75; p < 0.001), and 24-hour ambulatory diastolic blood pressure (maDBP) (low dose group: MD: -4.33 mmHg; 95% CI: -4.42 to -4.24; p < 0.001; medium dose group: MD: -5.82 mmHg; 95% CI: -5.91 to -5.73; p < 0.001). In the high-dose group, there was no difference between the aprocitentan and placebo groups in the msSBP (MD: -4.83 mmHg; 95% CI: -11.44 to 1.79; p = 0.150). Meanwhile, the safety profile of aprocitentan was good, and no significant differences in the frequency of adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs) were observed compared to the placebo.ConclusionsAprocitentan significantly reduces blood pressure and has a good safety profile. However, it is worth noting that high doses of aprocitentan (50 mg) did not yield better blood pressure-lowering effects.

Project description:BackgroundSystemic treatments, namely, either monotherapy or combination therapy, are commonly administered to patients with advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). This study aimed to provide the complete efficacy and safety profiles and ranking of systemic therapies for the treatment of unresectable advanced or metastatic CRC.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception until June 30, 2021, and also the bibliographies of relevant studies. Randomized controlled trials comparing two or more treatments, namely, at least capecitabine, 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, bevacizumab, cetuximab, oxaliplatin, or panitumumab were investigated. A network meta-analysis using the Bayesian approach was performed to compare the efficacy and safety of treatments. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was calculated for the probability of each treatment as the most effective. The overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), adverse events (AEs) grade ≥3, and serious adverse events (SAEs) were evaluated.ResultsOne hundred two publications with 36,147 participants were assigned to 39 different treatments. Among 11 treatments with full information on six outcomes, FOLFIRI/FOLFOX/FOLFOXIRI + bevacizumab significantly improved both the ORR and DCR, compared to FOLFIRI. Although FOLFOX and FOLFIRI/FOLFOX + cetuximab significantly prolonged both OS and PFS, treatments were comparable in terms of AEs grade ≥3 and SAEs. The top highest SUCRA values were observed in the FOLFOXIRI + panitumumab group for ORR (96%) and DCR (99%), FOLFIRI + bevacizumab + panitumumab group for OS (62%) and PFS (54%), and FOLFOXIRI + bevacizumab group for AEs grade ≥3 (59%) and SAEs (59%) outcomes.ConclusionsThese findings suggest an available range of systemic treatment therapies with different efficacy and safety profiles with patients. Further investigations of the side effects and mutation status are required to confirm our findings.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42019127772.

Project description:BackgroundDementia have brought great challenges to patients, families and society. Numerous art therapies for patients with dementia have been developed in recent years. However, it is still unclear which art therapy represents the optimal strategy for promoting physical and mental health.ObjectivesTo compare the efficacy of various art therapies in improving cognitive function, activity of daily living, depression, anxiety, agitation behavior and quality of life, and rank the art therapies for practice consideration.MethodsA comprehensive literature search was performed in eight electronic databases from their inception to April 2022. Two authors independently completed study selection, data extraction, and assessed methodological quality according to the revised version of the Cochrane tool (RoB 2). Comparative evaluation of different art therapies' effect was performed by conducting network meta-analysis. The study protocol was registered at PROSPERO.ResultsA total of 39 randomized controlled trials involving 2801 participants were included. Calligraphy therapy (MD = 4.39) and reminiscence therapy (MD = 2.53) significantly improved cognitive function compared with the usual care, and reminiscence therapy (MD = 1.75) significantly enhanced cognitive function compared with music therapy. Horticultural therapy significantly decreased agitation behavior compared with the usual care (MD = -31.34), music therapy (MD = -26.66), reading therapy (MD = -28.44) and reminiscence therapy (MD = -27.32). In addition, calligraphy therapy (MD = 9.00) improved quality of life compared with the usual care.ConclusionCalligraphy therapy might be the most effective art therapy for improving cognitive function and quality of life. Horticultural therapy might be the best art therapy for decreasing agitation behavior. Health-care professionals could consider applying these art therapies to improve cognitive function, agitation behavior and quality of life in patients with dementia.

Project description:BackgroundCatecholamines, especially norepinephrine, are the most frequently used vasopressors for treating patients with septic shock. During the recent decades, terlipressin, vasopressin V1A agonist, and even Ca2+ sensitizer were increasingly used by physicians. The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy of such different kinds of vasoactive medications on mortality among patients with septic shock.MethodsRelevant randomized controlled trials were identified by searching PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials updated to February 22, 2018. A network meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the effect of different types of vasoactive medications. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. Intensive care unit (ICU) mortality, hospital and ICU length of stay (LOS), and adverse events were also assessed.ResultsA total of 43 trials with 5767 patients assessing 17 treatment modalities were included. Treatments ranking based on surface under the cumulative ranking curve values from largest to smallest were NE/DB 85.9%, TP 75.1%, NE/EP 74.6%, PI 74.1%, EP 72.5%, VP 66.1%, NE 59.8%, PE 53.0%, DA 42.1%, DX 38.2%, SP 27.0%, PA 24.3%, EX 22.8%, LE 21.5%, and DB 13.3% for 28-day mortality. Treatments ranking for ICU mortality were TP/NE 86.4%, TP 80.3%, TP/DB/NE 65.7%, VP/NE 62.8%, NE 57.4%, VP 56.5%, PE 48.4%, DA 33.0%, PA 27.5%, LE 22.1%, and DB 9.9%. The incidence of myocardial infarction was reported with NE/EP 3.33% (n = 1 of 30), followed by EP 3.11% (n = 5 of 161), and then VP 3.10% (n = 19 of 613), NE 3.03% (n = 43 of 1417), DA 2.21% (n = 19 of 858), NE/DB 2.01% (n = 4 of 199), LE 1.16% (n = 3 of 258), and PA 0.39% (n = 1 of 257). The incidence of arrhythmia was reported with DA 26.01% (n = 258 of 992), followed by EP 22.98% (n = 37 of 161), and then NE/DB 20.60% (n = 41 of 199), NE/EP 20.0% (n = 6 of 30), NE 8.33% (n = 127 of 1525), LE 5.81% (n = 15 of 258), PA 2.33% (n = 6 of 257), and VP 1.67% (n = 10 of 600).ConclusionsThe use of norepinephrine plus dobutamine was associated with lower 28-day mortality for septic shock, especially among patients with lower cardiac output.

Dataset Information

Comparative efficacy and safety of fimasartan in patients with hypertension: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Publications

Comparative efficacy and safety of fimasartan in patients with hypertension: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets