Why the study?
Does candesartan cilexetil effectively and safely treat hypertension and other cardiovascular diseases?
Does candesartan cilexetil effectively and safely treat hypertension and other cardiovascular diseases?
This review highlights candesartan cilexetil as a highly selective, effective, and well-tolerated angiotensin receptor blocker for managing hypertension, heart failure, and reducing stroke risk.
Supports candesartan selection in hypertension and HF; leaves open comparative trials versus newer ARBs.
Hypertension is a major cardiovascular risk factor, but most patients remain asymptomatic for many years. Successful therapy not only needs to be effective, it also needs to be well tolerated. Angiotensin receptor blockers have emerged as a major therapeutic class because they meet both of these requirements. Numerous studies indicate that all approved angiotensin receptor blockers are highly selective for angiotensin-1 receptors, lower blood pressure as monotherapies, and work well in combination with other drugs - particularly diuretics. The side-effect profile of angiotensin receptor blockers is similar to that of placebo and they have not been associated with known side effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors such as cough and angioneurotic edema. Candesartan cilexetil is an angiotensin receptor blocker with insurmountable binding properties to the angiotensin-1 receptor, long duration of action and improved efficacy. In patients with hypertension, candesartan monotherapy has been shown to be safe and effective. Comparative data have shown similar or better results to other monotherapies in blood-pressure control, and in combination with hydrochlorothiazide it has been shown to have additive or synergistic effects. More recent data demonstrate that candesartan cilexetil is useful in the treatment of patients with heart failure and may protect against diabetic nephropathy. Studies have also shown protection from stroke, particularly in patients with isolated systolic hypertension.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ross et al. (2004) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: