Why the study?
Does azilsartan improve nocturnal blood pressure variation compared to candesartan in Japanese patients with essential hypertension?
Does azilsartan improve nocturnal blood pressure variation compared to candesartan in Japanese patients with essential hypertension?
Azilsartan is more effective than candesartan at reducing night-time systolic blood pressure in Japanese patients with non-dipping essential hypertension.
Supports preferring azilsartan over candesartan in non-dipping hypertension; extends ARB comparative data to nocturnal BP control.
BACKGROUND: Abnormal variations in night-time hypertension such as "non-dipping" type (< 10% decrease in nocturnal systolic blood pressure [SBP] from daytime SBP) are a risk factor for cardiovascular events independent of 24-h BP. METHODS: As part of a randomized, double-blind study of azilsartan (20-40 mg once daily) and candesartan (8-12 mg once daily) in Japanese patients with essential hypertension, an exploratory analysis was performed using ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) at baseline and Week 14. Effects of study drugs on nocturnal BP variations according to patients' nocturnal SBP dipping status were evaluated. RESULTS: ABPM data were available for 273 patients treated with azilsartan and 275 with candesartan. In the dipping group (≥ 10% decrease from daytime SBP), azilsartan produced a greater reduction from baseline in daytime than in night-time SBP (- 14.1 and - 10.9 mmHg, respectively), and the change in daytime SBP was significantly greater with azilsartan than with candesartan (p = 0.0077). In the non-dipping group, azilsartan produced a greater reduction from baseline in night-time than in daytime SBP (- 20.2 and - 9.9 mmHg, respectively), and reductions in both night-time SBP (p = 0.02) and daytime SBP (p = 0.0042) were significantly greater with azilsartan than with candesartan. CONCLUSIONS: Once-daily azilsartan improved non-dipping night-time SBP to a greater extent than candesartan in Japanese patients with grade I-II essential hypertension.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rakugi et al. (2013) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: