The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.
Quality of life and calcium channel blockade with nifedipine GITS versus amlodipine in hypertensive patients in Spain
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Compliance with hypertension treatment is affected by treatment-related factors (complexity, side effects), efficacy and compound-specific effects that impact on quality of life. This study examined the differences in quality of life produced by two once-daily calcium channel blockers using different delivery systems: nifedipine gastrointestinal therapeutic system (GITS) and amlodipine. DESIGN: This was a double-blind, double-dummy, randomized clinical trial comparing nifedipine GITS (30 mg) and amlodipine (5 mg) for 24 weeks following a placebo run-in. Clinical, laboratory evaluations and quality-of-life data were assessed at screening, baseline randomization and three times during active therapy. SETTING: The study was conducted in 13 medical clinics in Spain. PATIENTS: The sample comprised 430 screened and 356 randomized patients with mild to moderate hypertension (diastolic blood pressure 95-114 mmHg). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Change in systolic and diastolic blood pressure and in health-related quality of life were the main outcome measures. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between active treatment groups in the blood pressure changes (systolic blood pressure: nifedipine GITS -15.5 mmHg; amlodipine -15.7 mmHg). Spontaneous adverse events consistent with calcium channel blockage were not different. The nifedipine GITS group improved in all quality-of-life measures except Sexual Symptom Distress and showed a significantly greater improvement than amlodipine in overall Quality of Life (P< 0.05), General Perceived Health (P < 0.026) and its subscale Vitality (P < 0.019). The amlodipine group declined in overall Quality of Life, General Perceived Health, Vitality and Sleep Disturbance, and significantly in Sexual Symptom Distress (P < 0.045). However, this group improved in self-reported Cognitive Functioning (P=0.036), Mental Acuity (P < 0.005) and Detachment/disorientation (P=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest compound-specific effects on quality of life that may be due to differences in the delivery system. Nifedipine GITS is short-acting (2 h half-life) and is delivered continuously over a 24 h period, while amlodipine has a half-life of 40 h, which may produce more sustained low-level effects. While a more beneficial profile was observed for nifedipine, amlodipine demonstrated potential positive effects on cognitive functioning.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 30 · Cited by 40
Research works printed but not linked: 35
- Turner, 1992, Cardiology, 80, 11, 10.1159/000175043 · DOI
- Dahlof, 1991, Lancet, 338, 1281, 10.1016/0140-6736(91)92589-T · DOI
- 1991, JAMA, 265, 3255, 10.1001/jama.265.24.3255 · DOI · Paper page
- Amery, 1985, Lancet, i, 1349, 10.1016/S0140-6736(85)91783-0 · DOI
- 1993, Arch Intern Med, 153, 154, 10.1001/archinte.153.2.154 · DOI
- Hosie, 1995, J Hum Hypertens, 9, 515
- Croog, 1986, New Engl J Med, 314, 1657, 10.1056/NEJM198606263142602 · DOI
- Testa, 1991, Am J Hypertens, 4, 363, 10.1093/ajh/4.4.363 · DOI
- Testa, 1993, New Engl J Med, 328, 907, 10.1056/NEJM199304013281302 · DOI
- Handa, 1991, Am Heart J, 122, 1389, 10.1016/0002-8703(91)90582-3 · DOI
- Materson, 1994, Arch Intern Med, 154, 513, 10.1001/archinte.154.5.513 · DOI
- Bulpitt, 1976, Br Heart J, 38, 121, 10.1136/hrt.38.2.121 · DOI
- Weiss, 1972, N Engl J Med, 287, 632
- Bansal, 1988, Hypertension, 12, 1, 10.1161/01.HYP.12.1.1 · DOI
- Shapiro, 1982, Hypertension, 4, 355, 10.1161/01.HYP.4.3.355 · DOI
- Wassertheil-Smoller, 1992, Am J Hypertens, 5, 37, 10.1093/ajh/5.1.37 · DOI
- Brogden, 1995, Drugs, 50, 375, 10.2165/00003495-199550030-00007 · DOI
- van Zwieten, 1994, Clin Cardiol, 17, III3, 10.1002/clc.4960170103 · DOI
- Meredith, 1994, Clin Cardiol, 17, III7
- Perry, 1984, J Hypertens, 2, S197
- Veit, 1983, J Consult Clin Psychol, 51, 730, 10.1037/0022-006X.51.5.730 · DOI
- Rose, 1978, Pschosom Med, 40, 142, 10.1097/00006842-197803000-00006 · DOI
- Jenkins, 1983, JAMA, 250, 782, 10.1001/jama.250.6.782 · DOI
- Testa, 1989, Am J Prev Med, 5, 82, 10.1016/S0749-3797(18)31109-7 · DOI
- Testa, 1988, Postgrad Med J, 64, 50, 10.1136/pgmj.64.747.50 · DOI
- Guyatt, 1987, J Chronic Dis, 40, 171, 10.1016/0021-9681(87)90069-5 · DOI
- 1991, Arch Intern Med, 151, 1413, 10.1001/archinte.151.7.1413 · DOI
- Bulpitt, 1992, Pharmaco Economics, 1, 95, 10.2165/00019053-199201020-00006 · DOI
- Schwartz, 1989, Am J Cardiol, 64, 31
- Anderson, 1994, Drug Inf J, 28, 89, 10.1177/009286159402800112 · DOI
- Bergner, 1981, Med Care, 19, 787, 10.1097/00005650-198108000-00001 · DOI · Paper page
- Omvik, 1993, J Hypertens, 11, 103, 10.1097/00004872-199301000-00015 · DOI
- Parnetti, 1995, Clin Pharmacol, 29, 110, 10.2165/00003088-199529020-00005 · DOI
- Fritze, 1995, J Neural Transm Suppl, 46, 439
- Pazzaglia, 1995, Neuropsychopharmacology, 13, 75, 10.1016/0893-133X(95)00024-8 · DOI
Metadata
- Authors
- Testa, M. A., Turner, R. R., Simonson, D. C., Krafcik, M. B., Calvo, C., & Luque-Otero, M.
- Affiliations
- Harvard University (US)
- Xunta de Galicia (ES)
- Hospital Clínico San Carlos (ES)
- Corresponding author
- Turner, Ralph R.
- Venue
- Journal of Hypertension
- Published
- 1998-12
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 1839-1847
- ISSN
- 0263-6352 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W84312996
- Cited by
- 40
- References
- 30
- Citations by year
- 2024: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 2.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Hypertension (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (R01 HS07767)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Medication Adherence and Compliance
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention
- Keywords
- hypertension, nifedipine GITS, amlodipine, calcium channel blockers, health-related quality of life, sustained-release formulation, once-daily dosing, blood pressure reduction, sleep disorders, cognitive function, medication adherence, adverse events, mild to moderate hypertension, Spain
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Antihypertensive Agents, Calcium Channel Blockers, Double-Blind Method, Female, Humans, Hypertension, Male, Middle Aged, Nifedipine, Quality of Life, Spain, Drug Delivery Systems, Amlodipine
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review