Relative efficacy and tolerability of lacidipine and amlodipine in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension: A randomized double-blind study

Journal of Cardiovascular Pharmacology

Volumn 28, Issue 2, 1996, Pages 328-331

  Lau, Chu Pak ^a   Cheung, Bernard M Y ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG   (Hong Kong)

Author keywords

Amlodipine; Calcium channel blocker; Hypertension; Lacidipine

Indexed keywords

AMLODIPINE; ANTIHYPERTENSIVE AGENT; CALCIUM CHANNEL BLOCKING AGENT; LACIDIPINE;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CALCIUM ANTAGONISM; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DOUBLE BLIND PROCEDURE; DRUG EFFICACY; DRUG SAFETY; DRUG TOLERABILITY; FEMALE; FLUSHING; HEADACHE; HEART PALPITATION; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; HUMAN TISSUE; HYPERTENSION; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL;

ADULT; AGED; AMLODIPINE; ANTIHYPERTENSIVE AGENTS; BLOOD PRESSURE; DIHYDROPYRIDINES; DOUBLE-BLIND METHOD; FEMALE; HALF-LIFE; HUMANS; HYPERTENSION; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PULSE;

EID: 0029744431     PISSN: 01602446     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00005344-199608000-00021     Document Type: Article

References (11)

1. The United Kingdom Lacidipine study group. A double-blind comparison of the efficacy and safety of lacidipine with atenolol in the treatment of essential hypertension. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1991;17(suppl 4):S27-30.
2. Van Zweiten PA, Pfaffendorf M. Pharmacology of the dihydropyridine calcium antagonists: relationship between lipophilicity and pharmacodynamic responses. J Hypertens 1993;11(suppl 6):S3-8.
3. Chiariello M. A double-blind comparison of the efficacy and safety of lacidipine and hydrochlorothiazide in essential hypertension. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1991;17(suppl 4): S35-7.
4. Grizzle JE. The two-period change-over design and its use in clinical trials. Biometrics 1965;21:467-80.
5. Fleiss JL. The design and analysis of clinical experiments. New York: John-Wiley and Sons, 1986.
6. Lombarde D, Raimondi F. Efficacy and safety evaluation of lacidipine compared with amlodipine in mild-to-moderate hypertensive patients. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol 1994;23 (suppl 5):S98-100.
7. Eichizen H, Eichelbaum M. Clinical pharmacokinetics of verapamil, nifedipine, and diltiazem. Clin Pharmacokinet 1986; 11:425-49.
8. Parati G, Pomidossi G, Albini F, Malaspina D, Mancia G. Relationship of 24 H blood pressure mean and variability to severity of target-organ damage in hypertension. J Hypertens 1987;5:93-8.
9. Detry J-M R. Patient compliance and therapeutic coverage: amlodipine versus lacidipine SR in the treatment of hypertension and angina: interim results. Clin Cardiol 1994;17 (suppl III): 12-6.
10. Psaty BM, Heckbert SR, Koepsell TD, et al. The risk of myocardial infarction associated with antihypertensive drug therapies. JAMA 1995;74:620-5.
11. Gong L, Zwang W, Zhu Y, et al. STONE (Shanghai Trial of Nifedipine in the Elderly) Study [Abstract]. Presented at the Seventh European Meeting on Hypertension, June 9-12, 1995, Milan, Italy.