Antihypertensive Efficacy of Olmesartan Medoxomil and Candesartan Cilexetil Assessed by 24-hour Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring in Patients with Essential Hypertension

Overview

Journal Clin Drug Investig

Date 2007 May 31

PMID 17535053

Citations 31

Authors

Hans R Brunner

Klaus O Stumpe

Andrzej Januszewicz

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objective: To compare the antihypertensive efficacy of olmesartan medoxomil with that of candesartan cilexetil after 1, 2 and 8 weeks of treatment.

Design And Setting: Randomised, double-blind, parallel-group study conducted at 44 centres in Germany, Poland and the Czech Republic.

Patients: 643 patients (aged 19-86 years) with mainly mild-to-moderate essential hypertension received active double-blind treatment.

Interventions: Following a 2-week placebo run-in, eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive olmesartan medoxomil 20mg (n = 319) or candesartan cilexetil 8mg (n = 324) once daily for 8 weeks.

Main Outcome Measures: Changes from baseline in daytime, 24-hour and night-time diastolic (DBP) and systolic (SBP) blood pressures assessed by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM), and changes from baseline in sitting cuff DBP and SBP.

Results: Mean decreases from baseline in daytime DBP by ABPM at weeks 1, 2 and 8 were 6.7, 8.4 and 9.3mm Hg, respectively, in the olmesartan medoxomil group compared with 5.3, 6.0 and 7.8mm Hg, respectively, in the candesartan cilexetil group. The between-group differences were significantly in favour of olmesartan medoxomil at all three timepoints (p </= 0.0126). Significant differences in favour of olmesartan medoxomil were also observed for mean 24-hour DBP and for mean daytime and 24-hour SBP by ABPM. Decreases from baseline in sitting cuff BP at trough were similar in the two groups (15-16mm Hg for DBP and 21mm Hg for SBP). Both treatments were well tolerated.

Conclusions: Olmesartan medoxomil reduced daytime and 24-hour DBP and SBP, assessed by ABPM, more effectively than candesartan cilexetil at the doses tested. The majority of the treatment effect in both groups was seen after only 1 or 2 weeks of dosing, when the between-group differences were already statistically significant.

Citing Articles

Efficacy of Olmesartan/Amlodipine Single-Pill Combination on 24-h Mean Systolic Blood Pressure Measured by Ambulatory Monitoring in Non-Responders to Valsartan or Candesartan Monotherapy.

Chung W, Ihm S, Choi Y, Youn H J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2024; 27(1):e14929.

PMID: 39504016 PMC: 11771777. DOI: 10.1111/jch.14929.

Efficacy of angiotensin receptor blockers for nocturnal blood pressure reduction: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Liu J, Chen W, Shao S, Chen Y, Wang H, Xi Y Ann Med. 2024; 56(1):2362880.

PMID: 38830046 PMC: 11149579. DOI: 10.1080/07853890.2024.2362880.

Determination of candesartan or olmesartan in hypertensive patient plasma using UPLC-MS/MS.

Jeong H, Seo Y, Gu N, Rhee M, Shin K Transl Clin Pharmacol. 2022; 29(4):226-238.

PMID: 35024363 PMC: 8718358. DOI: 10.12793/tcp.2021.29.e21.

Clinical Efficacy and Safety of Combination Therapy with Amlodipine and Olmesartan or an Olmesartan/Hydrochlorothiazide Compound for Hypertension: A Prospective, Open-Label, and Multicenter Clinical Trial in China.

Gao P, Mei K, Li H, Dai Q, Guo X, Zhang D Curr Ther Res Clin Exp. 2019; 90:99-105.

PMID: 31388362 PMC: 6677643. DOI: 10.1016/j.curtheres.2015.09.001.

Comparative effectiveness of an angiotensin receptor blocker, olmesartan medoxomil, in older hypertensive patients.

Redon J, Weber M, Reimitz P, Wang J J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2018; 20(2):356-365.

PMID: 29462508 PMC: 8031060. DOI: 10.1111/jch.13183.

References

Mazzolai L, Burnier M . Comparative safety and tolerability of angiotensin II receptor antagonists. Drug Saf. 1999; 21(1):23-33. DOI: 10.2165/00002018-199921010-00003. View

Burnier M, Brunner H . Angiotensin II receptor antagonists. Lancet. 2000; 355(9204):637-45. DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(99)10365-9. View

Staessen J, Thijs L, Fagard R, OBrien E, Clement D, de Leeuw P . Predicting cardiovascular risk using conventional vs ambulatory blood pressure in older patients with systolic hypertension. Systolic Hypertension in Europe Trial Investigators. JAMA. 1999; 282(6):539-46. DOI: 10.1001/jama.282.6.539. View

Oparil S, Williams D, Chrysant S, Marbury T, Neutel J . Comparative efficacy of olmesartan, losartan, valsartan, and irbesartan in the control of essential hypertension. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2001; 3(5):283-91, 318. PMC: 8101821. DOI: 10.1111/j.1524-6175.2001.01136.x. View

. 1999 World Health Organization-International Society of Hypertension Guidelines for the Management of Hypertension. Guidelines Subcommittee. J Hypertens. 1999; 17(2):151-83. View

Murray C, Lopez A . Evidence-based health policy--lessons from the Global Burden of Disease Study. Science. 1996; 274(5288):740-3. DOI: 10.1126/science.274.5288.740. View

Stumpe K, Ludwig M . Antihypertensive efficacy of olmesartan compared with other antihypertensive drugs. J Hum Hypertens. 2002; 16 Suppl 2:S24-8. DOI: 10.1038/sj.jhh.1001395. View

Mancia G, Zanchetti A, Agabiti-Rosei E, Benemio G, De Cesaris R, Fogari R . Ambulatory blood pressure is superior to clinic blood pressure in predicting treatment-induced regression of left ventricular hypertrophy. SAMPLE Study Group. Study on Ambulatory Monitoring of Blood Pressure and Lisinopril Evaluation. Circulation. 1997; 95(6):1464-70. DOI: 10.1161/01.cir.95.6.1464. View

Verdecchia P, Clement D, Fagard R, Palatini P, Parati G . Blood Pressure Monitoring. Task force III: Target-organ damage, morbidity and mortality. Blood Press Monit. 1999; 4(6):303-17. DOI: 10.1097/00126097-199912000-00004. View

10.

Laeis P, Puchler K, Kirch W . The pharmacokinetic and metabolic profile of olmesartan medoxomil limits the risk of clinically relevant drug interaction. J Hypertens Suppl. 2001; 19(1):S21-32. DOI: 10.1097/00004872-200106001-00004. View

11.

Martin I . Implementation of WHO/ISH Guidelines: role and activities of WHO. Clin Exp Hypertens. 1999; 21(5-6):659-69. DOI: 10.3109/10641969909060997. View

12.

Ball K, Williams P, Stumpe K . Relative efficacy of an angiotensin II antagonist compared with other antihypertensive agents. Olmesartan medoxomil versus antihypertensives. J Hypertens Suppl. 2001; 19(1):S49-56. DOI: 10.1097/00004872-200106001-00007. View

13.

Puchler K, Laeis P, Stumpe K . Blood pressure response, but not adverse event incidence, correlates with dose of angiotensin II antagonist. J Hypertens Suppl. 2001; 19(1):S41-8. DOI: 10.1097/00004872-200106001-00006. View

14.

Parati G, de Leeuw P, Illyes M, Julius S, Kuwajima I, Mallion J . Blood pressure measurement in research. Blood Press Monit. 2002; 7(1):83-7. DOI: 10.1097/00126097-200202000-00017. View

15.

Mancia G, Parati G, Omboni S, Ravogli A, Villani A, Santucciu C . Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in the ELSA study. European Lacidipine Study on Atherosclerosis. Blood Press Suppl. 1996; 4:36-8. View

16.

Mancia G, Casadel R, MUTTI E, Trazzi S, Parati G . Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in the evaluation of antihypertensive treatment. Am J Med. 1989; 87(6B):64S-69S. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9343(89)90096-x. View

17.

Mancia G, Parati G . Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring and organ damage. Hypertension. 2000; 36(5):894-900. DOI: 10.1161/01.hyp.36.5.894. View

18.

Neutel J, Elliott W, Izzo J, Chen C, Masonson H . Antihypertensive efficacy of olmesartan medoxomil, a new angiotensin II receptor antagonist, as assessed by ambulatory blood pressure measurements. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2002; 4(5):325-31. PMC: 8101835. DOI: 10.1111/j.1524-6175.2002.01051.x. View

19.

Hansson L, Zanchetti A, Carruthers S, Dahlof B, Elmfeldt D, Julius S . Effects of intensive blood-pressure lowering and low-dose aspirin in patients with hypertension: principal results of the Hypertension Optimal Treatment (HOT) randomised trial. HOT Study Group. Lancet. 1998; 351(9118):1755-62. DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(98)04311-6. View

20.

McGrath B . Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. Med J Aust. 2002; 176(12):588-92. DOI: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2002.tb04590.x. View