• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
At equipotent doses, isradipine is better tolerated than amlodipine in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension: a double-blind, randomized, parallel-group study.在等效剂量下,对于轻至中度高血压患者,伊拉地平的耐受性优于氨氯地平:一项双盲、随机、平行组研究。
Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1994 Oct;38(4):335-40. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2125.1994.tb04363.x.
2
Amlodipine, felodipine, and isradipine in the treatment of Chinese patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension.氨氯地平、非洛地平和伊拉地平治疗中国轻至中度高血压患者的疗效观察
Clin Ther. 1998 Nov-Dec;20(6):1159-69. doi: 10.1016/s0149-2918(98)80111-2.
3
Results of a phase III, 8-week, multicenter, prospective, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group clinical trial to assess the effects of amlodipine camsylate versus amlodipine besylate in Korean adults with mild to moderate hypertension.一项三期、为期8周、多中心、前瞻性、随机、双盲、平行组临床试验的结果,该试验旨在评估坎地沙坦酯与苯磺酸氨氯地平对韩国轻至中度高血压成年人的疗效。
Clin Ther. 2007 Sep;29(9):1924-36. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2007.09.018.
4
Quantification of pedal edema during treatment with S(-)-amlodipine nicotinate versus amlodipine besylate in female Korean patients with mild to moderate hypertension: a 12-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, phase IV clinical trial.在患有轻中度高血压的韩国女性患者中,使用 S(-)-烟碱酸氨氯地平与苯磺酸氨氯地平治疗期间的足部水肿定量评估:一项为期 12 周、多中心、随机、双盲、阳性药物对照、四期临床试验。
Clin Ther. 2012 Sep;34(9):1940-7. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2012.08.003. Epub 2012 Aug 25.
5
Two multicenter, 8-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group studies evaluating the efficacy and tolerability of amlodipine and valsartan in combination and as monotherapy in adult patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension.两项多中心、为期8周、随机、双盲、安慰剂对照、平行组研究,评估氨氯地平和缬沙坦联合用药及单药治疗对轻度至中度原发性高血压成年患者的疗效和耐受性。
Clin Ther. 2007 Apr;29(4):563-80. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2007.03.018.
6
Evaluation of the efficacy and tolerability of combination therapy with candesartan cilexetil and amlodipine besilate compared with candesartan cilexetil monotherapy and amlodipine besilate monotherapy in Japanese patients with mild-to-moderate essential hypertension: a multicenter, 12-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study.评价坎地沙坦西酯与苯磺酸氨氯地平联合治疗与坎地沙坦西酯单药治疗和苯磺酸氨氯地平单药治疗轻中度原发性高血压日本患者的疗效和耐受性:一项多中心、12 周、随机、双盲、安慰剂对照、平行分组研究。
Clin Ther. 2012 Apr;34(4):838-48. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2012.02.015. Epub 2012 Mar 21.
7
Comparison of efficacy and tolerability of amlodipine orotate versus amlodipine besylate in adult patients with mild to moderate hypertension: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, 8-week follow-up, noninferiority trial.氨氯地平枸橼酸盐与苯磺酸氨氯地平在轻至中度高血压成年患者中的疗效和耐受性比较:一项多中心、随机、双盲、安慰剂对照、平行组、8周随访的非劣效性试验。
Clin Ther. 2006 Apr;28(4):537-51. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2006.04.008.
8
Results of a multicenter, 8-week, parallel-group, randomized,double-blind, double-dummy, Phase III clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of amlodipine maleate versus amlodipine besylate in Korean patients with mild to moderate hypertension.一项多中心、为期8周的平行组、随机、双盲、双模拟III期临床试验的结果,该试验旨在评估马来酸氨氯地平与苯磺酸氨氯地平对韩国轻至中度高血压患者的疗效和耐受性。
Clin Ther. 2005 Apr;27(4):441-50. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2005.04.001.
9
Multicentric, clinical trial of S-Amlodipine 2.5 mg versus Amlodipine 5 mg in the treatment of mild to moderate hypertension--a randomized, double-blind clinical trial.多中心、随机、双盲临床试验比较2.5毫克左旋氨氯地平与5毫克氨氯地平治疗轻至中度高血压的疗效
J Assoc Physicians India. 2004 Mar;52:197-202.
10
An 18-week, prospective, randomized, double-blind, multicenter study of amlodipine/ramipril combination versus amlodipine monotherapy in the treatment of hypertension: the assessment of combination therapy of amlodipine/ramipril (ATAR) study.氨氯地平/雷米普利联合用药与氨氯地平单药治疗高血压的18周前瞻性随机双盲多中心研究:氨氯地平/雷米普利联合治疗评估(ATAR)研究
Clin Ther. 2008 Sep;30(9):1618-28. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2008.09.008.

引用本文的文献

1
Etiology of Drug-Induced Edema: A Review of Dihydropyridine, Thiazolidinedione, and Other Medications Causing Edema.药物性水肿的病因:二氢吡啶、噻唑烷二酮及其他致水肿药物的综述
Cureus. 2024 Feb 1;16(2):e53400. doi: 10.7759/cureus.53400. eCollection 2024 Feb.
2
Efficacy, T cell activation and antibody responses in accelerated Plasmodium falciparum sporozoite chemoprophylaxis vaccine regimens.恶性疟原虫子孢子化学预防疫苗加速方案中的疗效、T细胞活化及抗体反应
NPJ Vaccines. 2022 May 31;7(1):59. doi: 10.1038/s41541-022-00473-1.
3
Comparative peripheral edema for dihydropyridines calcium channel blockers treatment: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.二氢吡啶类钙通道阻滞剂治疗的外周性水肿比较:系统评价和网络荟萃分析。
J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2022 May;24(5):536-554. doi: 10.1111/jch.14436. Epub 2022 Mar 2.
4
Eliciting adverse effects data from participants in clinical trials.从临床试验参与者中获取不良反应数据。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Jan 16;1(1):MR000039. doi: 10.1002/14651858.MR000039.pub2.
5
Proactive compared with passive adverse event recognition: calcium channel blocker-associated edema.主动与被动不良事件识别的比较:钙通道阻滞剂相关水肿
J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2008 Sep;10(9):716-22. doi: 10.1111/j.1751-7176.2008.00006.x.
6
Comparison of blood pressure control with amlodipine and controlled-release isradipine: an open-label, drug substitution study.氨氯地平和控释异搏定在血压控制方面的比较:一项开放标签的药物替代研究。
J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2005 Apr;7(4 Suppl 1):27-31. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-6175.2005.04450.x.
7
Amlodipine. A reappraisal of its pharmacological properties and therapeutic use in cardiovascular disease.氨氯地平。对其药理特性及在心血管疾病治疗应用的重新评估。
Drugs. 1995 Sep;50(3):560-86. doi: 10.2165/00003495-199550030-00009.
8
Isradipine. An update of its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties and therapeutic efficacy in the treatment of mild to moderate hypertension.伊拉地平。其药效学、药代动力学特性及治疗轻至中度高血压疗效的最新进展。
Drugs. 1995 Apr;49(4):618-49. doi: 10.2165/00003495-199549040-00009.
9
Nilvadipine. A review of its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties, therapeutic use in hypertension and potential in cerebrovascular disease and angina.尼伐地平。对其药效学和药代动力学特性、在高血压治疗中的应用以及在脑血管疾病和心绞痛方面的潜力的综述。
Drugs Aging. 1995 Feb;6(2):150-71. doi: 10.2165/00002512-199506020-00007.

本文引用的文献

1
A multicenter comparison of isradipine and felodipine in the treatment of mild-to-moderate hypertension. The Physician's Study Group.
Am J Hypertens. 1993 Mar;6(3 Pt 2):44S-48S. doi: 10.1093/ajh/6.3.44s.
2
Measurement of side effects of drugs.药物副作用的测量
Br Med J. 1974 Jun 29;2(5921):698-9. doi: 10.1136/bmj.2.5921.698.
3
The safety of amlodipine.氨氯地平的安全性。
Am Heart J. 1989 Nov;118(5 Pt 2):1114-9; discussion 1119-20. doi: 10.1016/0002-8703(89)90838-7.
4
Isradipine in essential hypertension: the Belgian General Practitioners' Study.伊拉地平治疗原发性高血压:比利时全科医生研究
Am J Med. 1989 Apr 17;86(4A):103-9. doi: 10.1016/0002-9343(89)90202-7.
5
A comparison of amlodipine, verapamil and placebo in the treatment of mild to moderate hypertension. Amlodipine Study Group.
J Hum Hypertens. 1989 Jun;3(3):191-6.
6
A study of the efficacy and safety of amlodipine for the treatment of hypertension in general practice.氨氯地平在全科医疗中治疗高血压的疗效与安全性研究。
Postgrad Med J. 1991;67 Suppl 5:S28-31.
7
First clinical experience with isradipine in the treatment of hypertension in Portugal.伊拉地平在葡萄牙治疗高血压的首次临床经验。
J Cardiovasc Pharmacol. 1991;18 Suppl 3:S4-6.
8
Calcium antagonists as first-line antihypertensive agents: a placebo-controlled, comparative trial of isradipine and nifedipine.钙拮抗剂作为一线抗高血压药物:一项关于伊拉地平与硝苯地平的安慰剂对照比较试验。
J Cardiovasc Pharmacol. 1990;15 Suppl 1:S70-4.
9
Comparison of early side effects with amlodipine and nifedipine retard in hypertension.氨氯地平和硝苯地平缓释片治疗高血压的早期副作用比较。
Cardiology. 1992;80 Suppl 1:54-9. doi: 10.1159/000175048.
10
Amlodipine compared to nitrendipine in hypertensive patients: the effects on toleration in relationship to the onset of action.氨氯地平与尼群地平治疗高血压患者的比较:起效时间与耐受性的关系
Cardiology. 1992;80 Suppl 1:46-53. doi: 10.1159/000175047.

在等效剂量下,对于轻至中度高血压患者,伊拉地平的耐受性优于氨氯地平:一项双盲、随机、平行组研究。

At equipotent doses, isradipine is better tolerated than amlodipine in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension: a double-blind, randomized, parallel-group study.

作者信息

Hermans L, Deblander A, De Keyser P, Scheys I, Lesaffre E, Westelinck K J

机构信息

Medical Department, Sandoz Belgium, Brussels.

出版信息

Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1994 Oct;38(4):335-40. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2125.1994.tb04363.x.

DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2125.1994.tb04363.x
PMID:7833223
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1364777/
Abstract
  1. The objective of this double-blind parallel-group study was to compare the tolerability of isradipine and amlodipine, specifically, the side-effects known to be related to the use of dihydropyridine calcium antagonists. 2. A total of 205 patients with mild-to-moderate essential hypertension were randomized to receive either the sustained-release (SRO) formulation of isradipine (n = 103) or amlodipine (n = 102), both at dosages of 5 mg once daily. Blood pressure measurements were taken at the end of the dosing interval to assess the antihypertensive efficacy of the two drugs. 3. Adverse reactions were assessed in two ways: a) spontaneously reported adverse events were recorded and investigated in depth for severity, duration, relation to the study drug, and outcome; b) a questionnaire was used to elicit specific adverse reactions known to be related to the use of dihydropyridine calcium antagonists which were evaluated for severity, duration, relation to the study drug, and outcome. 4. After 6 weeks of active treatment, both isradipine and amlodipine reduced mean sitting systolic/diastolic blood pressure: from 165.1/100.1 to 145.2/89.7 mm Hg with isradipine; and from 164.1/100.6 to 145.7/90.5 mm Hg with amlodipine. There was no difference in antihypertensive effect between isradipine and amlodipine (95% CI: -3.73 to 4.73 and -1.89 to 3.49 for differences in systolic and diastolic blood pressure, respectively). 5. The number of patients spontaneously reporting adverse events was significantly higher (P = 0.02; 95% CI: 3.1 to 26.7%) with amlodipine (33.3%) than with isradipine (18.4%).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
摘要
  1. 这项双盲平行组研究的目的是比较伊拉地平与氨氯地平的耐受性,具体而言,是比较已知与使用二氢吡啶类钙拮抗剂相关的副作用。2. 共有205例轻度至中度原发性高血压患者被随机分为两组,分别接受伊拉地平缓释(SRO)制剂(n = 103)或氨氯地平(n = 102)治疗,剂量均为每日5毫克一次。在给药间隔结束时测量血压,以评估两种药物的降压效果。3. 不良反应通过两种方式进行评估:a)记录自发报告的不良事件,并对其严重程度、持续时间、与研究药物的关系及转归进行深入调查;b)使用问卷来引出已知与使用二氢吡啶类钙拮抗剂相关的特定不良反应,并对其严重程度、持续时间、与研究药物的关系及转归进行评估。4. 经过6周的积极治疗,伊拉地平和氨氯地平均降低了平均坐位收缩压/舒张压:伊拉地平组从165.1/100.1毫米汞柱降至145.2/89.7毫米汞柱;氨氯地平组从164.1/100.6毫米汞柱降至145.7/90.5毫米汞柱。伊拉地平和氨氯地平的降压效果无差异(收缩压和舒张压差异的95%置信区间分别为-3.73至4.73和-1.89至3.49)。5. 自发报告不良事件的患者数量,氨氯地平组(33.3%)显著高于伊拉地平组(18.4%)(P = 0.02;95%置信区间:3.1至26.7%)。(摘要截选至250词)