Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Antihypertensive effect of azilsartan versus olmesartan in patients with essential hypertension: a meta-analysis

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Irish Journal of Medical Science (1971 -) Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

The comparison of antihypertensive effects between azilsartan and olmesartan in patients with essential hypertension has been investigated in several studies. The results were not consistent. We performed this meta-analysis determining the antihypertensive effect of azilsartan versus olmesartan in patients with essential hypertension.

Methods

Pubmed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central were searched for all published randomized studies comparing the antihypertensive effects between azilsartan and olmesartan in patients with essential hypertension.

Results

The antihypertensive effects were assessed in 1402 patients included in five trials. The reduction of office systolic blood pressure treated with azilsartan was greater than olmesartan (weighted mean differences (WMD) − 2.15 (95% confidence interval (CI), − 3.78, − 0.53) mm Hg, p < 0.01). There was no significant difference in reduction of office diastolic blood pressure between azilsartan and olmesartan (WMD − 0.99 (95% CI, − 2.06, 0.08) mm Hg, p > 0.05). The reduction of office systolic blood pressure treated with azilsartan was greater than olmesartan at same dose for both drugs (WMD − 2.24 (95% CI, − 4.03, − 0.44) mm Hg, p < 0.05), whereas there was no significant difference in reduction of office diastolic blood pressure between azilsartan and olmesartan (WMD − 0.55 (95% CI, − 1.76, 0.66) mm Hg, p > 0.05).

Conclusions

This meta-analysis provides the evidence that the reduction of office systolic blood pressure treated with azilsartan was greater than olmesartan in patients with essential hypertension. These findings suggest the importance of strict designed randomized controlled trials in determining antihypertensive effects of angiotensin II receptor blockers in clinical practice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Nishimura T, Hashimoto J, Ohkubo T, Kikuya M, Metoki H, Asayama K, Totsune K, Imai Y (2005) Efficacy and duration of action of the four selective angiotensin II subtype 1 receptor blockers, losartan, candesartan, valsartan and telmisartan, in patients with essential hypertension determined by home blood pressure measurements. Clin Exp Hypertens 27:477–489

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Hasegawa H, Takano H, Kameda Y, Kubota A, Kobayashi Y, Komuro I (2012) Effect of switching from telmisartan, valsartan, olmesartan, or losartan to candesartan on morning hypertension. Clin Exp Hypertens 34:86–91

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Georgiopoulos G, Katsi V, Oikonomou D, Vamvakou G, Koutli E, Laina A, Tsioufis C, Nihoyannopoulos P, Tousoulis D (2016) Azilsartan as a potent antihypertensive drug with possible pleiotropic cardiometabolic effects: a review study. Front Pharmacol 7:235

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Baker WL, White WB (2011) Azilsartan medoxomil: a new angiotensin II receptor antagonist for treatment of hypertension. Ann Pharmacother 45:1506–1515

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Handley A, Lloyd E, Roberts A, Barger B (2016) Safety and tolerability of azilsartan medoxomil in subjects with essential hypertension: a one-year, phase 3, open-label study. Clin Exp Hypertens 38:180–188

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Kurtz TW, Kajiya T (2012) Differential pharmacology and benefit/risk of azilsartan compared to other sartans. Vasc Health Risk Manag 8:133–143

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Kalikar M, Nivangune KS, Dakhale GN, Bajait CS, Sontakke SD, Motghare VM, Budania R (2017) Efficacy and tolerability of olmesartan, telmisartan, and losartan in patients of stage I hypertension: a randomized, open-label study. J Pharmacol Pharmacother 8:106–111

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Kario K, Saito I, Kushiro T, Teramukai S, Yaginuma M, Mori Y, Okuda Y, Kobayashi F, Shimada K (2016) Persistent olmesartan-based blood pressure-lowering effects on morning hypertension in Asians: the HONEST study. Hypertens Res 39:334–341

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Costa FV (2017) Improving adherence to treatment and reducing economic costs of hypertension: the role of olmesartan-based treatment. High Blood Press Cardiovasc Prev 24:265–274

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Kourlaba G, Gialama F, Tsioufis K, Maniadakis N (2016) A literature review to evaluate the clinical and economic value of olmesartan for the treatment of hypertensive patients. Int J Cardiol 221:60–74

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. White WB, Weber MA, Sica D, Bakris GL, Perez A, Cao C, Kupfer S (2011) Effects of the angiotensin receptor blocker azilsartan medoxomil versus olmesartan and valsartan on ambulatory and clinic blood pressure in patients with stages 1 and 2 hypertension. Hypertension 57:413–420

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Shiga Y, Miura SI, Motozato K, Norimatsu K, Yano M, Hitaka Y, Adachi S, Kuwano T, Inoue K, Inoue A, Fujisawa K, Shirotani T, Kusumoto T, Ideishi M, Saku K (2017) Comparison of efficacy and safety of azilsartan and olmesartan in patients with essential hypertension. Int Heart J 58:416–421

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kakio Y, Uchida HA, Umebayashi R, Takeuchi H, Okuyama Y, Hanayama Y, Wada J (2017) Practical efficacy of olmesartan versus azilsartan in patients with hypertension: a multicenter randomized-controlled trial (MUSCAT-4 study). Blood Press Monit 22:59–67

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Sezai A, Osaka S, Yaoita H, Arimoto M, Hata H, Shiono M, Sakino H (2016) Changeover trial of azilsartan and olmesartan comparing effects on the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system in patients with essential hypertension after cardiac surgery (CHAOS study). Ann Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 22:161–167

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Bakris GL, Sica D, Weber M, White WB, Roberts A, Perez A, Cao C, Kupfer S (2011) The comparative effects of azilsartan medoxomil and olmesartan on ambulatory and clinic blood pressure. J Clin Hypertens 13:81–88

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Zhao D, Liu H, Dong P, Zhao J (2017) A meta-analysis of add-on use of spironolactone in patients with resistant hypertension. Int J Cardiol 233:113–117

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, Jenkinson C, Reynolds DJ, Gavaghan DJ, McQuay HJ (1996) Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials 17:1–12

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG (2003) Measuring inconsistency in metaanalyses. BMJ 327:557–560

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Begg CB, Mazumdar M (1994) Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias. Biometrics 50:1088–1101

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Satoh M, Haga T, Hosaka M, Obara T, Metoki H, Murakami T, Kikuya M, Inoue R, Asayama K, Mano N, Ohkubo T, Imai Y (2016) The velocity of antihypertensive effects of seven angiotensin II receptor blockers determined by home blood pressure measurements. J Hypertens 34:1218–1223

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Imaizumi S, Miura S, Yahiro E, Uehara Y, Komuro I, Saku K (2013) Class- and molecule-specific differential effects of angiotensin II type 1 receptor blockers. Curr Pharm Des 19:3002–3008

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Angeloni E (2016) Azilsartan medoxomil in the management of hypertension: an evidence-based review of its place in therapy. Core Evid 11:1–10

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Hjermitslev M, Grimm DG, Wehland M, Simonsen U, Krüger M (2017) Azilsartan medoxomil, an angiotensin II receptor antagonist for the treatment of hypertension. Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol 121:225–233

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Rakugi H, Enya K, Sugiura K, Ikeda Y (2012) Comparison of the efficacy and safety of azilsartan with that of candesartan cilexetil in Japanese patients with grade I-II essential hypertension: a randomized, double-blind clinical study. Hypertens Res 35:552–558

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Sica D, White WB, Weber MA, Bakris GL, Perez A, Cao C, Handley A, Kupfer S (2011) Comparison of the novel angiotensin II receptor blocker azilsartan medoxomil vs valsartan by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. J Clin Hypertens 13:467–472

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. White WB, Cuadra RH, Lloyd E, Bakris GL, Kupfer S (2016) Effects of azilsartan medoxomil compared with olmesartan and valsartan on ambulatory and clinic blood pressure in patients with type 2 diabetes and prediabetes. J Hypertens 34:788–797

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Iwanami J, Mogi M, Tsukuda K, Wang XL, Nakaoka H, Ohshima K, Chisaka T, Bai HY, Kanno H, Min LJ, Horiuchi M (2014) Role of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2/angiotensin-(1-7)/Mas axis in the hypotensive effect of azilsartan. Hypertens Res 37:616–620

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Harrell RE, Karim A, Zhang W, Dudkowski C (2016) Effects of age, sex, and race on the safety and pharmacokinetics of single and multiple doses of azilsartan medoxomil in healthy subjects. Clin Pharmacokinet 55:595–604

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Raff U, Walker S, Ott C, Schneider MP, Schmieder RE (2015) Olmesartan improves pulse wave velocity and lowers central systolic blood pressure and ambulatory blood pressure in patients with metabolic syndrome. J Clin Hypertens 17:98–104

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Akyürek Ö, Akbal E, Güneş F, Akyürek N (2014) Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma concentrations in newly diagnosed hypertension patients and the metabolic effects of olmesartan. Arch Med Res 45:138–142

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Ravarotto V, Pagnin E, Maiolino G, Fragasso A, Carraro G, Rossi B, Calò LA (2015) The blocking of angiotensin II type 1 receptor and RhoA/Rho kinase activity in hypertensive patients: effect of olmesartan medoxomil and implication with cardiovascular-renal remodeling. J Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone Syst 16:1245–1250

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Furuhashi M, Moniwa N, Mita T, Fuseya T, Ishimura S, Ohno K, Shibata S, Tanaka M, Watanabe Y, Akasaka H, Ohnishi H, Yoshida H, Takizawa H, Saitoh S, Ura N, Shimamoto K, Miura T (2015) Urinary angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 in hypertensive patients may be increased byolmesartan, an angiotensin II receptor blocker. Am J Hypertens 28:15–21

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Abe M, Oikawa O, Okada K, Soma M (2015) Urinary angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 increases in diabetic nephropathy by angiotensin II type 1 receptor blocker olmesartan. J Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone Syst 16:159–164

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Adike A, Corral J, Rybnicek D, Sussman D, Shah S, Quigley E (2016) Olmesartan-induced enteropathy. Methodist Debakey Cardiovasc J 12:230–232

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was supported by Academic Progression Grant from the First Affiliated Hospital, and College of Clinical Medicine of Henan University of Science and Technology and Luoyang Central Hospital Affiliated to Zhengzhou University.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Di Zhao and Hui Liu contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Hypertension, The First Affiliated Hospital, and College of Clinical Medicine of Henan University of Science and Technology, 24 Jinghua Avenue, Luoyang, 471003, China

    Di Zhao

  2. Division of Endocrinology, Luoyang Central Hospital Affiliated to Zhengzhou University, 288 Zhongzhouzhong Avenue, Luoyang, 471000, China

    Hui Liu

  3. Division of Cardiology, The First Affiliated Hospital, and College of Clinical Medicine of Henan University of Science and Technology, 24 Jinghua Avenue, Luoyang, 471003, China

    Pingshuan Dong

Authors
  1. Di Zhao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hui Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Pingshuan Dong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Di Zhao.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhao, D., Liu, H. & Dong, P. Antihypertensive effect of azilsartan versus olmesartan in patients with essential hypertension: a meta-analysis. Ir J Med Sci 188, 481–488 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11845-018-1859-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11845-018-1859-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation