TrialResults - center   -  Clinical trials results database in


Clinical trials of Parapres (candesartan)     pdf     short list

Clinical trials of Parapres (candesartan) and meta-analysis are available for the following clinical conditions:


hypertension

These trials are included in meta-analysis concerning: angiotensin-receptor blockers in all diseases requiring ACEi (HF, CHD, HT,...), anti hypertensive agent in all type of patient, anti hypertensive agent in nephropathy, anti hypertensive agent in patients undergoing dialysis, anti hypertensive agent in subjects with pre-hypertension,

candesartan vs control
Takahashi ,2006 candesartan
versus
control
patients on chronic haemodialysis in stable condition and with no clinical evidence of cardiac disorders 19.4 months
open
candesartan vs conventional treatment
E-COST ,2005 candesartan, 2 to 12 mg daily
versus
conventional antihypertensive drugs other than angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors or ARBs
Japanese essential hypertensive subjects (sitting blood pressure 140-180/90-110 mmHg) aged 35-79 years
single-blind
Japan
E-COST-R ,2005 candesartan
versus
conventional treatment
hypertensive subjects 60 to 75 years old with non-diabetic chronic renal insufficiency
open
HIJ-CREATE ,2009 angiotensin II receptor blocker-based therapy
versus
non-angiotensin II receptor blocker-based therapy
patients with angiographically documented coronary artery disease and hypertension 4.2 y (median)
open
Japan
candesartan vs placebo
SCOPE ,2003 candesartan, 8–16 mg once daily (target 160/90)
versus
placebo
patients aged 70–89 years, with systolic blood pressure 160– 179 mmHg, and/or diastolic blood pressure 90–99 mmHg, and a Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) test score > 24 3.7 y (mean)
double-blind
15 countries
TROPHY ,2006
NCT00227318
candesartan during 2y followed by 2y of placebo
versus
placebo
subjects with repeated measurements of systolic pressure of 130 to 139 mm Hg and diastolic pressure of 89 mm Hg or lower, or systolic pressure of 139 mm Hg or lower and diastolic pressure of 85 to 89 mm Hg 4y
double-blind
USA
Candesartan vs usual care
HIJ-CREATE ,2009 cardesartan adjusted dose for target arterial pressure of <130/85 mmHg
versus
usual care (non-ARB-based pharmacotherapy including angiotensin-converting enzyme-inhibitors)
hypertension with angiographically documented coronary artery disease (acute or stable) up to 60 months
open
japan
Takahashi et al ,2006 Candesartan 4-8mg/day
versus
Conventional treatment
chronic haemodialysis patients
open
Suzuki et al ,2008 Candesartan 12 mg/day, losartan 100 mg/day, or valsartan 160 mg/day
versus
Conventional treatment
patients undergoing hemodialysis 1-5 years
open
candesartan vs amlodipine
CASE-J ,2008 candesartan-based regimen
versus
amlodipine-based regimen
high-risk Japanese hypertensive patients 3.2 years
open (blinded assessment)
Japan
candesartan vs hydrochlorothiazide
ALPINE ,2003 candesartan
versus
hydrochlorothiazide
newly detected hypertensives 1 year
double-blind
Sweden

miscellaneous

These trials are included in meta-analysis concerning: angiotensin-receptor blockers in all type of patients,

candesartan vs control
Takahashi ,2006 candesartan
versus
control
patients on chronic haemodialysis in stable condition and with no clinical evidence of cardiac disorders 19.4 months
open
candesartan vs conventional treatment
E-COST ,2005 candesartan, 2 to 12 mg daily
versus
conventional antihypertensive drugs other than angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors or ARBs
Japanese essential hypertensive subjects (sitting blood pressure 140-180/90-110 mmHg) aged 35-79 years
single-blind
Japan
E-COST-R ,2005 candesartan
versus
conventional treatment
hypertensive subjects 60 to 75 years old with non-diabetic chronic renal insufficiency
open
HIJ-CREATE ,2009 angiotensin II receptor blocker-based therapy
versus
non-angiotensin II receptor blocker-based therapy
patients with angiographically documented coronary artery disease and hypertension 4.2 y (median)
open
Japan
candesartan vs placebo
SCOPE ,2003 candesartan, 8–16 mg once daily (target 160/90)
versus
placebo
patients aged 70–89 years, with systolic blood pressure 160– 179 mmHg, and/or diastolic blood pressure 90–99 mmHg, and a Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) test score > 24 3.7 y (mean)
double-blind
15 countries
TROPHY ,2006
NCT00227318
candesartan during 2y followed by 2y of placebo
versus
placebo
subjects with repeated measurements of systolic pressure of 130 to 139 mm Hg and diastolic pressure of 89 mm Hg or lower, or systolic pressure of 139 mm Hg or lower and diastolic pressure of 85 to 89 mm Hg 4y
double-blind
USA
candesartan vs amlodipine
CASE-J ,2008 candesartan-based regimen
versus
amlodipine-based regimen
high-risk Japanese hypertensive patients 3.2 years
open (blinded assessment)
Japan
candesartan vs hydrochlorothiazide
ALPINE ,2003 candesartan
versus
hydrochlorothiazide
newly detected hypertensives 1 year
double-blind
Sweden

heart failure

These trials are included in meta-analysis concerning: angiotensin-receptor blockers in all type of patients, angiotensin-receptor blockers in patients with preserved-LVEF heart failure, inhibition of the renin-angiotensin system (ACEI or ARB) in patients with preserved-LVEF heart failure, angiotensin-receptor blockers in patients intolerant to ACE inhibitors, angiotensin-receptor blockers in patients already receiving ACE inhibitor, angiotensin-receptor blockers in patients previously untreated with ACE inhibitors,

candesartan vs placebo
ARCH-J ,2003 Candesartan, 8 mg daily
versus
Placebo
patients with chronic heart failure who were not receiving ACE inhibitor therapy 155 d
double blind
CHARM-Alternative ,2003 candesartan (target dose32 mg once daily)
versus
Placebo
patients with symptomatic heart failure and left-ventricular ejection fraction 40% or less who were notreceiving ACE inhibitors because of previous intolerance Median, 33.7 mo
double blind
26 countries
Mitrovic et al. ,2003 Candesartan, 2 mg, 4mg, 8mg, 16mg daily
versus
Placebo
patients with CHF (New York Heart Association class II or III) with impaired left ventricular function (ejection fraction <=40%) and pulmonary capillary wedge pressure >=13 mm Hg 12 wk
double blind
Europe, South Africa
SPICE ,2000 Candesartan, 16 mg daily
versus
Placebo
patients with chronic heart failure and left ventricular ejection fraction less than 35%, and history of discontinuing an ACE inhibitor because of intolerance 12 wk
double blind
STRETCH ,1999 Candesartan, 4 mg, 8mg, 16mg daily
versus
Placebo
Male and female patients 21 to 80 years of age with mild to moderate symptomatic CHF (NYHA class II or III) 12 wk
Double blind
Germany, Czech Republic, Slovenia.
CHARM preserved ,2003 candesartan target dose 32 mg once daily
versus
placebo
patients with NYHA II-IV heart failure and LVEF higher than 40% 36.6 months
double blind
26 countries
candesartan+ACE inhibitor vs ACE inhibitor only
CHARM-Added ,2003 Candesartantarget dose 32 mg once daily
versus
Placebo
patients with New York Heart Association functional class II–IV CHF and left-ventricular ejection fraction40% or lower, and who were being treated with ACE inhibitors. Median, 41 mo
double blind
26 countries
RESOLVD association ,1999 Candesartan, 4 mg, 8mg daily, plus enalapril, 10 mg twice daily
versus
Enalapril, 10 mg twice daily
Patients with New York Heart Association functional class NYHA II, III, or IV CHF, 6-minute walk distance (6MWD) >500 m, and ejection fraction (EF) <0.40 43 wk

multicenter
candesartan vs enalapril
RESOLVD (candesartan alone) ,1999 Candesartan, 4 mg, 8mg, 16mg daily
versus
Enalapril, 10 mg twice daily
Patients with New York Heart Association functional class NYHA II, III, or IV CHF, 6-minute walk distance (6MWD) >500 m, and ejection fraction (EF) <0.40 43 wk
Double blind
US, Canada, Europe, Brazil

atrial fibrillation

These trials are included in meta-analysis concerning: prevention in patients without history of AF (primary prevention), prevention in patient with history of atrial fibrillation,

candesartan vs placebo
CAPRAF (Tveit) ,2007
NCT00130975
candesartan 8 mg once daily for 3-6 weeks before and candesartan 16 mg once daily for 6 months after electrical cardioversion
versus
placebo
patients undergoing electrical cardioversion for persistent AF 6 months
double blind
CHARM (AF ancillary study) ,2005 candesartan
versus
placebo
Heart failure 3.17 y

diabetes type 2

These trials are included in meta-analysis concerning: anti hypertensive agent in patients with or without hypertension,

candesartan vs control
SCOPE (diabetic subgroup) ,2003 candesartan
versus
control
sub group of diabetic patients aged 70-89 years, with systolic blood pressure 160-179 mmHg, and/or diastolic blood pressure 90-99 mmHg, and a Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) test score >or= 24 3.7 years
double-blind
15 countries

heart failure with preserved LVEF

These trials are included in meta-analysis concerning: All mecanism in all type of patients,

candesartan vs placebo
CHARM preserved ,2003 candesartan target dose 32 mg once daily
versus
placebo
patients with NYHA II-IV heart failure and LVEF higher than 40% 36.6 months
double blind
26 countries

patients at high risk for cardiovascular events

These trials are included in meta-analysis concerning: angiotensin-receptor blockers in all type of patients,

candesartan vs placebo
SCOPE ,2003 candesartan, 8–16 mg once daily (target 160/90)
versus
placebo
patients aged 70–89 years, with systolic blood pressure 160– 179 mmHg, and/or diastolic blood pressure 90–99 mmHg, and a Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) test score > 24 3.7 y (mean)
double-blind
15 countries



Entry terms: methyl-candesartan, methyl-2-ethoxy-1-((2'-(1H-tetrazol-5-yl)biphenyl-4-yl)methyl)-1H-benzimidazole-7-carboxylate, methyl-candesartan, (11C)methyl-candesartan, candesartan, 2-ethoxy-7-carboxy-1-(2'-(1H-tetrazol-5-yl)biphenyl-4-yl)methylbenzimidazole, CV 11974, CV11974, CV-11974, candesartan cilexetil, 1-(cyclohexylocarbonyloxy)ethyl-2-ethoxy-1-(2'-(1H-tetrazol-5-yl)biphenyl-4-yl)-1H-benzimidazole-7-carboxylate, Parapres, Almirall brand of candesartan cilexetil, TCV 116, TCV-116, Atacand, Astra brand of candesartan cilexetil, Takeda brand of candesartan cilexetil, Blopress, Kenzen, Promed brand of candesartan cilexetil, Amias, AstraZeneca brand of candesartan cilexetil



Search Parapres clinical trials in Pubmed

Search Parapres clinical trials in ClinicalTrials.gov

Search Parapres clinical trials in Wikipedia

Search Parapres in drugs.com




browse_trt3b

 
(c) 2006-2014TrialResults-center - All rights reserved Sitemap | Feedback | Disclaimer & Privacy Policy | Copyright | Home | Top
Last uptaded on 2014/9
86 user(s) connected

Creative Commons License TrialResults-center database by TrialResults-center is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 2.0 France License .


OpenSearch feed - Add TrialResults-center.org to your browser's search bar