 |
 |

Chlorthalidone vs Other Low-Dose DiureticsReply
 |
 |
| Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings. |
|
 |
 |
In Reply: We agree with Dr Choi and colleagues that direct comparisons within active control clinical trials are the optimal method of assessing differences between drugs. When the absence of active control data makes the use of indirect comparisons necessary, it is important to compare things that are similar.
Their reference to MRFIT1 is surprising on several counts. First, they make an indirect comparison between hydrochlorothiazide and chlorthalidone even though the choice between the 2 diuretics was a local option and not a part of the randomized design. Second, for the randomized comparison between special intervention and usual care, MRFIT, which did not use a factorial design, has not generally been included in meta-analyses of hypertension trials2 because the effects of antihypertensive treatment cannot be separated from the effects of the MRFIT nutrition and smoking interventions. Finally, high-dose diuretics were used in MRFIT. These differ from low-dose diuretics in their . . . [Full Text of this Article]
Bruce M. Psaty, MD, PhD
psaty@u.washington.edu
Thomas Lumley, PhD
University of Washington Seattle
Curt D. Furberg, MD, PhD
Wake Forest University Winston-Salem, NC
CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Technorati Twitter
What's this?
RELATED ARTICLES
Chlorthalidone vs Other Low-Dose Diuretics
Kenneth L. Choi, Dave Chua, and William J. Elliott
JAMA. 2004;292(15):1816-1817.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Major Outcomes in High-Risk Hypertensive Patients Randomized to Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor or Calcium Channel Blocker vs Diuretic: The Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT)
The ALLHAT Officers and Coordinators for the ALLHAT Collaborative Research Group
JAMA. 2002;288(23):2981-2997.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
|