 |
|
Meta-analysis of Trials Comparing  -Blockers, Calcium Antagonists, and Nitrates for Stable Angina
Paul A. Heidenreich, MD, MS;
Kathryn M. McDonald, MM;
Trevor Hastie, PhD;
Bahaa Fadel, MD;
Vivian Hagan;
Byron K. Lee, MD;
Mark A. Hlatky, MD
JAMA. 1999;281:1927-1936.
ABSTRACT
| |
Context Which drug is most effective as a first-line treatment for stable angina is not known.
Objective To compare the relative efficacy and tolerability of treatment with  -blockers, calcium antagonists, and long-acting nitrates for patients who have stable angina.
Data Sources We identified English-language studies published between 1966 and 1997 by searching the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases and reviewing the bibliographies of identified articles to locate additional relevant studies.
Study Selection Randomized or crossover studies comparing antianginal drugs from 2 or 3 different classes (-blockers, calcium antagonists, and long-acting nitrates) lasting at least 1 week were reviewed. Studies were selected if they reported at least 1 of the following outcomes: cardiac death, myocardial infarction, study withdrawal due to adverse events, angina frequency, nitroglycerin use, or exercise duration. Ninety (63%) of 143 identified studies met the inclusion criteria.
Data Extraction Two independent reviewers extracted data from selected articles, settling any differences by consensus. Outcome data were extracted a third time by 1 of the investigators. We combined results using odds ratios (ORs) for discrete data and mean differences for continuous data. Studies of calcium antagonists were grouped by duration and type of drug (nifedipine vs nonnifedipine).
Data Synthesis Rates of cardiac death and myocardial infarction were not significantly different for treatment with -blockers vs calcium antagonists (OR, 0.97; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.67-1.38; P=.79). There were 0.31 (95% CI, 0.00-0.62; P=.05) fewer episodes of angina per week with -blockers than with calcium antagonists. -Blockers were discontinued because of adverse events less often than were calcium antagonists (OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.60-0.86; P<.001). The differences between -blockers and calcium antagonists were most striking for nifedipine (OR for adverse events with -blockers vs nifedipine, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.47-0.77). Too few trials compared nitrates with calcium antagonists or -blockers to draw firm conclusions about relative efficacy.
Conclusions -Blockers provide similar clinical outcomes and are associated with fewer adverse events than calcium antagonists in randomized trials of patients who have stable angina.
INTRODUCTION
Stable angina affects more than 7 million people in the United States,1 with an estimated 350,000 new cases annually. Long-term pharmacotherapy to prevent anginal symptoms has consisted of -blockers, calcium antagonists, long-acting nitrates, or their combinations.2 The choice of a first-line agent has been controversial. Because long-term use of -blockers has been shown to reduce mortality following myocardial infarction,3 recent clinical guidelines have suggested that -blockers be used as first-line agents in patients with stable angina.4-5 However, calcium antagonists are often used as initial therapy because they are assumed to have equal efficacy in relieving angina, and fewer adverse effects.6-7 Others have recommended that therapy begin with long-acting nitrates,6, 8 but concern about the need for a nitrate-free period has led many physicians to use long-acting nitrates as a second-line agent.2 No single class of therapy has been proven superior.9-10
Recent case-control studies and meta-analyses of randomized trials have suggested that short-acting calcium antagonists increase the risk of cardiac events among patients with hypertension11 and that nifedipine increases mortality following acute ischemic syndromes.12-13 These observations have led to considerable discussion and controversy.14 Even if these concerns prove to be valid in the specific populations studied, it is uncertain whether the findings in these patient groups can be applied to patients who have stable angina.
To determine the relative efficacy and safety of antianginal therapies, we performed a meta-analysis of trials that directly compared -blockers, calcium antagonists, and long-acting nitrates in patients who had stable angina. We also assessed the efficacy and safety of nifedipine and short-acting calcium antagonists by examining trials that compared these agents with -blockers.
METHODS
Data Sources
We searched MEDLINE (1966-1997) and EMBASE (1974-1997), and reviewed cited references of retrieved articles to identify relevant studies. Our search criteria were (1) the Medical Subject Headings angina pectoris or the text word angina and (2) publication type randomized controlled trial or text word containing a form of the word random. For this criteria set, we searched MEDLINE, then EMBASE. We also performed searches replacing the second criterion with (3) publication type controlled clinical trial or (4) text word double-blind. Finally, we reviewed the bibliographies of identified trials to locate other relevant studies.
Study Selection
We restricted this review to controlled trials that directly compared drugs from 2 or 3 major antianginal drug classes, including long-acting nitrates, -blockers, and calcium antagonists. Trials were included if the enrolled patients had a history of stable angina. Studies were included if they were either randomized parallel design or crossover studies. Studies of the following design were excluded: 1 drug vs placebo, comparison of different dosage of the same drug, and 1 drug vs a 2-drug combination. Studies with a duration of less than 1 week were excluded. Trials that used a study medication during a run-in period prior to randomization were also excluded.
For studies that compared more than 1 drug from a given class, we limited our analysis to the drug most commonly used for stable angina. To determine the most commonly used agents, we obtained pharmaceutical data from IMS Health, Plymouth Meeting, Pa, that described the frequency of medications prescribed for stable angina (in the absence of hypertension) in 1998. For studies comparing more than 1 dosage, we chose the dosage closest to the midpoint of the recommended treatment dosage range from the Physicians' Desk Reference.
Outcome Measures
We examined measures of antianginal efficacy and tolerability, conducting separate meta-analyses for each outcome. Measures of antianginal efficacy included number of angina episodes per week (patient recorded), nitroglycerin use per week (patient recorded), total exercise time, and time to 1-mm ST depression on a treadmill or upright bicycle. For crossover studies, mean between-person values were used to allow comparison with parallel studies. The tolerability measure was the rate of subject withdrawal due to adverse events, defined as death or cardiac or noncardiac symptoms. Withdrawal due to protocol violation or loss to follow-up were not counted as adverse events. We also examined the combined end point of cardiac death and nonfatal myocardial infarction for studies in which either was reported.
Data Extraction
Study selection was performed initially by title review (P.A.H. and M.A.H.). Candidate abstracts were then reviewed and appropriate studies were selected for data retrieval. Two independent reviewers extracted data from each article, compared their results, and settled any differences by consensus. One of the 2 reviewers had training in cardiology and the other had training in epidemiology or health services research. All outcome data were abstracted a third time by 1 of the investigators (P.A.H., B.F., or B.K.L.).
Subgroup Comparisons
We examined several subgroups of trials to determine their contribution to the summary differences between -blockers and calcium antagonists. The 2 prespecified comparisons of interest were nifedipine vs nonnifedipine calcium antagonists and short- vs long-acting calcium antagonists. Short-acting preparations were defined as those with usual dosing of 3 or more times per day according to the Physicians' Desk Reference. Additional comparisons were made based on the funding source (industry vs other) and the location of the trial (Europe vs United States). Because several trials examined drugs that are not in common use for treatment of stable angina, we repeated our analysis after limiting the trials to those agents that had at least 2% market share in the United States during the first quarter of 1998 (data from IMS Health). Based on these data, common therapies were limited to 4 calcium antagonists (amlodipine, diltiazem, nifedipine, and verapamil) and 5 -blockers (atenolol, carvedilol, propranolol, metoprolol, and nadolol). We compared trials that were double-blind with those that were not to determine the effect of this quality measure. We did not evaluate subgroups of long-acting nitrates because the number of trials of this class of agents was small.
Statistical Analysis
We combined estimates of the mean difference for number of angina episodes and number of nitroglycerin tablets used per week, the standardized mean difference for exercise time, and the odds ratio (OR) for adverse events, cardiac death, and myocardial infarction.15 The mean differencei between the drug treatment arms is equal to the meanai-meanbi, where a and b are the 2 arms of the ith study. The estimated variance is vi= 2i (1/nai+1/nbi), where n is the within-study sample size for the 2 study arms and 2 is estimated as the pooled within-group variance.
We used the standardized mean difference to compare exercise times because exercise protocols varied widely across studies. This measure expresses the difference in mean exercise time as a fraction of the SD. The measure is calculated as di=(meanai – meanbi)/pooled SD. The variance for this value is estimated as vi=[(nai+nbi)/ nai nbi] + [di2/2(nai + nbi)]. For this comparison, a positive value indicates increased exercise time in the treatment group. We pooled both mean differences and standardized mean differences by weighting the individual differences by the inverse of the variance. Random effects were assumed.
We used the Peto (fixed-effects) method to estimate summary ORs for the outcomes of death or myocardial infarction and withdrawal due to adverse events.16 Although we found no statistical evidence of heterogeneity (P>.20 for all) among studies using the Q statistic,16 we chose also to display random-effects results using the DerSimonian-Laird method17 where stated for comparison. For studies that reported no events, we substituted 0.1 in place of 0 for the random-effects calculation. A summary rate difference was calculated for trials with 1 or more adverse events.16-17 This measure complements the OR by providing an absolute difference in the adverse event rate. We examined differences between study subgroups of trials using analysis of variance.18
For the outcomes of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and adverse events, the study sample size was defined as the number of patients randomized. For the outcomes of angina episodes, nitroglycerin use, and exercise time, the sample size was defined as the number of patients who completed the study. P values are 2-tailed.
RESULTS
Excluded Studies
A total of 143 articles were identified by the MEDLINE and EMBASE searches and citation review. We excluded 25 studies that may have fulfilled the inclusion criteria but were not written in English; 17 that were duplicates or substudies of an included study; 6 that used a study drug during a run-in period prior to randomization; and 5 that did not report any of the primary outcomes. The remaining 90 articles (63%) (Table 1) were abstracted and included in the analysis.19-4950-8990-108
|
|
|
|
Table 1. Study Characteristics of the Included Trials*
|
|
|
-Blockers vs Calcium Antagonists
The majority of studies (n=72) compared -blockers with calcium antagonists (Table 1, Table 2, and Table 3). The included studies had a mean length of 8 weeks and only 2 trials67, 71 were longer than 6 months. Most studies (n=64) that compared -blockers with calcium antagonists required evidence of coronary artery disease or ischemia, in addition to a history of stable angina. A positive treadmill test result was required in 57 trials. Exclusion criteria were mentioned in 56 of the reports and included congestive heart failure (n=46), recent myocardial infarction (n=45), bradyarrhythmia or heart block (n=31), significant lung disease (n=26), and diabetes mellitus (n=13). The trials were predominately crossover in design (n=49), and were most often conducted in Europe (n=50) or North America (n=16). Source of study funding was stated in 31 studies; of those, 14 received support from the pharmaceutical industry. Significant differences in the abstracted outcome measures between -blockers and calcium antagonists were reported in only 17 of 72 trials.
|
|
|
|
Table 2. Calcium Antagonists and -Blockers Evaluated in Direct Comparisons
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Table 3. Outcomes in Stable Angina for -Blockers vs Calcium Antagonists*
|
|
|
Cardiac Death or Nonfatal Myocardial Infarction. Only the TIBET71 and APSIS67 trials were long-term (>6 months) comparisons of -blockers and calcium antagonists; these 2 studies accounted for 103 of the 116 cardiac events recorded in all trials (Figure 1). The pooled OR for these 2 trials for risk with -blockers was 0.98 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66-1.47). For the 59 short-term trials, there was no obvious difference in cardiac death or myocardial infarction (OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.40-2.00). When both long- and short-term trials were combined (Table 3), there were 57 events in the -blocker and 59 in the calcium antagonist groups. The OR for risk with -blockers was 0.97 (95% CI, 0.67-1.38). A random-effects analysis (DerSimonian-Laird method) produced similar results (OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.67-1.43). No significant differences were found when the trials were grouped by type of calcium antagonist (nifedipine vs nonnifedipine) or duration of action (Figure 2, top).
|
|
|
|
Figure 1. Odds Ratios for Cardiac Death or Myocardial Infarction With -Blockers vs Calcium Antagonists
Individual odds ratios are displayed for 2 long-term trials along with the combined odds ratio for 60 short-term studies. TIBET indicates Total Ischaemic Burden European Trial; APSIS, Angina Prognosis Study in Stockholm; and error bars, 95% confidence intervals.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Figure 2. Summary Odds Ratios for Benefit With -Blockers vs Calcium Antagonists for Cardiac Death or Myocardial Infarction and Adverse Events
A greater rate of adverse events leading to withdrawal was observed with calcium antagonists compared with -blockers for the nifedipine, long-acting, and short-acting calcium antagonist subgroups. Error bars indicate 95% confidence intervals.
|
|
|
Angina Episodes. The patients enrolled in the trials that compared -blockers with calcium antagonists had moderately frequent angina (mean [SD], 4.0 [5.9] episodes per week during treatment). Compared with calcium antagonists, -blockers were associated with 0.31 (95% CI, 0.00-0.62) fewer episodes of angina per week (P=.05) (Table 3). When the comparison was restricted to trials comparing -blockers with nifedipine, there were 0.63 (95% CI, 0.23-1.00) fewer angina events per week with -blockers (Figure 3, top). We did not observe a significant effect of the duration of action of calcium antagonists when short- and long-acting calcium antagonists were compared separately with -blockers (Figure 3, top). Short-acting calcium antagonists were associated with an increase of 0.44 angina episodes per week (95% CI, -0.87 to -0.02), while long-acting calcium antagonists decreased angina frequency by 0.08 episodes per week (95% CI, -0.75 to 0.91).
Nitroglycerin Use. Despite the differences in the frequency of angina, nitroglycerin tablet use per week was not significantly different between patients treated with -blockers and with calcium antagonists (Table 3). There was a nonsignificant reduction of 0.14 (95% CI, -0.19 to 0.46) fewer nitroglycerin tablets per week with -blockers in studies that compared -blockers with nifedipine. We found no differences when short- and long-acting calcium antagonist preparations were examined separately.
Exercise Time. There were no significant differences in time to ischemia (1-mm ST depression) between calcium antagonists and -blockers (Table 3). Similarly, no difference in exercise time to ischemia was observed when only trials comparing -blockers with nifedipine were evaluated (Figure 3, bottom). No differences were noted when short- and long-acting preparations of calcium antagonists were evaluated separately.
Withdrawal Due to Adverse Events. Adverse events that led to study withdrawal occurred in 8% of patients. Patients were less likely to discontinue -blockers than calcium antagonists in the 51 studies that compared these agents (OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.60-0.86) (Figure 4 and Table 3). The absolute difference in the adverse event rate was 2.0 (95% CI, 0.5-3.4) fewer events with -blockers compared with calcium antagonists for every 100 patients treated.
Trials comparing nifedipine with -blockers had significantly fewer adverse events with -blockers (OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.47-0.77) (Figure 2, bottom). In contrast, there was no significant difference in the rate of adverse events between nonnifedipine calcium antagonists and -blockers. Adverse events were not significantly different between long- and short-acting calcium antagonists when these agents were compared separately with -blockers (Figure 2, bottom).
Secondary Analyses. When we limited the trials to those that studied calcium antagonists and -blockers that had at least 2% market share in the United States in 1998, we noted significantly fewer adverse events (OR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.59-0.92), and angina episodes per week (absolute difference, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.05-0.75) for -blockers compared with calcium antagonists. No significant differences in any of the outcome measures were found when the trials were grouped by funding source or study location.
We compared -blockers with dihydropyridine calcium antagonists separately (nifedipine, n=26; nicardipine, n=5; amlodipine, n=1; felodipine, n=1) and found fewer adverse events (OR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.50-0.80), and angina episodes per week (OR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.23-0.99) with -blocker therapy. However, nifedipine accounted for 79% of all dihydropyridines, and an effect of dihydropyridine therapy independent of nifedipine could not be demonstrated. Random- and fixed-effects methods of pooling gave similar estimates for all comparisons.
Long-Acting Nitrates vs Calcium Antagonists
There were 12 studies that compared calcium antagonists with long-acting nitrates (Table 1). Patient characteristics were similar to those in the trials previously described that compared -blockers with calcium antagonists. There were no significant differences in outcome between these classes of medications (Table 4); however, a trend (P=.10) was noted for greater number of angina episodes per week in patients who were taking long-acting nitrates.
|
|
|
|
Table 4. Outcomes in Stable Angina for Nitrates vs Calcium Antagonists*
|
|
|
Long-Acting Nitrates vs -Blockers
Only 6 studies compared -blockers with long-acting nitrates (Table 1). Patient characteristics were similar to those in the trials that compared -blockers with calcium antagonists. There were no significant differences between -blockers and long-acting nitrates in any of the outcomes measured ( Table 5). A trend (P=.08) toward increased nitroglycerin use per week was noted for patients who were taking long-acting nitrates.
|
|
|
|
Table 5. Outcomes in Stable Angina for -Blockers vs Nitrates*
|
|
|
Effect of Excluding Non-English Articles
To determine the effect of excluding articles written in languages other than English, we reviewed the abstracts (in English) of 12 (48%) of 25 studies whose full text was not written in English. None of the studies reported a significant difference in death or myocardial infarction rates, exercise time, angina episodes, or nitroglycerin use for comparisons between -blockers and calcium antagonists (n=6), -blockers and nitrates (n=2), or calcium antagonists and nitrates (n=4). Two studies that compared calcium antagonists with nitrates noted fewer adverse effects with calcium antagonists.
COMMENT
This quantitative overview shows that calcium antagonists were associated with a greater number of adverse events compared with -blockers in trials of patients who have stable angina. Angina relief, as measured by number of angina episodes, nitroglycerin use, and exercise time, was not significantly different between -blockers and calcium antagonists. Trial duration was too short to determine differences in long-term rates of survival or myocardial infarction between calcium antagonists and -blockers. Similarly, too few studies compared long-acting nitrates with calcium antagonists or -blockers to determine differences in survival, symptoms, or adverse events.
The safety of calcium antagonists for patients who have coronary artery disease has been questioned. Prior meta-analyses and case-control studies have demonstrated an increased risk of myocardial infarction in hypertensive patients who take short-acting calcium antagonists.11 In patients who have acute coronary syndromes, mortality increased with increasingly large dosages of short-acting nifedipine.12-13 In a recent case-control study, short-acting calcium antagonists were associated with a 4-fold increase in the risk of cardiovascular deaths and hospital admission compared with -blockers.109 We were unable to determine whether there were important differences in mortality or myocardial infarction rates between antianginals because follow-up was less than 6 months in all but 2 studies. This important question could be addressed by larger long-term comparisons of these agents.
Our finding that -blockers were as well tolerated as calcium antagonists was not expected. Past reviews have noted frequent adverse effects with -blockers,8 whereas calcium antagonists have been recommended and used widely because of their low adverse-effect profile.6-7 Our findings must be tempered by noting that patients who were thought unlikely to tolerate -blockers (such as those with congestive heart failure, heart block, or significant pulmonary disease) were generally excluded from the randomized studies. Nonetheless, our findings suggest that patients without these contraindications should have success in finding angina relief and freedom from adverse events when they use a -blocker instead of a calcium antagonist.
Our study suggests that short- and long-acting nifedipine may not be as well tolerated as other calcium antagonists, consistent with past investigations of long-acting nifedipine. In 6 small randomized studies of at least 1 week in duration that compared long-acting nifedipine with other calcium antagonists, nifedipine was associated with more symptoms and adverse effects in 2110-111 and was equivalent to other calcium antagonists in 4.112-115
Our findings have several clinical implications. They suggest that -blockers should be considered first-line agents because they are as effective as and better tolerated than calcium antagonists and have been shown to improve prognosis in other populations with coronary disease. For patients who have a history of myocardial infarction, -blockers are already recommended as first-line agents because they are associated with decreased rates of cardiac death and myocardial infarction.3 These recommendations do not apply to patients with contraindications to -blockers (eg, severe reactive airway disease).
Current treatment of angina in the United States frequently does not include -blockers. A study using the National Ambulatory Medical Survey found that treatment with -blockers was reported in only 21% of office visits by patients with coronary artery disease and no strong contraindication to -blockade.116 Pharmaceutical data from the first quarter of 1998 (IMS Health) suggest that physicians prefer long-acting nitrates to calcium antagonists or -blockers. European data also suggest that calcium antagonists are more often used than -blockers for first-line therapy for patients with stable angina.7
The choice of a first-line agent for use in patients who have stable angina has been addressed by recent clinical guidelines. The European Society of Cardiology recommends -blockers for patients who have clear-cut effort-related angina or a prior myocardial infarction.5 The North of England Stable Angina Guideline Development Group recommends -blockers for all patients who have no contraindication,4 citing evidence that -blockers lower mortality after myocardial infarction, reduce mortality for patients who have a subsequent myocardial infarction while taking medication, and reduce adverse vascular events in patients who have hypertension. Our study data support these recommendations and add evidence that -blockers are equally well or better tolerated than and provide angina relief equivalent to that of calcium antagonists and long-acting nitrates.
Like those of any meta-analysis, our findings may have been affected by publication bias.117 It is possible that studies that failed to demonstrate significant differences were not submitted or accepted for publication. However, few (25%) of the studies included demonstrated significant differences between drugs, suggesting that any such bias may be small. Patients who have congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive lung disease, and nonexertional chest pain were rarely included in the studies; thus, our findings are not applicable to those types of patients. Only a few small studies compared long-acting nitrates with calcium antagonists or -blockers; thus, our analysis was unlikely to detect any clinically important differences between these agents. We did not include studies reported in foreign-language publications in our meta-analysis. A recent study has found that studies published in English were more likely to report P <.05.118 However, review of the English abstracts that were available (50% of foreign-language studies) did not demonstrate a difference in significant findings. Our study did not examine measures of quality of life. Although adverse events severe enough to lead to withdrawal from the study occurred less frequently in patients treated with -blockers than in those treated with calcium antagonists, less severe adverse effects were not consistently reported, so we could not measure differences in their rates.
In summary, our quantitative review suggests that -blockers provide an equivalent reduction in angina and lead to similar or reduced rates of adverse events compared with either calcium antagonists or long-acting nitrates. The differences in adverse event rates and frequency of angina between -blockers and calcium antagonists are accounted for in large part by nifedipine, which was associated with a higher rate of adverse events and angina symptoms. More long-term comparative trials are required to determine whether the different therapies confer a significant mortality difference in patients who have stable angina.
AUTHOR INFORMATION
Funding/Support: This study was funded by contract 290-97-0013 to the UCSF-Stanford Evidence-based Practice Center from the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research. Dr Heidenreich is supported by a career development award from the Veterans Affairs Health Services Research and Development Service.
Corresponding Author and Reprints: Paul A. Heidenreich, MD, MS, 111C Cardiology, Palo Alto VA Medical Center, 3801 Miranda Ave, Palo Alto, CA 94304 (e-mail: pah{at}smi.stanford.edu).
Author Affiliations: Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, Calif (Dr Heidenreich); and the Departments of Health Research and Policy (Drs Heidenreich, Hastie, and Hlatky and Mss McDonald and Hagan), Medicine (Drs Heidenreich, Fadel, Lee, and Hlatky and Ms McDonald), and Statistics (Dr Hastie), Stanford University, Stanford, Calif.
REFERENCES
1. 1998 Heart and Stroke Statistical Update. Dallas, Tex: American Heart Association; 1998.
2. Gersh B, Braunwald E, Rutherford J. Chronic coronary artery disease. In: Braunwald E, ed. Heart Disease.5th ed. Philadelphia, Pa: WB Saunders Co; 1997:307-335.
3. Yusuf S, Peto R, Lewis J, Collins R, Sleight P. Beta blockade during and after myocardial infarction. Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 1985;27:335-371.
ISI
| PUBMED
4. North of England Stable Angina Guideline Development Group. North of England Evidence Based Guidelines Development Project. BMJ. 1996;312:827-832.
FREE FULL TEXT
5. Management of stable angina pectoris: recommendations of the Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J. 1997;18:394-413.
FREE FULL TEXT
6. Chan PK, Heo JY, Garibian G, et al. The role of nitrates, beta blockers, and calcium antagonists in stable angina pectoris. Am Heart J. 1988;116:838-848.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
7. Fox KM, Jespersen CM, Ferrari R, Rehnqvist N. How European cardiologists perceive the role of calcium antagonists in the treatment of stable angina. Eur Heart J. 1997;18(suppl A):A113-A116.
PUBMED
8. Hoekenga D, Abrams J. Rational medical therapy for stable angina pectoris. Am J Med. 1984;76:309-314.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
9. Thadani U. Management of patients with chronic stable angina at low risk for serious cardiac events. Am J Cardiol. 1997;79:24-30.
PUBMED
10. Roberts R. Stable angina as a manifestation of ischemic heart disease. Circulation. 1985;72:V145-V154.
PUBMED
11. Psaty BM, Heckbert SR, Koepsell TD, et al. The risk of myocardial infarction associated with antihypertensive drug therapies. JAMA. 1995;274:620-625.
FREE FULL TEXT
12. Furberg CD, Psaty BM, Meyer JV. Nifedipine: dose-related increase in mortality in patients with coronary heart disease. Circulation. 1995;92:1326-1331.
FREE FULL TEXT
13. Furberg CD, Psaty BM. Corrections to the nifedipine meta-analysis. Circulation. 1996;93:1475-1476.
PUBMED
14. Califf RM, Kramer JM. What have we learned from the calcium channel blocker controversy? Circulation. 1998;97:1529-1531.
FREE FULL TEXT
15. Shadish W, Haddock C. Combining estimates of effect size. In: Cooper H, Hedges L, eds. The Handbook of Research Synthesis5th ed. New York, NY: Russel Sage Foundation; 1994:307-335.
16. Petitti D. Statistical Methods in Meta-Analysis: Meta-Analysis, Decision Analysis and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 1994:90-114.
17. DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1986;7:177-188.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
18. Hedges L. Fixed effects models. In: Cooper H, Hedges L, eds. The Handbook of Research Synthesis5th ed. New York, NY: Russel Sage Foundation; 1994:307-335.
19. Wallace WA, Wellington KL, Chess MA, Liang CS. Comparison of nifedipine gastrointestinal therapeutic system and atenolol on antianginal efficacies and exercise hemodynamic responses in stable angina pectoris. Am J Cardiol. 1994;73:23-28.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
20. von Arnim T. Medical treatment to reduce total ischemic burden. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1995;25:231-238.
ABSTRACT
21. Savonitto S, Ardissiono D, Egstrup K, et al. Combination therapy with metoprolol and nifedipine versus monotherapy in patients with stable angina pectoris. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1996;27:311-316.
ABSTRACT
22. Johnson SM, Mauritson DR, Corbett JR, et al. Double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled comparison of propranolol and verapamil in the treatment of patients with stable angina pectoris. Am J Med. 1981;71:443-451.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
23. Di Somma S, de Divitiis M, Bertocchi F, et al. Treatment of hypertension associated with stable angina pectoris. Cardiologia. 1996;41:635-643.
PUBMED
24. Bowles MJ, Bala Subramanian V, Davies AB, Raftery EB. Double-blind randomized crossover trial of verapamil and propranolol in chronic stable angina. Am Heart J. 1983;106:1297-1306.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
25. Ardissino D, Savonitto S, Egstrup K, et al. Selection of medical treatment in stable angina pectoris. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1995;25:1516-1521.
ABSTRACT
26. van der Does R, Eberhardt R, Derr I, Ehmer B. Efficacy and safety of carvedilol in comparison with nifedipine sustained-release in chronic stable angina. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol. 1992;19(suppl 1):S122-S127.
PUBMED
27. Lynch P, Dargie H, Krikler S, Krikler D. Objective assessment of antianginal treatment. BMJ. 1980;281:184-187.
FREE FULL TEXT
28. Rae AP, Beattie JM, Lawrie TD, Hutton I. Comparative clinical efficacy of bepridil, propranolol and placebo in patients with chronic stable angina. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1985;19:343-352.
ISI
| PUBMED
29. Kawanishi DT, Reid CL, Morrison EC, Rahimtoola SH. Response of angina and ischemia to long-term treatment in patients with chronic stable angina. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1992;19:409-417.
ABSTRACT
30. Pflugfelder PW, Humen DP, O'Brien PA, et al. Comparison of bepridil with nadolol for angina pectoris. Am J Cardiol. 1987;59:1283-1288.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
31. McGill D, McKenzie W, McCredie M. Comparison of nicardipine and propranolol for chronic stable angina pectoris. Am J Cardiol. 1986;57:39-43.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
32. Humen DP, Kostuk WJ. Clinical response and effects on left ventricular function of isosorbide dinitrate added to propranolol or diltiazem monotherapy in patients with chronic stable angina. Can J Cardiol. 1991;7:74-80.
ISI
| PUBMED
33. Frishman WH, Klein NA, Klein P, et al. Comparison of oral propranolol and verapamil for combined systemic hypertension and angina pectoris. Am J Cardiol. 1982;50:1164-1172.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
34. Nadazdin A, Davies GJ. Investigation of therapeutic mechanisms of atenolol and diltiazem in patients with variable-threshold angina. Am Heart J. 1994;127:312-317.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
35. De Divitiis O, Liguori V, Di Somma S, et al. Bisoprolol in the treatment of angina pectoris. Eur Heart J. 1987;8(suppl M):43-54.
PUBMED
36. Crake T, Mulcahy D, Wright C, Fox K. Labetalol in the treatment of stable exertional angina pectoris. Eur Heart J. 1988;9:1200-1205.
FREE FULL TEXT
37. Higginbotham MB, Morris KG, Coleman RE, Cobb FR. Chronic stable angina monotherapy. Am J Med. 1989;86:1-5.
ISI
| PUBMED
38. Southall E, Nutt NR, Thomas RD. Chronic stable angina. J Int Med Res. 1982;10:361-366.
ISI
| PUBMED
39. Wheatley D. A comparison of diltiazem and atenolol in angina. Postgrad Med J. 1985;61:785-789.
FREE FULL TEXT
40. Hauf-Zachariou U, Blackwood RA, Gunawardena KA, et al. Carvedilol versus verapamil in chronic stable angina. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 1997;52:95-100.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
41. Steffensen R, Grande P, Pedersen F, Haunso S. Effects of atenolol and diltiazem on exercise tolerance and ambulatory ischaemia. Int J Cardiol. 1993;40:143-153.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
42. Bjerle P, Olofsson B, Glimvik O. Nicardipine and propranolol in angina pectoris. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1986;22(suppl):339S-343S.
43. Findlay IN, Dargie HJ. The effects of nifedipine, atenolol and that combination on left ventricular function. Postgrad Med J. 1983;59(suppl 2):70-73.
PUBMED
44. Findlay IN, MacLeod K, Ford M, Gillen G, Elliott AT, Dargie HJ. Treatment of angina pectoris with nifedipine and atenolol. Br Heart J. 1986;55:240-245.
FREE FULL TEXT
45. Findlay IN, MacLeod K, Gillen G, et al. A double blind placebo controlled comparison of verapamil, atenolol, and their combination in patients with chronic stable angina pectoris. Br Heart J. 1987;57:336-343.
FREE FULL TEXT
46. Livesley B, Catley PF, Campbell RC, Oram S. Double-blind evaluation of verapamil, propranolol, and isosorbide dinitrate against a placebo in the treatment of angina pectoris. BMJ. 1973;1:375-378.
FREE FULL TEXT
47. Frishman WH. Comparative efficacy and concomitant use of bepridil and beta blockers in the management of angina pectoris. Am J Cardiol. 1992;69:50D-55D.
FULL TEXT
| PUBMED
48. van Dijk RB, Lie KI, Crijns HJ. Diltiazem in comparison with metoprolol in stable angina pectoris. Eur Heart J. 1988;9:1194-1199.
FREE FULL TEXT
49. Kenny J, Kiff P, Holmes J, Jewitt DE. Beneficial effects of diltiazem and propranolol, alone and in combination, in patients with stable angina pectoris. Br Heart J. 1985;53:43-46.
FREE FULL TEXT
50. Arnman K, Ryden L. Comparison of metoprolol and verapamil in the treatment of angina pectoris. Am J Cardiol. 1982;49:821-827.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
51. Ahuja RC, Sinha N, Kumar RR, Saran RK. Effect of metoprolol and diltiazem on the total ischaemic burden in patients with chronic stable angina. Int J Cardiol. 1993;41:191-199.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
52. Parameshwar J, Keegan J, Mulcahy D, et al. Atenolol or nicardipine alone is as efficacious in stable angina as their combination. Int J Cardiol. 1993;40:135-141.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
53. Sadick NN, Tan AT, Fletcher PJ, Morris J, Kelly DT. A double-blind randomized trial of propranolol and verapamil in the treatment of effort angina. Circulation. 1982;66:574-579.
FREE FULL TEXT
54. Hung J, Lamb IH, Connolly SJ, Jutzy KR, Goris ML, Schroeder JS. The effect of diltiazem and propranolol, alone and in combination, on exercise performance and left ventricular function in patients with stable effort angina. Circulation. 1983;68:560-567.
FREE FULL TEXT
55. Egstrup K, Andersen PE Jr. Transient myocardial ischemia during nifedipine therapy in stable angina pectoris, and its relation to coronary collateral flow and comparison with metoprolol. Am J Cardiol. 1993;71:177-183.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
56. Lai C, Onnis E, Orani E, et al. Felodipine improves the anti-ischaemic effect of metoprolol in stable effort-induced angina. Drug Invest. 1992;4:30-33.
57. Bowles MJ, Subramanian VB, Davies AB, Raftery EB. Comparison of antianginal actions of verapamil and propranolol. BMJ. 1981;282:1754.
FREE FULL TEXT
58. Parker JO, Farrell B. Comparative antianginal effects of bepridil and propranolol in angina pectoris. Am J Cardiol. 1986;58:449-452.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
59. Hopkinson ND, Hui KP, Smith MP, Hollinrake K. A comparison of sustained release verapamil versus atenolol for 24 h protection from exercise-induced angina pectoris. Eur Heart J. 1991;12:1273-1277.
FREE FULL TEXT
60. Romano M, Di Maro T, Carella G, et al. Atenolol and/or nifedipine in effort angina. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol. 1988;26:468-470.
PUBMED
61. Catipovic-Veselica K, Skrinjaric-Cincar S, Catipovic B. Efficacy of diltiazem and penbutolol in myocardial ischemia of patients with stable angina pectoris. Croat Med J. 1993;34:319-324.
62. Johnston DL, Manyari DE, Kostuk WJ. The clinical and hemodynamic effects of propranolol, pindolol and verapamil in the treatment of exertional angina pectoris. CMAJ. 1984;130:1449-1455.
ABSTRACT
63. Cocco G, Strozzi C, Chu D, Amrein R, Castagnoli E. Therapeutic effects of pindolol and nifedipine in patients with stable angina pectoris and asymptomatic resting ischemia. Eur J Cardiol. 1979;10:59-69.
ISI
| PUBMED
64. Rousseau MF, Hanet C, Pardonge-Lavenne E, et al. Changes in myocardial metabolism during therapy in patients with chronic stable angina: a comparison of long-term dosing with propranolol and nicardipine. Circulation. 1986;73:1270-1280.
FREE FULL TEXT
65. Romano M, di Maro T, Cotecchia MR, et al. Long-term management of exercise-induced myocardial ischemia. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol. 1986;24:551-554.
PUBMED
66. Logan R, Ikram H, Webster M, Guppy W. Comparative efficacy of nicardipine hydrochloride and atenolol in the treatment of chronic stable angina. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1986;22(suppl):345S-350S.
67. Rehnqvist N, Hjemdahl P, Billing E, et al. Effects of metoprolol vs verapamil in patients with stable angina pectoris. Eur Heart J. 1996;17:76-81.
FREE FULL TEXT
68. Lessem J. Combined therapy with Ca-antagonists and beta-adrenergic receptor blocking agents in chronic stable angina. Acta Med Scand Suppl. 1984;681:83-90.
PUBMED
69. Johnston DL, Gebhardt VA, Donald A, Kostuk WJ. Comparative effects of propranolol and verapamil alone and in combination on left ventricular function and volumes in patients with chronic exertional angina. Circulation. 1983;68:1280-1289.
FREE FULL TEXT
70. de Vries RJ, van den Heuvel AF, Lok DJ, et al. Nifedipine gastrointestinal therapeutic system versus atenolol in stable angina pectoris. Int J Cardiol. 1996;57:143-150.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
71. Dargie HJ, Ford I, Fox KM. Total Ischaemic Burden European Trial (TIBET). Eur Heart J. 1996;17:104-112.
FREE FULL TEXT
72. Vliegen HW, van der Wall EE, Kragten JA, et al. Comparison of diltiazem standard formulation and diltiazem controlled release in patients with stable angina pectoris. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol. 1993;21:552-559.
ISI
| PUBMED
73. Shapiro W, Narahara KA, Kostis JB, et al. Comparison of atenolol and nifedipine in chronic stable angina pectoris. Am J Cardiol. 1989;64:186-190.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
74. Ardissino D, Savonitto S, Egstrup K, et al. Transient myocardial ischemia during daily life in rest and exertional angina pectoris and comparison of effectiveness of metoprolol versus nifedipine. Am J Cardiol. 1991;67:946-952.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
75. Blake P, Berry SC, Readman A, Ratcliffe M, Godley M. A comparison of epanolol and nifedipine in stable angina patients. Cardiology. 1991;79:249-255.
ISI
| PUBMED
76. Miller WE, Vittitoe J, O'Rourke RA, Crawford MH. Nadolol versus diltiazem and combination for preventing exercise-induced ischemia in severe angina pectoris. Am J Cardiol. 1988;62:372-376.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
77. Hill JA, Gonzalez JI, Kolb R, Pepine CJ. Effects of atenolol alone, nifedipine alone and their combination on ambulant myocardial ischemia. Am J Cardiol. 1991;67:671-675.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
78. Egstrup K. Randomized double-blind comparison of metoprolol, nifedipine, and their combination in chronic stable angina. Am Heart J. 1988;116:971-978.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
79. Destors JM, Boissel JP, Philippon AM, Schbath J. Controlled clinical trial of bepridil, propranolol and placebo in the treatment of exercise induced angina pectoris. Fundam Clin Pharmacol. 1989;3:597-611.
ISI
| PUBMED
80. Meyer EC, Makov UE, Palant A. Monotherapy of stable angina pectoris with bopindolol in comparison with diltiazem. Cardiology. 1991;78:179-184.
ISI
| PUBMED
81. Riley M, Elborn JS, Khan MM, Stanford CF, et al. Comparative effects of epanolol and diltiazem on exercise performance and respiratory gas exchange in angina pectoris. Eur Heart J. 1992;13:1116-1122.
FREE FULL TEXT
82. Singh S. Long-term double-blind evaluation of amlodipine and nadolol in patients with stable exertional angina pectoris. Clin Cardiol. 1993;16:54-58.
ISI
| PUBMED
83. O'Hara MJ, Khurmi NS, Bowles MJ, et al. Comparison of diltiazem at two dose levels with propranolol for treatment of stable angina pectoris. Am J Cardiol. 1984;54:477-481.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
84. Brouwer J, Viersma JW, van Veldhuisen DJ, et al. Usefulness of heart rate variability in predicting drug efficacy (metoprolol vs diltiazem) in patients with stable angina pectoris. Am J Cardiol. 1995;76:759-763.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
85. Khurmi NS, O'Hara MJ, Bowles MJ, Raftery EB. Effect of diltiazem and propranolol on myocardial ischaemia during unrestricted daily life in patients with effort-induced chronic stable angina pectoris. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 1987;32:443-447.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
86. Sigurd B, Hansen JF. Verapamil or propranolol in the treatment of stable angina pectoris of effort. Acta Med Scand Suppl. 1984;681:75-81.
PUBMED
87. Kenmure AC, Scruton JH. A double-blind controlled trial of the anti-anginal efficacy of nifedipine compared with propranolol. Br J Clin Pract. 1979;33:49-51.
ISI
| PUBMED
88. Lai C, Onnis E, Pirisi R, et al. Anti-ischaemic and anti-anginal activity of atenolol, nifedipine and their combination in stable, chronic effort angina. Drugs Exp Clin Res. 1988;14:699-705.
ISI
| PUBMED
89. Hetzel M, Wieshammer S, Barnikel U, et al. Effects of antianginal therapy with atenolol and slow-release nifedipine on respiratory gas exchange and on the ventilatory requirements for aerobic exercise. Z Kardiol. 1994;83(suppl 3):83-87.
PUBMED
90. Wieshammer S, Hetzel M, Barnikel U, et al. Effects of atenolol, slow-release nifedipine, and their combination on respiratory gas exchange and exercise tolerance in stable effort angina. Klin Wochenschr. 1991;69:645-651.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
91. de Vries RJ, Dunselman PH, van Veldhuisen DJ, et al. Comparison between felodipine and isosorbide mononitrate as adjunct to beta blockade in patients >65 years of age with angina pectoris. Am J Cardiol. 1994;74:1201-1206.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
92. Akhras F, Chambers J, Jefferies S, Jackson G. A randomised double-blind crossover study of isosorbide mononitrate and nifedipine retard in chronic stable angina. Int J Cardiol. 1989;24:191-196.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
93. Ankier SI, Fay L, Warrington SJ, Woodings DF. A multicentre open comparison of isosorbide-5-mononitrate and nifedipine given prophylactically to general practice patients with chronic stable angina pectoris. J Int Med Res. 1989;17:172-178.
ISI
| PUBMED
94. Liang CS, Coplin B, Wellington K. Comparison of antianginal efficacy of nifedipine and isosorbide dinitrate in chronic stable angina. Am J Cardiol. 1985;55:9E-14E.
FULL TEXT
| PUBMED
95. Connelly CM, Waksmonski C, Gagnon MM, Lipsitz LA. Effects of isosorbide dinitrate and nicardipine hydrochloride on postprandial blood pressure in elderly patients with stable angina pectoris or healed myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol. 1995;75:291-293.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
96. Eldridge JE, Burdick DC, Jones RH, Hossack KF. Comparison of nitroglycerin patches and nifedipine. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol. 1987;10:315-319.
ISI
| PUBMED
97. Emanuelsson H, Ake H, Kristi M, Arina R. Effects of diltiazem and isosorbide-5-mononitrate, alone and in combination, on patients with stable angina pectoris. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 1989;36:561-566.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
98. von Arnim T, Erath A, Reuschel-Janetschek E. Isosorbide-5-mononitrate and nifedipine can reduce ischaemic ST-segment changes during Holter monitoring in patients with spontaneous angina pectoris. Eur Heart J. 1988;9(suppl A):113-118.
PUBMED
99. Steffensen R, Melchior T, Bech J, et al. Effects of amlodipine and isosorbide dinitrate on exercise-induced and ambulatory ischemia in patients with chronic stable angina pectoris. Cardiovasc Drugs Ther. 1997;11:629-635.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
100. Schneider W, Maul FD, Bussmann WD, et al. Comparison of the antianginal efficacy of isosorbide dinitrate (ISDN) 40 mg and verapamil 120 mg three times daily in the acute trial and following two-week treatment. Eur Heart J. 1988;9:149-158.
FREE FULL TEXT
101. Friedensohn A, Meshulam R, Schlesinger Z. Randomized double-blind comparison of the effects of isosorbide dinitrate retard, verapamil sustained-release, and their combination on myocardial ischemic episodes. Cardiology. 1991;79(suppl 2):31-40.
PUBMED
102. Carboni GP, Saltarocchi ML, Risa AL, Scardovi AB, Zanchi E, Prati PL. Combined gallopamil and isosorbide-5-mononitrate in "mixed" angina pectoris. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol. 1992;20(suppl 7):S64-S70.
PUBMED
103. van de Ven LL, Vermeulen A, Tans JG, et al. Which drug to choose for stable angina pectoris. Int J Cardiol. 1995;47:217-223.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
104. Waysbort J, Meshulam N, Brunner D. Isosorbide-5-mononitrate and atenolol in the treatment of stable exertional angina. Cardiology. 1991;79(suppl 2):19-26.
PUBMED
105. Krepp HP. Evaluation of the antianginal and anti-ischemic efficacy of slow-release isosorbide-5-mononitrate capsules, bupranolol and their combination, in patients with chronic stable angina pectoris. Cardiology. 1991;79(suppl 2):14-18.
PUBMED
106. Aubert A, Nyberg G, Slaastad R, Tjeldflaat L. Prophylactic treatment of angina pectoris. BMJ. 1970;1:203-206.
FREE FULL TEXT
107. Binak K, Sirmaci N, Tavsanoglu S, Harmanci N. Beta-adrenergic-blocker LB46 and isosorbide dinitrate synergism in angina pectoris. New Istanbul Contrib Clin Sci. 1974;11:8-23.
PUBMED
108. Goldbarg AN, Moran JF, Butterfield TK, et al. Therapy of angina pectoris with propranolol and long-acting nitrates. Circulation. 1969;40:847-853.
ISI
| PUBMED
109. Alderman MH, Cohen H, Roque R, Madhavan S. Effect of long-acting and short-acting calcium antagonists on cardiovascular outcomes in hypertensive patients. Lancet. 1997;349:594-598.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
110. Pandolfo L, Pajes G, Zardi D, Giorgi G. Anti-ischaemic efficacy of amlodipine vs nifedipine in the treatment of patients with stable exertional angina. Clin Drug Invest. 1997;13:113-118.
111. Licciardello G, Privitera A, Calvi V, et al. Amlodipine vs nifedipine. Clin Drug Invest. 1997;13:119-125.
112. Zanolla L, Franceschini L, Rossi L, et al. Nifedipine GITS versus diltiazem in chronic stable angina. Br J Clin Pract Suppl. 1997;88:27-35.
PUBMED
113. Schulte KL. 24 h anti-anginal and anti-ischaemic effects with once daily felodipine. Eur Heart J. 1995;16:171-176.
FREE FULL TEXT
114. Siu SC, Jacoby RM, Phillips RT, Nesto RW. Comparative efficacy of nifedipine gastrointestinal therapeutic system versus diltiazem when added to beta blockers in stable angina pectoris. Am J Cardiol. 1993;71:887-892.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
115. Donaldson KM, Dawkins KD, Waller DG. A comparison of nisoldipine and nifedipine, in combination with atenolol, in the management of myocardial ischaemia. Eur Heart J. 1993;14:534-539.
FREE FULL TEXT
116. Wang TJ, Stafford RS. National patterns and predictors of beta-blocker use in patients with coronary artery disease. Arch Intern Med. 1998;158:1901-1906.
FREE FULL TEXT
117. Easterbrook PJ, Berlin JA, Gopalan R, Matthews DR. Publication bias in clinical research. Lancet. 1991;337:867-872.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
118. Egger M, Zellweger-Zahner T, Schneider M, Junker C, Lengeler C, Antes G. Language bias in randomised controlled trials published in English and German. Lancet. 1997;350:326-329.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter
What's this?
RELATED ARTICLE
May 26, 1999
JAMA. 1999;281(20):1959-1960.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES
|
Efficacy of ranolazine in patients with chronic angina observations from the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled MERLIN-TIMI (Metabolic Efficiency With Ranolazine for Less Ischemia in Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes) 36 Trial.
Wilson et al.
J Am Coll Cardiol 2009;53:1510-1516.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
CHAPTER 17 Chronic Ischaemic Heart Disease
Crea et al.
ESC Textbook of Cardiovascular Medicine 2009;2:med-9780199566990-chapter-med-9780199566990-chapter.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Use of {beta} blockers in patients with COPD
Au
Thorax 2008;63:296-298.
FULL TEXT
Long term medical treatment of stable coronary disease
Shavelle
Heart 2007;93:1473-1477.
FULL TEXT
European guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice: executive summary: Fourth Joint Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology and Other Societies on Cardiovascular Disease Prevention in Clinical Practice (Constituted by representatives of nine societies and by invited experts)
Authors/Task Force Members et al.
Eur Heart J 2007;28:2375-2414.
FULL TEXT
Cardiovascular Protection Using Beta-Blockers: A Critical Review of the Evidence
Bangalore et al.
J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;50:563-572.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Treatment of stable angina
Ben-Dor and Battler
Heart 2007;93:868-874.
FULL TEXT
2007 Guidelines for the Management of Arterial Hypertension: The Task Force for the Management of Arterial Hypertension of the European Society of Hypertension (ESH) and of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC)
Authors/Task Force Members: et al.
Eur Heart J 2007;0:ehm236v1-75.
FULL TEXT
Antianginal Efficacy of Ranolazine When Added to Treatment With Amlodipine: The ERICA (Efficacy of Ranolazine in Chronic Angina) Trial
Stone et al.
J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;48:566-575.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Ranolazine: Augmenting the Antianginal Armamentarium
Cairns
J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;48:576-578.
FULL TEXT
Re-examining the efficacy of {beta}-blockers for the treatment of hypertension: a meta-analysis
Khan and McAlister
CMAJ 2006;174:1737-1742.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Guidelines on the management of stable angina pectoris: executive summary: The Task Force on the Management of Stable Angina Pectoris of the European Society of Cardiology
Authors/Task Force Members et al.
Eur Heart J 2006;27:1341-1381.
FULL TEXT
The need to identify new targets for therapeutic intervention in angina
Tavazzi
Eur Heart J Suppl 2006;8:A3-A5.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Favourable long term prognosis in stable angina pectoris: an extended follow up of the angina prognosis study in Stockholm (APSIS)
Hjemdahl et al.
Heart 2006;92:177-182.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Clinical implications of inhibition of the late sodium current: ranolazine
Bassand
Eur Heart J Suppl 2006;8:A14-A19.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Under-use of beta-blockers in patients with ischaemic heart disease and concomitant chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
Egred et al.
QJM 2005;98:493-497.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Chronic Stable Angina
Abrams
NEJM 2005;352:2524-2533.
FULL TEXT
Cardiac medical therapy in patients after undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery: A review of randomized controlled trials
Okrainec et al.
J Am Coll Cardiol 2005;45:177-184.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Physicians' attitudes to the pharmacological treatment of patients with stable angina pectoris
Beaulieu et al.
QJM 2005;98:41-51.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Temporal Characteristics of cAMP Response Element-Mediated Gene Transcription: Requirement for Sustained cAMP Production
Baker et al.
Mol. Pharmacol. 2004;65:986-998.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Current Medical Management of Chronic Stable Angina
Thadani
J CARDIOVASC PHARMACOL THER 2004;9:S11-S29.
ABSTRACT
Efficacy and Safety of a Metabolic Modulator Drug in Chronic Stable Angina: Review of Evidence from Clinical Trials
Chaitman
J CARDIOVASC PHARMACOL THER 2004;9:S47-S64.
ABSTRACT
Use of {beta}-Blockers in Patients with COPD
Andrus et al.
The Annals of Pharmacotherapy 2004;38:142-145.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Agonist and Inverse Agonist Actions of {beta}-Blockers at the Human {beta}2-Adrenoceptor Provide Evidence for Agonist-Directed Signaling
Baker et al.
Mol. Pharmacol. 2003;64:1357-1369.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Casses of Antianginal Compounds: Old and New--Therapeutic Implications
Singh
J CARDIOVASC PHARMACOL THER 2003;8:85-88.
Agonist Actions of "{beta}-Blockers" Provide Evidence for Two Agonist Activation Sites or Conformations of the Human {beta}1-Adrenoceptor
Baker et al.
Mol. Pharmacol. 2003;63:1312-1321.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Health Outcomes Associated With Various Antihypertensive Therapies Used as First-Line Agents: A Network Meta-analysis
Psaty et al.
JAMA 2003;289:2534-2544.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Anti-ischemic properties of calcium-channel blockers: Lessons from cardiac surgery
Opie
J Am Coll Cardiol 2003;41:1506-1509.
FULL TEXT
Cardioselective {beta}-Blockers in Patients with Reactive Airway Disease: A Meta-Analysis
Salpeter et al.
ANN INTERN MED 2002;137:715-725.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Treatment of Perioperative Myocardial Ischemia
Zvara
SEMIN CARDIOTHORAC VASC ANESTH 2001;5:166-183.
ABSTRACT
Epidemiologic Review of the Calcium Channel Blocker Drugs: An Up-to-date Perspective on the Proposed Hazards
Kizer and Kimmel
Arch Intern Med 2001;161:1145-1158.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Intercurrent drug therapy and perioperative cardiovascular mortality in elective and urgent/emergency surgical patients{{dagger}}
Sear et al.
Br J Anaesth 2001;86:506-512.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
First line drugs in chronic stable effort angina--the case for newer, longer-acting calcium channel blocking agents
Opie
J Am Coll Cardiol 2000;36:1967-1971.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Effect of Patient Reminder/Recall Interventions on Immunization Rates: A Review
Szilagyi et al.
JAMA 2000;284:1820-1827.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Are Beta-Blockers or Calcium Antagonists Better for Stable Angina?
Journal Watch Cardiology 1999;1999:5-5.
FULL TEXT
|
