Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 1989:38 Suppl 2:61-5.
doi: 10.2165/00003495-198900382-00015.

Comparative multicentre study of the tolerability and efficacy of epanolol versus nifedipine in patients with stable angina pectoris

Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Comparative multicentre study of the tolerability and efficacy of epanolol versus nifedipine in patients with stable angina pectoris

A S Readman. Drugs. 1989.

Abstract

The primary aim of this multicentre, randomised, double-blind, crossover study in 529 patients with stable angina pectoris was to compare the tolerability of epanolol, a novel antianginal agent, administered as a single oral daily dose of 200mg, with an oral retard formulation of twice-daily nifedipine 20mg and to determine patient preference (VISA 2). Confirmation of equal efficacy and safety monitoring were secondary aims of the study. Treatment consisted of 4 weeks on each therapy, and at the end of the study each patient was asked to state their treatment preference. 448 patients (85%) answered the preference question. Preliminary analysis of the data showed that 61% of patients preferred epanolol vs 31% who preferred nifedipine (p less than 0.001). Reason for a preference for epanolol were mainly fewer adverse experiences (11% vs. 23% with nifedipine), a general improvement in well-being (16% vs 10% with nifedipine) and a decrease in the number of angina attacks (11% vs 10% with nifedipine). A tolerability questionnaire comprising 43 questions and covering 7 different body systems showed that epanolol had a better profile than nifedipine for the following 7 side effects: poor sleep, abdominal pain, flushing, swollen ankles, palpitations, headache and a general feeling of being unwell. Four patients died during the study; none of the deaths were associated with the study treatment. Treatment with nifedipine resulted in 63 patient withdrawals compared with 31 patient withdrawals during epanolol treatment; there were 5 patient withdrawals from both treatments. The main reasons for withdrawal of patients from nifedipine treatment were adverse events (9% vs 4% with epanolol) and a lack of efficacy (3% vs 2% with epanolol).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources