ライフサイエンスコーパス: HCTZ

1 HCTZ is the most commonly prescribed antihypertensive dr

2 ve either chlorthalidone, 6.25 mg, (n = 16); HCTZ 12.5 mg (n = 18); or HCTZ-CR 12.5 mg (n = 20).

3 Adding HCTZ to intravenous furosemide increases the risk of hyp

4 More than 97% of all HCTZ prescriptions are for 12.5 to 25 mg per day.

5 In patients treated with furosemide and HCTZ, it is advisable to add potassium supplements or a

6 ion between HCTZ 12.5 mg (5.7/3.3 mm Hg) and HCTZ 25 mg (7.6/5.4 mm Hg).

7 no significant differences between SPIRO and HCTZ.

8 tolic blood pressure with spironolactone and HCTZ but not with placebo.

9 Because HCTZ has been perceived as a short-acting drug, a third

10 astolic (p = 0.15) 24-h BP reduction between HCTZ 12.5 mg (5.7/3.3 mm Hg) and HCTZ 25 mg (7.6/5.4 mm

11 ed with the HCTZ group and with the combined HCTZ and placebo groups.

12 Although no head-to-head trials compare HCTZ with the uncommonly prescribed chlorthalidone (CTDN

13 HCTZ at baseline were randomized to continue HCTZ or switch to CTD at pharmacologically comparable do

14 of essential hypertension, whereas low-dose HCTZ monotherapy is not an appropriate antihypertensive

15 fferences in duration of action (16-24 h for HCTZ versus 48-72 h for CTDN).

16 arison with an extended-release formulation (HCTZ-controlled release [CR]) was added.

17 Hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) in the 12.5-mg dose remains the most commonly pres

18 f spironolactone 25 mg, hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) 12.5 mg, or placebo for 6 months.

19 ypertensive efficacy of hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) by ambulatory blood pressure (BP) monitoring.

20 ailure, the addition of hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) to furosemide increased the diuretic response in t

21 TD) is more potent than hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) in reducing blood pressure (BP) in hypertensive pa

22 nd 25 non-responders to hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) or chlorthalidone.

23 tolic BP in response to hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ).

24 Hydrochlorthiazide (HCTZ) is the tenth most commonly prescribed drug in rece

25 cause outcome data at this dose are lacking, HCTZ is an inappropriate first-line drug for the treatme

26 eatment of hypertension, subsidized losartan-HCTZ single-pill combination (SPC) medications, nurse tr

27 Pharmacologically comparable daily dose of HCTZ or CTD and history of MI or stroke.

28 The antihypertensive efficacy of HCTZ by ambulatory BP monitoring is less well defined.

29 The antihypertensive efficacy of HCTZ in its daily dose of 12.5 to 25 mg as measured in h

30 Fourteen studies of HCTZ dose 12.5 to 25 mg with 1,234 patients and 5 studie

31 o 25 mg with 1,234 patients and 5 studies of HCTZ dose 50 mg with 229 patients fulfilled the inclusio

32 6.25 mg, (n = 16); HCTZ 12.5 mg (n = 18); or HCTZ-CR 12.5 mg (n = 20).

33 DCP randomized 13 523 participants to CTD or HCTZ, with a mean (SD) study duration of 2.4 (1.4) years

34 heart failure and volume overload to receive HCTZ or placebo in addition to intravenous furosemide.

35 of the primary outcome than those receiving HCTZ (105 of 733 [14.3%] vs 140 of 722 [19.4%]; hazard r

36 04) and 0.87% (95% CI 0.03 to 1.71%) for RSG+HCTZ (P = 0.041) only.

37 SG+FRUS), (3) RSG + hydrochlorothiazide (RSG+HCTZ), (4) RSG + spironolactone (RSG+SPIRO), and (5) dis

38 e diuretic triamterene-hydrocholothiazide (T-HCTZ), or anakinra in these patients.

39 t, and that this product is abrogated with T-HCTZ.

40 d 65 years or older with hypertension taking HCTZ at baseline were randomized to continue HCTZ or swi

41 In contrast to the HCTZ group, the HCTZ-CR group also showed a significant (p < 0.01) reduc

42 hypokalemia was significantly higher in the HCTZ group (compared with the placebo group) at 48 and 9

43 in the chlorthalidone group than in the the HCTZ group.

44 In contrast to the HCTZ group, the HCTZ-CR group also showed a significant

45 htly higher in the CTD arm compared with the HCTZ arm (597 of 6023 [9.9%] vs 535 of 6045 [8.9%]; HR,

46 he spironolactone group as compared with the HCTZ group and with the combined HCTZ and placebo groups

47 were differentially expressed in relation to HCTZ or chlorthalidone BP response in whites.

48 ed trials (n = 50,946), CTDN was superior to HCTZ in reducing congestive heart failure and in reducin

49 idence demonstrates that CTDN is superior to HCTZ in reducing CVEs and is congruent with the recent c

50 significant reduction in CVEs by CTDN versus HCTZ persisted even when reduction in office SBP produce

51 tage risk reduction in CVEs from CTDN versus HCTZ was 21 [95% confidence interval (CI) 8-32], P = 0.0

52 ke when comparing those randomized to CTD vs HCTZ, with a difference only among those without prior M

53 When HCTZ is added to furosemide, the risk of hypokalemia is

54 With HCTZ therapy, sustained hypertension was converted into

55 The decrease in 24-h BP with HCTZ dose 12.5 to 25 mg was systolic 6.5 mm Hg (95% conf

56 randomized trials that assessed 24-h BP with HCTZ in comparison with other antihypertensive drugs.

57 an observational cohort study, compared with HCTZ, CTDN was associated with lower left ventricular hy

58 tients with prior MI or stroke compared with HCTZ.

59 compared chlorthalidone, 6.25 mg daily, with HCTZ, 12.5 mg daily, by 24-h ambulatory blood pressure (

60 However, with HCTZ 50 mg, the reduction in 24-h BP was significantly h

61 re observed with chlorthalidone but not with HCTZ.

62 significant 24-h ABP reduction was seen with HCTZ, 12.5 mg daily, which merely converted sustained hy

63 independent cohort of AA and EA treated with HCTZ from the PEAR study, followed by a race specific me

64 95% CI, 0.76-0.87]; P<0.001), treatment with HCTZ (OR, 4.90 [95% CI, 2.50-9.90]; P<0.001), and treatm