戻る
「早戻しボタン」を押すと検索画面に戻ります。

今後説明を表示しない

[OK]

コーパス検索結果 (1語後でソート)

通し番号をクリックするとPubMedの該当ページを表示します
1 bitor, and a component of LCZ696 (sacubitril/valsartan).
2 hese genes was preserved by naloxone but not valsartan.
3 ting the angiotensin II type I receptor with valsartan.
4 ion, a failure prevented by naloxone but not valsartan.
5 ied changes in CRP that were associated with valsartan.
6 r heart failure was significantly lower with valsartan.
7 s a BP-independent antiproteinuric effect of valsartan.
8 as no longer different from that noted after valsartan.
9 s before and after administration of the ARB valsartan.
10 sponse to Ang I was blunted significantly by valsartan.
11 reatment with enalapril than with sacubitril/valsartan.
12  weeks (14% reduction; P=0.03) compared with valsartan.
13 kers of heart failure severity compared with valsartan.
14 d AT1 Ang II receptor blockade (benazeprilat/valsartan, 0.05/3 mg x kg(-1) d(-1)) and rapid pacing (n
15 d AT1 Ang II receptor blockade (benazeprilat/valsartan, 0.05/3 mg x kg(-1) x d(-1)) and rapid pacing
16 1012], 12 weeks, 835 [710-981]; ratio LCZ696/valsartan, 0.77, 95% CI 0.64-0.92, p=0.005).
17 ments (systolic/diastolic 11.2/6.6 mm Hg for valsartan, 11.6/6.5 mm Hg for amlodipine) and at no time
18 s 29% lower in patients receiving sacubitril/valsartan (114 [7%] patients) compared with patients rec
19  were randomly assigned to LCZ696 and 152 to valsartan; 134 in the LCZ696 group and 132 in the valsar
20 (455), a combination of aliskiren 150 mg and valsartan 160 mg (446), or placebo (459) for 4 weeks, fo
21 receive once-daily aliskiren 150 mg (n=437), valsartan 160 mg (455), a combination of aliskiren 150 m
22 le-blind treatment with valsartan 80 mg BID, valsartan 160 mg BID, or placebo while receiving their u
23 e (-6.8 mm Hg; P=0.013) were observed in the valsartan 160 mg group compared with placebo.
24          Patients were randomized to receive valsartan 160 mg PO BID, captopril 50 mg PO TID, or vals
25     Compared with placebo, the first dose of valsartan 160 mg resulted in a significantly greater red
26 led trial of angiotensin II receptor blocker valsartan 160 mg twice daily compared with placebo in pa
27 odialysis to placebo, ramipril (5 mg/d), and valsartan (160 mg/d) for 7 days, with a washout period o
28 6 patients were randomly assigned to receive valsartan; 198 were randomly assigned to receive placebo
29 ted with adverse effects similar to those of valsartan; 22 patients (15%) on LCZ696 and 30 (20%) on v
30 e patients reversed to normoalbuminuria with valsartan (29.9% versus 14.5%; P=0.001).
31 mly assigned to enalapril than to sacubitril/valsartan (3.1 vs 2.2 per 100 patient-years; HR, 1.37 [9
32 han to those randomly assigned to sacubitril/valsartan (3.3 vs 2.3 per 100 patient-years; HR, 1.43 [9
33 ing (n=9), (3) AT1 Ang II receptor blockade (valsartan, 3 mg x kg(-1) x d(-1)) and rapid pacing (n=9)
34 9), (2) concomitant AT(1) receptor blockade (valsartan, 3 mg/kg per day) and rapid pacing (n=8), (3)
35 3) concomitant AT1 Ang II receptor blockade (valsartan, 3 mg/kg/d) and rapid pacing (n=9), (4) concom
36 d (n=11); (2) IABP and AT1R blockade (AT1RB; valsartan, 3 ng/kg/hr; n=6).
37 int, the combination of aliskiren 300 mg and valsartan 320 mg lowered mean sitting diastolic blood pr
38 iskiren 300 mg 9.0 mm Hg decrease, p<0.0001; valsartan 320 mg, 9.7 mm Hg decrease, p<0.0001), or with
39 1.2 mm Hg, 95% CI -2.3 to -0.1; p=0.030) and valsartan 320 mg/day (-4.4 mm Hg, -5.4 to -3.3; p<0.0001
40 rdial infarction, to additional therapy with valsartan (4909 patients), valsartan plus captopril (488
41 eated animals with animals treated with oral valsartan (50 mg/kg/d), oral enalapril (10 mg/kg/d), and
42 f therapy, plasma aldosterone was reduced by valsartan 80 mg BID (-52.1 pg/mL; P=0.001) and 160 mg BI
43 omly assigned to double-blind treatment with valsartan 80 mg BID, valsartan 160 mg BID, or placebo wh
44                    A pressure reduction from valsartan 80 mg did not achieve statistical significance
45 an 160 mg PO BID, captopril 50 mg PO TID, or valsartan 80 mg PO BID plus captopril 50 mg PO TID betwe
46  mg/day), nebivolol (5 mg/day or 20 mg/day), valsartan (80 mg/day or 160 mg/day), or placebo.
47 th enalapril 10 mg twice daily or sacubitril/valsartan 97/103 mg twice daily (previously known as LCZ
48 (LVEF) </=40%] were randomized to sacubitril/valsartan 97/103 mg twice daily versus enalapril 10 mg t
49                                   Sacubitril/valsartan, a combination angiotensin receptor-neprilysin
50                                              Valsartan, a specific AT1 receptor antagonist inhibited
51 and assessed the effectiveness of sacubitril/valsartan across the LVEF spectrum.
52                                              Valsartan added to background therapy for heart failure
53                            Most importantly, valsartan administration also attenuated the development
54                         Neither ramipril nor valsartan affected BP during hemodialysis.
55 y profile similar to that with aliskiren and valsartan alone.
56                               Treatment with valsartan also resulted in significant improvements in N
57 f blood pressure were complete, created 5006 valsartan-amlodipine patient pairs matched exactly for s
58 lity and morbidity in the subgroup receiving valsartan, an ACE inhibitor, and a beta-blocker raises c
59  56% (95% CI, 49.6 to 63.0) of baseline with valsartan and 92% (95% CI, 81.7 to 103.7) of baseline wi
60 or the syntheses of industrial precursors to valsartan and boscalid from chloroarenes with approximat
61                      The interaction between valsartan and CKD was also tested.
62 rsus 17% of patients treated with sacubitril/valsartan and enalapril, respectively.
63 he wholesale acquisition cost for sacubitril/valsartan and enalapril.
64 nd/or beta-blocker (BB) were randomized into valsartan and placebo groups and followed for a mean of
65                    Baseline LVIDd and EF for valsartan and placebo groups were similar: 3.6 +/- 0.5 v
66 and increase in EF were no different between valsartan and placebo groups.
67                                              Valsartan and placebo were compared by RRs for M + M.
68    Small but significant differences between valsartan and placebo were present for change in right v
69 ents on background therapy and randomized to valsartan and placebo, serial recordings of left ventric
70                                              Valsartan and ramipril both lowered D-dimer levels (P<0.
71                                              Valsartan and ramipril both lowered IL-6 levels during d
72                                         Both valsartan and tempol substantially attenuated mitochondr
73 tensin type 1 receptor blockers losartan and valsartan and the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibito
74 rtan+LBQ augmented the inhibitory effects of valsartan and the highest doses completely abrogated ang
75 o) combines the angiotensin receptor blocker valsartan and the neprilysin inhibitor prodrug sacubitri
76        Rates of adverse events for losartan, valsartan, and candesartan users (N=136 177) aged >/=66
77             Among generic users of losartan, valsartan, and candesartan, there was an increase in rat
78 d 1.26 +/- 0.10 for no treatment, enalapril, valsartan, and SK-1080, respectively).
79        We compared the effects of captopril, valsartan, and their combination on atherosclerotic even
80 artan group died, as did 941 patients in the valsartan-and-captopril group and 958 patients in the ca
81 l, 0.90 to 1.11; P=0.98; hazard ratio in the valsartan-and-captopril group as compared with the capto
82                                          The valsartan-and-captopril group had the most drug-related
83                                          The Valsartan Antihypertensive Long-term Use Evaluation (VAL
84                                          The Valsartan Antihypertensive Long-term Use Evaluation (VAL
85 s effect was proposed after results from the Valsartan Antihypertensive Long-Term Use Evaluation (VAL
86 valuation (VALUE) trial, in which the use of valsartan (ARB) was compared with amlodipine in patients
87 found an excess of MIs among patients in the valsartan arm.
88 duced NT-proBNP to a greater extent than did valsartan at 12 weeks and was well tolerated.
89 and during follow-up in patients assigned to valsartan at a target dose of 160 mg twice daily or plac
90             The combination of aliskiren and valsartan at maximum recommended doses provides signific
91  CI 670-914], 12 weeks, 605 pg/mL [512-714]; valsartan: baseline, 862 pg/mL [733-1012], 12 weeks, 835
92            This stimulation was inhibited by valsartan, but not by PD 123319.
93 ibitory effects of the clinical AT1R blocker valsartan can be identified, whereas blockage of upstrea
94                                              Valsartan can slow progression and/or reverse early card
95 r mediated, because AT1 receptor antagonists valsartan, candesartan, and losartan inhibited Ang II-in
96                                              Valsartan, captopril, or the combination had comparable
97  randomly assigned to receive treatment with valsartan, captopril, or the combination; follow-up cont
98 trated consistent improvements in sacubitril/valsartan compared with enalapril through 36 months.
99 comes and on the effectiveness of sacubitril/valsartan compared with enalapril.
100 u by one year, and persisted to two years in valsartan compared with placebo patients, irrespective o
101 e better in patients treated with sacubitril/valsartan compared with those treated with enalapril, wi
102            The benefit of LCZ696 (sacubitril/valsartan) compared with enalapril was consistent across
103 e maximum recommended doses of aliskiren and valsartan, compared with each drug alone in patients wit
104         Moreover, high dietary potassium and valsartan each augmented the inhibitory effect of 11,12-
105 designed to test the hypothesis that the ARB valsartan, either alone or in combination with captopril
106 s, a high potassium intake or treatment with valsartan enhanced AA-induced inhibition of ENaC, an eff
107 of double-blind treatment with nebivolol and valsartan fixed-dose combination (5 and 80 mg/day, 5 and
108                                Nebivolol and valsartan fixed-dose combination is an effective and wel
109                        The application of 1% valsartan gel compared with other tested formulations an
110                               One percent of valsartan gel-treated wounds also exhibited higher mitoc
111 ite endpoint occurred in 810 patients in the valsartan group (10.6%, 25.5 per 1000 patient-years) and
112  group and 0.26% (SD 1.25) in the sacubitril/valsartan group (between-group reduction 0.13%, 95% CI 0
113  weeks in the LCZ696 group compared with the valsartan group (LCZ696: baseline, 783 pg/mL [95% CI 670
114 ed by 23.8+/-3.0 pg/mL (SEM) (-17.4%) in the valsartan group (P<0.00001).
115 d by 0.60 (SD 1.4) cm/s from baseline in the valsartan group (p<0.0001) and 0.44 (1.4) cm/s from base
116  placebo group and 346 (13.8 percent) in the valsartan group (P<0.001).
117 ssure 4.0/2.1 mm Hg lower in amlodipine than valsartan group after 1 month; 1.5/1.3 mm Hg after 1 yea
118 .9) mm Hg reduction in blood pressure in the valsartan group and a 9.7 (17.0)/5.5 (10.2) mm Hg reduct
119  in the captopril group (hazard ratio in the valsartan group as compared with the captopril group, 1.
120 ollow-up of 24.7 months, 979 patients in the valsartan group died, as did 941 patients in the valsart
121 esults of Base-Case Analysis: The sacubitril-valsartan group experienced 0.08 fewer heart failure hos
122                      At 8 months, sacubitril/valsartan group noted improvements in both KCCQ clinical
123 ns were persistently lower in the sacubitril/valsartan group than in the enalapril group over the 3-y
124 rtan; 134 in the LCZ696 group and 132 in the valsartan group were included in analysis of the primary
125 onfidence interval for the comparison of the valsartan group with the captopril group was within the
126 the valsartan group, and 37 in the aliskiren/valsartan group), mainly due to lack of therapeutic effe
127                                       In the valsartan group, aldosterone (baseline, 137+/-124 pg/mL,
128  group, 53 in the aliskiren group, 43 in the valsartan group, and 37 in the aliskiren/valsartan group
129 gator reported events 798), 587 (796) in the valsartan group, and 554 (756) in the combination group;
130 nd renal dysfunction were more common in the valsartan group, and cough, rash, and taste disturbance
131 (0.77, 0.58-1.02, p=0.073) in the sacubitril/valsartan group.
132  g; P=0.01) in the placebo group than in the valsartan group.
133 eased by a similar amount in the placebo and valsartan groups (P=0.94).
134  at a similar frequency in the captopril and valsartan groups.
135 ng-enzyme (ACE) inhibitors or beta-blockers, valsartan had a favorable effect in patients receiving n
136 olled in PARADIGM-HF who received sacubitril/valsartan had a greater long-term reduction in HbA1c tha
137 treated with a beta-blocker or randomized to valsartan had greater odds of being in the HFiEF group,
138  22 patients (15%) on LCZ696 and 30 (20%) on valsartan had one or more serious adverse event.
139                                   Sacubitril/valsartan has been approved for use in heart failure (HF
140  independent randomized clinical trials, the Valsartan Heart Failure Trial (Val-HeFT) (n=4053) and th
141                                          The Valsartan Heart Failure Trial (Val-HeFT) provided the fi
142         Of the 5010 subjects enrolled in the Valsartan Heart Failure Trial (Val-HeFT), 3519 had a bas
143 onths (n=1517) in patients randomized in the Valsartan Heart Failure Trial (Val-HeFT).
144                    Retrospective analysis of Valsartan Heart Failure Trial data indicated that the qu
145 e of CRP in patients randomized in Val-HeFT (Valsartan Heart Failure Trial) and studied changes in CR
146 low-up in approximately 4300 patients in the Valsartan Heart Failure Trial.
147 ng changes in mortality and morbidity in the Valsartan Heart Failure Trial.
148 4 months (n=1345), and 12 months (n=1094) in Valsartan Heart Failure Trial.
149                                          The Valsartan in Acute Myocardial Infarction (VALIANT) Echo
150 ocardial infarction who were enrolled in the Valsartan in Acute Myocardial Infarction (VALIANT) echoc
151 4,703 patients with acute MI enrolled in the VALsartan In Acute myocardial iNfarcTion (VALIANT) trial
152 entation for 1067 patients who had SD in the Valsartan in Acute Myocardial Infarction Trial (VALIANT)
153  as sudden death events in patients from the VALsartan In Acute myocardial infarctioN Trial (VALIANT)
154  events in 14,703 patients randomized in the Valsartan in Acute Myocardial Infarction Trial (VALIANT)
155                               As part of the Valsartan in Acute Myocardial Infarction Trial (VALIANT)
156                                 The VALIANT (Valsartan in Acute Myocardial Infarction Trial) Echo stu
157 0 African-American patients) in the VALIANT (VALsartan In Acute myocardial iNfarcTion) trial were com
158 patients with HFrEF is reduced by sacubitril/valsartan in comparison with enalapril.
159                           METHODS AND In the Valsartan in Heart Failure Trial (Val-HeFT), 5010 patien
160                           In Nateglinide and Valsartan in Impaired Glucose Tolerance Outcomes Researc
161                          (LCZ696 Compared to Valsartan in Patients With Chronic Heart Failure and Pre
162            The RR for M + M outcomes favored valsartan in the worse quartiles.
163 lol) and an angiotensin II receptor blocker (valsartan) in adults with hypertension.
164                                              Valsartan increased F(2)-isoprostane levels, and ramipri
165             In summary, during hemodialysis, valsartan induces a greater anti-inflammatory effect com
166 ration of the Ang II type 1 receptor blocker valsartan inhibited Ang II-induced ABCA1 mRNA repression
167 tensin receptor blocker component of LCZ696, valsartan inhibited both hypertrophy and fibrosis.
168 lockers interfere with AT1R-Gq coupling, and valsartan interferes with betaAR-Gs coupling.
169                                              Valsartan is as effective as captopril in patients who a
170        Limitation: The benefit of sacubitril-valsartan is based on a single clinical trial.
171                                         Dual valsartan+LBQ augmented the inhibitory effects of valsar
172 ure (PARADIGM-HF) trial, in which sacubitril/valsartan (LCZ696) reduced both death and HF hospitaliza
173 sin receptor neprilysin inhibitor sacubitril/valsartan (LCZ696) reduced cardiovascular morbidity and
174 ht to determine if treatment with sacubitril/valsartan (LCZ696) reduces rates of hospital readmission
175   These findings demonstrate that sacubitril/valsartan leads to better HRQL in surviving patients wit
176 ined BP and the same degree of BP reduction, valsartan lowered UAER more effectively than amlodipine
177                                              Valsartan lowered UAER similarly in both the hypertensiv
178          The MicroAlbuminuria Reduction With VALsartan (MARVAL) study was designed to evaluate the BP
179           These data suggest that sacubitril/valsartan might enhance glycaemic control in patients wi
180 AAF, suggesting that the angiotensin blocker valsartan might prevent HAAF.
181                      A total of 88 patients (valsartan, n=44; placebo, n=44) were enrolled in the tri
182                                The effect of valsartan on estimated glomerular filtration rate was es
183                     The beneficial effect of valsartan on first morbid events was similar in those wi
184                                The effect of valsartan on mortality did not differ in patients with a
185 There was no significant treatment effect of valsartan on right ventricular ejection fraction, exerci
186 ned to evaluate the BP-independent effect of valsartan on UAER in type 2 diabetic patients with micro
187 ion, and the effect of LCZ696, compared with valsartan, on hs-TnT over 36 weeks.
188 ertension, were randomly assigned to 80 mg/d valsartan or 5 mg/d amlodipine for 24 weeks.
189  achieved blood pressures, regimens based on valsartan or amlodipine would have differing effects on
190 arallel-group comparison of therapy based on valsartan or amlodipine.
191 ndomly assigned to treatment with sacubitril/valsartan or enalapril.
192 line, 12 and 36 weeks after randomization to valsartan or LCZ696.
193 ine and another combination drug, sacubitril/valsartan or LCZ696.
194      Intervention: Treatment with sacubitril-valsartan or lisinopril.
195 emia, with or without concurrent exposure to valsartan or naloxone.
196 2 months between groups randomly assigned to valsartan or placebo depended on baseline ACE inhibitor
197  were randomly assigned to receive 160 mg of valsartan or placebo twice daily.
198 rt failure were randomly assigned to receive valsartan or placebo.
199 improved with either ANG II receptor blocker valsartan or superoxide dismutase/catalase mimetic tempo
200 were randomly assigned to receive captopril, valsartan, or both.
201  Treatment with the ACE inhibitor captopril, valsartan, or the combination of captopril plus valsarta
202  between Sprague-Dawley, untreated Ren2, and valsartan- or tempol-treated Ren2 rats.
203                    The benefit of sacubitril/valsartan over enalapril was similar to the primary outc
204                    The benefit of sacubitril/valsartan, over an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibit
205 onal therapy with valsartan (4909 patients), valsartan plus captopril (4885 patients), or captopril (
206                                              Valsartan pretreatment blocked Fra2 binding to the ABCA1
207                                              Valsartan prevented CsA-induced oxidative stress as well
208        Conclusion: Treatment with sacubitril-valsartan provides reasonable value in reducing cardiova
209                                              Valsartan reduced estimated glomerular filtration rate c
210  and Morbidity in Heart Failure), sacubitril/valsartan reduced morbidity and mortality compared with
211  fraction, whether treatment with sacubitril/valsartan reduced NT-proBNP below specific partition val
212                                              Valsartan reduced the estimated glomerular filtration ra
213 ril did not reduce focal tracer uptake, oral valsartan resulted in partial blockade (infarct-to-remot
214 sartan, or the combination of captopril plus valsartan resulted in similar changes in cardiac volume,
215 of drugs for the treatment of heart failure: Valsartan/sacubitril (formerly known as LCZ696 and curre
216 g clinical trials are evaluating the role of valsartan/sacubitril in the treatment of heart failure w
217 bidity in Heart Failure (PARADIGM-HF) trial, valsartan/sacubitril significantly reduced mortality and
218  identify a PKG-dependent mechanism by which valsartan/sacubitril, a combination drug recently approv
219   We review here the mechanisms of action of valsartan/sacubitril, the pharmacological properties of
220                       Compared with placebo, valsartan significantly (P<0.001) reduced the rate of in
221 hat preventive treatment of Tg2576 mice with valsartan significantly reduced AD-type neuropathology a
222                                              Valsartan significantly reduced arterial pressure in kno
223                                              Valsartan significantly reduced the RDS after 6 months v
224                                              Valsartan significantly reduces the combined end point o
225 ase were quartile-dependent and greater with valsartan than placebo at virtually all time points.
226  point, however, was 13.2 percent lower with valsartan than with placebo (relative risk, 0.87; 97.5 p
227 e effect of the angiotensin-receptor blocker valsartan, the ACE inhibitor captopril, and the combinat
228    There was no significant effect of 3-year valsartan therapy on systemic right ventricular ejection
229                       Background: Sacubitril-valsartan therapy reduces cardiovascular mortality compa
230 ith moderate heart failure demonstrated that valsartan therapy taken with either ACEI or BB reversed
231 en improvements in mortality with sacubitril/valsartan, this analysis provides comprehensive assessme
232  to LCZ696 titrated to 200 mg twice daily or valsartan titrated to 160 mg twice daily, and treated fo
233 eive either the angiotensin receptor blocker valsartan (titrated to 320 mg once daily) or matched pla
234 stration of the angiotensin receptor blocker valsartan to intact mice results in a significant reduct
235 addition of the angiotensin-receptor blocker valsartan to standard therapy for heart failure.
236                                In sacubitril/valsartan-treated patients, median NT-proBNP was signifi
237  Results of Sensitivity Analysis: Sacubitril-valsartan treatment was most sensitive to the duration o
238 ental costs and QALYs gained with sacubitril/valsartan treatment were estimated at $35512 and 0.78, r
239 -remodeling effect and clinical benefit with valsartan treatment.
240 independent of clinical variables, sST2, and valsartan treatment.
241                It has been demonstrated that Valsartan (Val) as an angiotensin receptor blocker has r
242                   We studied the efficacy of valsartan (Val) to slow cardiovascular disease progressi
243 valuate the cost-effectiveness of sacubitril-valsartan versus angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor
244 oup, and 554 (756) in the combination group; valsartan versus captopril, p = 0.651 (0.965); combinati
245                      Overall, the sacubitril/valsartan versus enalapril hazard ratio for the primary
246 imed to investigate the effect of sacubitril/valsartan versus enalapril on HbA1c and time to first-ti
247 rdiovascular risk factors were randomized to valsartan versus placebo and nateglinide versus placebo
248                                              Valsartan versus placebo changes from baseline in LVIDd
249 000 patients with HF treated with sacubitril/valsartan vs enalapril over 30 years.
250 e pressor response to Ang I before and after valsartan was also reevaluated in 11 patients after the
251 the placebo group; however, after 12 months, valsartan was associated with a decrease in CRP in patie
252 sin receptor neprilysin inhibitor sacubitril/valsartan was associated with a reduction in cardiovascu
253                                              Valsartan was associated with a similar frequency of sig
254                     The effect of sacubitril/valsartan was consistent across all subgroups examined.
255                                   Sacubitril/valsartan was effective across the LVEF spectrum, with n
256                                   Sacubitril/valsartan was effective at reducing cardiovascular death
257 sin receptor neprilysin inhibitor sacubitril/valsartan was more effective than the angiotensin-conver
258                    Treatment with sacubitril/valsartan was nearly twice as likely as enalapril to red
259                                The effect of valsartan was similar in all subgroups, including those
260 we found that only 1 of the candidate drugs, valsartan, was capable of attenuating oligomerization of
261                     However, candesartan and valsartan were the most potent at blocking AngII-induced
262                                    Combining valsartan with captopril increased the rate of adverse e
263  the Markov model calculated that sacubitril/valsartan would increase life expectancy at an ICER cons
264 is that for the same blood-pressure control, valsartan would reduce cardiac morbidity and mortality m
265 Sensitivity analyses demonstrated sacubitril/valsartan would remain cost-effective vs enalapril.

WebLSDに未収録の専門用語(用法)は "新規対訳" から投稿できます。
 
Page Top