LIFE: losartan versus atenolol
As indicated in table 4 of the orginal LIFE report,2 of the enrolled population of 586 individuals initiated on losartan, only 54 (9%) ended the study still on monotherapy, and of the 609 patients initiated on atenolol, only 39 (6%) ended on monotherapy; by the end of the study most patients were on...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | The Lancet (British edition) 2003-10, Vol.362 (9393), p.1416-1416 |
|---|---|
| 1. Verfasser: | |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 1416 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 9393 |
| container_start_page | 1416 |
| container_title | The Lancet (British edition) |
| container_volume | 362 |
| creator | Ong, HT |
| description | As indicated in table 4 of the orginal LIFE report,2 of the enrolled population of 586 individuals initiated on losartan, only 54 (9%) ended the study still on monotherapy, and of the 609 patients initiated on atenolol, only 39 (6%) ended on monotherapy; by the end of the study most patients were on combination therapy (373 [64%] in the losartan group and 376 [62%] in the atenolol group). To conclude that losartan is better than atenolol in reducing sudden cardiac death, when there arc so few patients who were actually enrolled in a direct comparison of losartan with atenolol, is misleading. More correct, would be to conclude that the LIFE study implies that patients on a combination antihypertensive therapy, including losartan, do better than those on a combination, including atenolol. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1016/S0140-6736(03)14647-8 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71344275</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0140673603146478</els_id><sourcerecordid>71344275</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c435t-edb5cf20d8eccd915e4a8cdb1ed90690e9583b71aad69887fda4e6358ae7fac93</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkE1LAzEURYMotlZ_gqW4EF2MJs3nuBEprRYKLlRwFzLJG5gyndRkpuC_d6YtCm509Tbn3ss7CJ0TfEMwEbcvmDCcCEnFFabXhAkmE3WA-oRJlnAm3w9R_xvpoZMYlxhjJjA_Rj3CuOJtoo-Gi_lsejcqfTShNtVoAyE2cWRqqHzpy1N0lJsywtn-DtDbbPo6eUoWz4_zycMisYzyOgGXcZuPsVNgrUsJB2aUdRkBl2KRYki5opkkxjiRKiVzZxgIypUBmRub0gG63PWug_9oINZ6VUQLZWkq8E3UklDGxpL_ByQpVl3jxS9w6ZtQtU9okrZER7UQ30E2-BgD5HodipUJn5pg3WnWW826c6gx1VvNussN9-VNtgL3k9p7bYH7HQCttE0BQUdbQGXBFQFsrZ0v_pj4Annqis0</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>199081908</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>LIFE: losartan versus atenolol</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><source>EBSCOhost Business Source Complete</source><source>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</source><creator>Ong, HT</creator><creatorcontrib>Ong, HT</creatorcontrib><description>As indicated in table 4 of the orginal LIFE report,2 of the enrolled population of 586 individuals initiated on losartan, only 54 (9%) ended the study still on monotherapy, and of the 609 patients initiated on atenolol, only 39 (6%) ended on monotherapy; by the end of the study most patients were on combination therapy (373 [64%] in the losartan group and 376 [62%] in the atenolol group). To conclude that losartan is better than atenolol in reducing sudden cardiac death, when there arc so few patients who were actually enrolled in a direct comparison of losartan with atenolol, is misleading. More correct, would be to conclude that the LIFE study implies that patients on a combination antihypertensive therapy, including losartan, do better than those on a combination, including atenolol.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0140-6736</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1474-547X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(03)14647-8</identifier><identifier>PMID: 14585647</identifier><identifier>CODEN: LANCAO</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Antihypertensive Agents - therapeutic use ; Atenolol - therapeutic use ; Comorbidity ; Death, Sudden, Cardiac - prevention & control ; Diabetes ; Diabetes Mellitus - epidemiology ; Drug therapy ; Drug Therapy, Combination ; Heart failure ; Humans ; Hydrochlorothiazide - therapeutic use ; Hypertension - drug therapy ; Hypertension - epidemiology ; Hypertrophy, Left Ventricular - epidemiology ; Losartan - therapeutic use ; Patients ; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic ; Treatment Outcome</subject><ispartof>The Lancet (British edition), 2003-10, Vol.362 (9393), p.1416-1416</ispartof><rights>2003 Elsevier Ltd</rights><rights>Copyright Lancet Ltd. Oct 25, 2003</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c435t-edb5cf20d8eccd915e4a8cdb1ed90690e9583b71aad69887fda4e6358ae7fac93</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/199081908?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,778,782,3539,27907,27908,45978,64366,64368,64370,72220</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14585647$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Ong, HT</creatorcontrib><title>LIFE: losartan versus atenolol</title><title>The Lancet (British edition)</title><addtitle>Lancet</addtitle><description>As indicated in table 4 of the orginal LIFE report,2 of the enrolled population of 586 individuals initiated on losartan, only 54 (9%) ended the study still on monotherapy, and of the 609 patients initiated on atenolol, only 39 (6%) ended on monotherapy; by the end of the study most patients were on combination therapy (373 [64%] in the losartan group and 376 [62%] in the atenolol group). To conclude that losartan is better than atenolol in reducing sudden cardiac death, when there arc so few patients who were actually enrolled in a direct comparison of losartan with atenolol, is misleading. More correct, would be to conclude that the LIFE study implies that patients on a combination antihypertensive therapy, including losartan, do better than those on a combination, including atenolol.</description><subject>Antihypertensive Agents - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Atenolol - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Comorbidity</subject><subject>Death, Sudden, Cardiac - prevention & control</subject><subject>Diabetes</subject><subject>Diabetes Mellitus - epidemiology</subject><subject>Drug therapy</subject><subject>Drug Therapy, Combination</subject><subject>Heart failure</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Hydrochlorothiazide - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Hypertension - drug therapy</subject><subject>Hypertension - epidemiology</subject><subject>Hypertrophy, Left Ventricular - epidemiology</subject><subject>Losartan - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><issn>0140-6736</issn><issn>1474-547X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2003</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkE1LAzEURYMotlZ_gqW4EF2MJs3nuBEprRYKLlRwFzLJG5gyndRkpuC_d6YtCm509Tbn3ss7CJ0TfEMwEbcvmDCcCEnFFabXhAkmE3WA-oRJlnAm3w9R_xvpoZMYlxhjJjA_Rj3CuOJtoo-Gi_lsejcqfTShNtVoAyE2cWRqqHzpy1N0lJsywtn-DtDbbPo6eUoWz4_zycMisYzyOgGXcZuPsVNgrUsJB2aUdRkBl2KRYki5opkkxjiRKiVzZxgIypUBmRub0gG63PWug_9oINZ6VUQLZWkq8E3UklDGxpL_ByQpVl3jxS9w6ZtQtU9okrZER7UQ30E2-BgD5HodipUJn5pg3WnWW826c6gx1VvNussN9-VNtgL3k9p7bYH7HQCttE0BQUdbQGXBFQFsrZ0v_pj4Annqis0</recordid><startdate>20031025</startdate><enddate>20031025</enddate><creator>Ong, HT</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><general>Elsevier Limited</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0TT</scope><scope>0TZ</scope><scope>0U~</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88A</scope><scope>88C</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88G</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8C2</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AN0</scope><scope>ASE</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FPQ</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K6X</scope><scope>K9-</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>KB~</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0R</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M0T</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2M</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20031025</creationdate><title>LIFE: losartan versus atenolol</title><author>Ong, HT</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c435t-edb5cf20d8eccd915e4a8cdb1ed90690e9583b71aad69887fda4e6358ae7fac93</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2003</creationdate><topic>Antihypertensive Agents - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Atenolol - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Comorbidity</topic><topic>Death, Sudden, Cardiac - prevention & control</topic><topic>Diabetes</topic><topic>Diabetes Mellitus - epidemiology</topic><topic>Drug therapy</topic><topic>Drug Therapy, Combination</topic><topic>Heart failure</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Hydrochlorothiazide - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Hypertension - drug therapy</topic><topic>Hypertension - epidemiology</topic><topic>Hypertrophy, Left Ventricular - epidemiology</topic><topic>Losartan - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Ong, HT</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>News PRO</collection><collection>Pharma and Biotech Premium PRO</collection><collection>Global News & ABI/Inform Professional</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Calcium & Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Biology Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Psychology Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Lancet Titles</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>British Nursing Database</collection><collection>British Nursing Index</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>eLibrary</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>British Nursing Index (BNI) (1985 to Present)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>British Nursing Index</collection><collection>Consumer Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Newsstand Professional</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Consumer Health Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Psychology</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>The Lancet (British edition)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Ong, HT</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>LIFE: losartan versus atenolol</atitle><jtitle>The Lancet (British edition)</jtitle><addtitle>Lancet</addtitle><date>2003-10-25</date><risdate>2003</risdate><volume>362</volume><issue>9393</issue><spage>1416</spage><epage>1416</epage><pages>1416-1416</pages><issn>0140-6736</issn><eissn>1474-547X</eissn><coden>LANCAO</coden><abstract>As indicated in table 4 of the orginal LIFE report,2 of the enrolled population of 586 individuals initiated on losartan, only 54 (9%) ended the study still on monotherapy, and of the 609 patients initiated on atenolol, only 39 (6%) ended on monotherapy; by the end of the study most patients were on combination therapy (373 [64%] in the losartan group and 376 [62%] in the atenolol group). To conclude that losartan is better than atenolol in reducing sudden cardiac death, when there arc so few patients who were actually enrolled in a direct comparison of losartan with atenolol, is misleading. More correct, would be to conclude that the LIFE study implies that patients on a combination antihypertensive therapy, including losartan, do better than those on a combination, including atenolol.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>14585647</pmid><doi>10.1016/S0140-6736(03)14647-8</doi><tpages>1</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0140-6736 |
| ispartof | The Lancet (British edition), 2003-10, Vol.362 (9393), p.1416-1416 |
| issn | 0140-6736 1474-547X |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71344275 |
| source | MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals; EBSCOhost Business Source Complete; ProQuest Central UK/Ireland |
| subjects | Antihypertensive Agents - therapeutic use Atenolol - therapeutic use Comorbidity Death, Sudden, Cardiac - prevention & control Diabetes Diabetes Mellitus - epidemiology Drug therapy Drug Therapy, Combination Heart failure Humans Hydrochlorothiazide - therapeutic use Hypertension - drug therapy Hypertension - epidemiology Hypertrophy, Left Ventricular - epidemiology Losartan - therapeutic use Patients Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic Treatment Outcome |
| title | LIFE: losartan versus atenolol |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-17T06%3A12%3A51IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=LIFE:%20losartan%20versus%20atenolol&rft.jtitle=The%20Lancet%20(British%20edition)&rft.au=Ong,%20HT&rft.date=2003-10-25&rft.volume=362&rft.issue=9393&rft.spage=1416&rft.epage=1416&rft.pages=1416-1416&rft.issn=0140-6736&rft.eissn=1474-547X&rft.coden=LANCAO&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/S0140-6736(03)14647-8&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E71344275%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=199081908&rft_id=info:pmid/14585647&rft_els_id=S0140673603146478&rfr_iscdi=true |