-
The American Journal of Cardiology Oct 2023Sacubitril-valsartan is an angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) associated with a decreased risk of death and hospitalization for selected patients with... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Sacubitril-valsartan is an angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) associated with a decreased risk of death and hospitalization for selected patients with heart failure (HF). However, its association with improved atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) events remains unclear. We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the association of ARNI with ASCVD events in patients with HF. We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrials.gov for studies comparing ARNIs with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) in terms of myocardial infarction, stroke, angina pectoris, peripheral artery disease, and the composite end point in patients with HF. A total of 8 randomized controlled trials were included, with 17,541 patients assigned to either the ARNI (8,764 patients) or ACEi/ARB (8,777 patients) groups. The incidence of composite end point (risk ratio [RR] 1.03, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.93 to 1.13, p = 0.63), myocardial infarction (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.30, p = 0.85), angina pectoris (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.17, p = 0.70), and stroke (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.16, p = 0.93) were not statistically different between the ARNI and ACEi/ARB groups. However, ARNI was associated with a higher incidence of peripheral artery disease (RR 1.63, 95% CI 1.05 to 2.52, p = 0.03). In conclusion, this meta-analysis found no association between ARNI therapy and improved ASCVD events in patients with HF.
Topics: Humans; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Neprilysin; Cardiovascular Diseases; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Atherosclerosis; Antihypertensive Agents; Peripheral Arterial Disease; Angina Pectoris; Myocardial Infarction; Stroke; Heart Failure; Antiviral Agents
PubMed: 37619492
DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2023.07.154 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2017Beta-blockers refer to a mixed group of drugs with diverse pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties. They have shown long-term beneficial effects on mortality and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Beta-blockers refer to a mixed group of drugs with diverse pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties. They have shown long-term beneficial effects on mortality and cardiovascular disease (CVD) when used in people with heart failure or acute myocardial infarction. Beta-blockers were thought to have similar beneficial effects when used as first-line therapy for hypertension. However, the benefit of beta-blockers as first-line therapy for hypertension without compelling indications is controversial. This review is an update of a Cochrane Review initially published in 2007 and updated in 2012.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of beta-blockers on morbidity and mortality endpoints in adults with hypertension.
SEARCH METHODS
The Cochrane Hypertension Information Specialist searched the following databases for randomized controlled trials up to June 2016: the Cochrane Hypertension Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2016, Issue 6), MEDLINE (from 1946), Embase (from 1974), and ClinicalTrials.gov. We checked reference lists of relevant reviews, and reference lists of studies potentially eligible for inclusion in this review, and also searched the the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform on 06 July 2015.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of at least one year of duration, which assessed the effects of beta-blockers compared to placebo or other drugs, as first-line therapy for hypertension, on mortality and morbidity in adults.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We selected studies and extracted data in duplicate, resolving discrepancies by consensus. We expressed study results as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and conducted fixed-effect or random-effects meta-analyses, as appropriate. We also used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence. GRADE classifies the certainty of evidence as high (if we are confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of effect), moderate (if the true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of effect), low (if the true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of effect), and very low (if we are very uncertain about the estimate of effect).
MAIN RESULTS
Thirteen RCTs met inclusion criteria. They compared beta-blockers to placebo (4 RCTs, 23,613 participants), diuretics (5 RCTs, 18,241 participants), calcium-channel blockers (CCBs: 4 RCTs, 44,825 participants), and renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors (3 RCTs, 10,828 participants). These RCTs were conducted between the 1970s and 2000s and most of them had a high risk of bias resulting from limitations in study design, conduct, and data analysis. There were 40,245 participants taking beta-blockers, three-quarters of them taking atenolol. We found no outcome trials involving the newer vasodilating beta-blockers (e.g. nebivolol).There was no difference in all-cause mortality between beta-blockers and placebo (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.11), diuretics or RAS inhibitors, but it was higher for beta-blockers compared to CCBs (RR 1.07, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.14). The evidence on mortality was of moderate-certainty for all comparisons.Total CVD was lower for beta-blockers compared to placebo (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.97; low-certainty evidence), a reflection of the decrease in stroke (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.96; low-certainty evidence) since there was no difference in coronary heart disease (CHD: RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.07; moderate-certainty evidence). The effect of beta-blockers on CVD was worse than that of CCBs (RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.29; moderate-certainty evidence), but was not different from that of diuretics (moderate-certainty) or RAS inhibitors (low-certainty). In addition, there was an increase in stroke in beta-blockers compared to CCBs (RR 1.24, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.40; moderate-certainty evidence) and RAS inhibitors (RR 1.30, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.53; moderate-certainty evidence). However, there was little or no difference in CHD between beta-blockers and diuretics (low-certainty evidence), CCBs (moderate-certainty evidence) or RAS inhibitors (low-certainty evidence). In the single trial involving participants aged 65 years and older, atenolol was associated with an increased CHD incidence compared to diuretics (RR 1.63, 95% CI 1.15 to 2.32). Participants taking beta-blockers were more likely to discontinue treatment due to adverse events than participants taking RAS inhibitors (RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.29 to 1.54; moderate-certainty evidence), but there was little or no difference with placebo, diuretics or CCBs (low-certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Most outcome RCTs on beta-blockers as initial therapy for hypertension have high risk of bias. Atenolol was the beta-blocker most used. Current evidence suggests that initiating treatment of hypertension with beta-blockers leads to modest CVD reductions and little or no effects on mortality. These beta-blocker effects are inferior to those of other antihypertensive drugs. Further research should be of high quality and should explore whether there are differences between different subtypes of beta-blockers or whether beta-blockers have differential effects on younger and older people.
Topics: Adrenergic beta-Antagonists; Adult; Aged; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Antihypertensive Agents; Atenolol; Calcium Channel Blockers; Coronary Disease; Diuretics; Heart Arrest; Humans; Hypertension; Middle Aged; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Stroke
PubMed: 28107561
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002003.pub5 -
Journal of Clinical Hypertension... Aug 2023Studies have shown that angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) are superior in primary and secondary prevention for cardiac mortality and morbidity to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Studies have shown that angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) are superior in primary and secondary prevention for cardiac mortality and morbidity to angiotensin receptor blocker (ARBs). One of the common side effects from ACEI is dry cough. The aims of this systematic review, and network meta-analysis are to rank the risk of cough induced by different ACEIs and between ACEI and placebo, ARB or calcium channel blockers (CCB). We performed a systematic review, and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to rank the risk of cough induced by each ACEI and between ACEI and placebo, ARB or CCB. A total of 135 RCTs with 45,420 patients treated with eleven ACEIs were included in the analyses. The pooled estimated relative risk (RR) between ACEI and placebo was 2.21 (95% CI: 2.05-2.39). ACEI had more incidences of cough than ARB (RR 3.2; 95% CI: 2.91, 3.51), and pooled estimated of RR between ACEI and CCB was 5.30 (95% CI: 4.32-6.50) Moexipril ranked as number one for inducing cough (SUCRA 80.4%) and spirapril ranked the least (SUCRA 12.3%). The order for the rest of the ACEIs are as follows: ramipril (SUCRA 76.4%), fosinopril (SUCRA 72.5%), lisinopril (SUCRA 64.7%), benazepril (SUCRA 58.6%), quinapril (SUCRA 56.5%), perindopril (SUCRA 54.1%), enalapril (SUCRA 49.7%), trandolapril (SUCRA 44.6%) and, captopril (SUCRA 13.7%). All ACEI has the similar risk of developing a cough. ACEI should be avoided in patients who have risk of developing cough, and an ARB or CCB is an alternative based on the patient's comorbidity.
Topics: Humans; Antihypertensive Agents; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Network Meta-Analysis; Cough; Hypertension; Calcium Channel Blockers
PubMed: 37417783
DOI: 10.1111/jch.14695 -
PLoS Medicine Nov 2021Drug-induced orthostatic hypotension (OH) is common, and its resulting cerebral hypoperfusion is linked to adverse outcomes including falls, strokes, cognitive... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Drug-induced orthostatic hypotension (OH) is common, and its resulting cerebral hypoperfusion is linked to adverse outcomes including falls, strokes, cognitive impairment, and increased mortality. The extent to which specific medications are associated with OH remains unclear.
METHODS AND FINDINGS
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the extent to which specific drug groups are associated with OH. EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Web of Science databases were searched from inception through 23 November 2020. Placebo-controlled randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on any drug reporting on OH as an adverse effect in adults (≥18 years) were eligible. Three authors extracted data on the drug, OH, dose, participant characteristics, and study setting. The revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomised trials (RoB 2) was used to appraise evidence. Summary odds ratios (ORs) were estimated for OH using fixed effects Mantel-Haenszel statistics. We conducted subgroup analysis on validity of OH measurement, drug dose, risk of bias, age, and comorbidity. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) tool was used to summarise the certainty of evidence. Of 36,940 citations, 69 eligible RCTs were included in the meta-analysis comprising 27,079 participants. Compared with placebo, beta-blockers and tricyclic antidepressants were associated with increased odds of OH (OR 7.76 [95% CI 2.51, 24.03]; OR 6.30 [95% CI 2.86, 13.91]). Alpha-blockers, antipsychotics, and SGLT-2 inhibitors were associated with up to 2-fold increased odds of OH, compared to placebo. There was no statistically significant difference in odds of OH with vasodilators (CCBs, ACE inhibitors/ARBs, SSRIs), compared to placebo. Limitations of this study are as follows: data limited to placebo-controlled studies, (excluding head-to-head trials), many RCTs excluded older participants; therefore results may be amplified in older patients in the clinical setting. The study protocol is publicly available on PROSPERO (CRD42020168697).
CONCLUSIONS
Medications prescribed for common conditions (including depression, diabetes, and lower urinary tract symptoms) were associated with significantly increased odds of OH. Drugs causing sympathetic inhibition were associated with significantly increased odds of OH, while most vasodilators were associated with small nonsignificant differences in odds of OH, compared to placebo. Drugs targeting multiple parts of the orthostatic blood pressure (BP) reflex pathway (e.g. sympathetic inhibition, vasodilation, cardio-inhibitory effects) may carry cumulative risk, suggesting that individuals with polypharmacy could benefit from postural BP monitoring.
Topics: Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Antidepressive Agents; Antipsychotic Agents; Humans; Hypotension, Orthostatic; Placebos; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Vasodilator Agents
PubMed: 34752479
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003821 -
Annals of Vascular Surgery May 2022Several RCTs have been conducted to assess the efficacy and safety of angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) and beta-blocker (BB) therapy for Marfan syndrome (MFS), but the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
Several RCTs have been conducted to assess the efficacy and safety of angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) and beta-blocker (BB) therapy for Marfan syndrome (MFS), but the existing evidence is limited and conflicting. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of different therapies.
METHODS
The PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases were electronically searched up to March 2021 to retrieve randomized controlled trials regarding the efficacy and safety of ARB-related (including ARB-only and ARB+BB treatment) and BB-only treatment for treating patients with MFS. The revised risk-of-bias tool was used for quality assessment. The odds ratio (OR) and standard mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were used to estimate the pooled effect size.
RESULTS
Fourteen reports of 9 trials involving 1,449 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Regarding aortic root dilation, the ARB-related regimen has efficacy comparable with that of the BB-only regimen in patients with MFS (pooled SMD = -0.16, 95% CI [-0.33; 0.01]; P = 0.06), while in the ARB+BB vs. BB-only subgroup, a significant difference was observed (pooled SMD = -0.26; 95% CI [-0.40; -0.11]; P < 0.01). In addition, there were no significant differences in other aortic dilation-related measures (aortic root Z scores, ascending aorta, pulmonary artery, aortic annulus, sinotubular junction, aortic arch, thoracic aorta, and abdominal aorta diameter change) or cardiovascular events (aortic dissection, aortic surgery, and death) between the 2 regimens.
CONCLUSION
Our results showed that the clinical efficacy of ARB-only therapy is not inferior to that of BB-only therapy. Moreover, ARB+BB therapy showed superior therapeutic effects without significant adverse effects.
Topics: Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Aortic Diseases; Humans; Marfan Syndrome; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34998935
DOI: 10.1016/j.avsg.2021.12.073 -
Hepatology International Sep 2016The renin-angiotensin system (RAS) has an important role in hepatic fibrosis and portal hypertension. RAS inhibitors are already accepted in clinical fields for... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
The renin-angiotensin system (RAS) has an important role in hepatic fibrosis and portal hypertension. RAS inhibitors are already accepted in clinical fields for antihypertensive management, but their effects on hepatic fibrosis are controversial. The aim of this study was to systematically review the effects of RAS inhibitors on hepatic fibrosis based on histological assessment.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis (MA) of the literature using the Ovid-MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases (up to January 2015) to identify clinical studies evaluating the effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers on hepatic fibrosis or cirrhosis patients based on histological assessment. Of the 455 studies identified, we analyzed 7, including a total of 1066 patients, which met our selection criteria.
RESULTS
According to the MA, patients treated with RAS inhibitors had significantly lower fibrosis scores (SMD -0.68, 95 % CI -1.03, -0.34, I (2) = 0 %, p < 0.0001) and smaller fibrosis areas (SMD -0.80, 95 % CI -1.18, -0.41, I (2) = 0 %, p < 0.0001) than controls. Serum fibrosis markers such as TGF-β1, collagen I, IV, TIMP-1, and MMP2 were significantly reduced in the intervention group. In two studies, mean arterial pressures were significantly decreased in RAS inhibitor users, but there were no reports about symptoms related to decreased blood pressure. No significant difference was found in serum creatinine levels between the intervention and control groups, and significant renal dysfunction was not observed after administration of RAS inhibitors.
CONCLUSIONS
RAS inhibitors are potential therapeutic agents for hepatic fibrosis, which can be safely used in patients with chronic liver disease.
Topics: Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Clinical Trials as Topic; Creatine; Humans; Liver Diseases; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 26903052
DOI: 10.1007/s12072-016-9705-x -
Cancer Causes & Control : CCC Sep 2015We aim to investigate the association between angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs)/angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) therapy and colorectal cancer (CRC)... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
We aim to investigate the association between angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs)/angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) therapy and colorectal cancer (CRC) by conducting a systematic review with meta-analysis.
METHODS
Literature was searched on PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane library to identify relevant studies evaluating ACEIs/ARBs therapy and risk of CRC incidence or survival of CRC patients. Pooled risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals was calculated for the association between ACEIs/ARBs and CRC risk and mortality.
RESULTS
Eleven observational studies were included in the systematic review. A meta-analysis of six studies totaling 113,048 individuals indicated a 6% decreased risk of CRC in ACEIs/ARBs users compared to non-users (95% CI 0.89-0.98). In the four case-control studies, individuals using ACEIs/ARBs were associated with a 6% decreased risk of CRC (95% CI 0.90-0.99). The meta-analysis of three studies investigating the relationship between ACEIs/ARBs and survival of CRC did not show a significantly decreased mortality in ACEIs/ARBs users (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.60-1.09). Seven studies evaluated the dose-response relationship between ACEIs/ARBs therapy and CRC, and two of them showed that the association was related to longer duration and higher dose.
CONCLUSIONS
CEIs/ARBs therapy might be associated with a reduce risk of CRC development, but whether use of these medications improves the outcomes of CRC remains unknown. Large-scale and more robust studies are needed to further explore this association.
Topics: Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Colorectal Neoplasms; Humans; Hypertension; Incidence; Risk
PubMed: 26081426
DOI: 10.1007/s10552-015-0617-1 -
Pediatric Nephrology (Berlin, Germany) Mar 2022IgA nephropathy (IgAN) is one of the most prevalent primary glomerulopathies in children. There are various studies investigating the efficacy of angiotensin-converting... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
IgA nephropathy (IgAN) is one of the most prevalent primary glomerulopathies in children. There are various studies investigating the efficacy of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARB) in adults with IgAN. However, only few studies evaluated the efficacy of these medications in pediatric patients.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of ACEI/ARB in children with IgAN.
DATA SOURCES
Databases including PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane, Scopus, and Google Scholar were searched between the 1st of April and 20th of July of 2021 using the keywords "IgA Nephropathy," "Berger's Disease," "Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors," "Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists," "Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers," and similar entry terms collected from the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH).
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Observational studies (case series, case-control, cohort, and cross-sectional) and clinical trials with descriptions of pediatric patients (under 19 years old) with histopathological diagnosis of IgA nephropathy and who received ACEI and/or ARB.
PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTIONS
Pediatric patients (under 19 years old) with histopathological diagnosis of IgA nephropathy and who received ACEI and/or ARB.
STUDY APPRAISAL
For quality assessment, the Risk of Bias 2 tool (RoB 2), the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions tool (ROBINS-I), the National Institutes of Health (NIH) quality assessment tool, and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) were used.
RESULTS
After recovering 1,471 studies, only eight, published between 2003 and 2019, met the eligibility criteria and were included in this systematic review. Of the 737 included children in the studies, 202 (25.8%) used ACEI/ARB and were compared with placebo and other therapy regimens. Of the seven studies that evaluated proteinuria, six reported an efficacy of ACEI/ARB in reducing this marker. ACEI/ARB also showed a possible effect in reducing hematuria and oxidative stress. The most common side effect was dizziness.
LIMITATIONS
The number of studies about the treatment with ACEI/ARB in children with IgAN is scarce. In addition, the studies are very heterogeneous. There are few studies that compared ACEI/ARB with placebo.
CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS
The use of ACEI and/or ARB appears to be safe and to reduce proteinuria in pediatric patients with IgAN. Nonetheless, further randomized controlled trials, with greater methodological rigor and longer follow-up time, are required to establish the efficacy and safety of this therapy in this population.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER
The protocol of this systematic literature review was registered in PROSPERO under the number CRD42021245375, and in the OSF registries ( https://osf.io/qft4z/ ) with the registration https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/VADYR . A higher resolution version of the Graphical abstract is available as Supplementary information.
Topics: Adult; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Child; Cross-Sectional Studies; Female; Glomerulonephritis, IGA; Humans; Male; Proteinuria; Young Adult
PubMed: 34686915
DOI: 10.1007/s00467-021-05316-0 -
Journal of Clinical Anesthesia Aug 2017Clinical repercussions of perioperative treatment with ACEIs/ARBs. (Review)
Review
STUDY OBJECTIVE
Clinical repercussions of perioperative treatment with ACEIs/ARBs.
DESIGN
Systematic review according to PRISMA statement.
SETTING
Perioperative period.
PATIENTS
29 studies 11 cases/cases series, 12 observational studies and 6 randomized studies.
MEASUREMENTS
Arterial blood pressure differences, refractory hypotension, other comorbidities.
MAIN RESULTS
The studies show different results regarding the topics measured. They are divided in the results regarding blood pressure, long term morbidities and effects in neuraxial anesthesia.
CONCLUSIONS
Withholding AECI/ARBs on the morning prior to surgery could be recommended as a potentially effective measure, with a low level of evidence, in order to reduce the appearance of hypotension in the perioperative period of non-cardiac surgery.
Topics: Anesthesia; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Drug Administration Schedule; Humans; Hypotension; Intraoperative Complications; Perioperative Care; Research Design
PubMed: 28625460
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2017.04.018 -
Cureus Aug 2023Amyloid-ß (Aß) plaques and Neurofibrillary tangles are hallmarks of Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology. Recent advances to find a cure for AD have led to the... (Review)
Review
Comparative Study of Safety and Efficacy of Angiotensin-Receptor Blockers and Anti Amyloid-ß Monoclonal Antibodies for the Treatment of Alzheimer's Disease: A Systematic Review.
Amyloid-ß (Aß) plaques and Neurofibrillary tangles are hallmarks of Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology. Recent advances to find a cure for AD have led to the exploration of Anti-Aß monoclonal antibodies and angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs). The antibodies can decrease plaque formation or remove already formed plaques. ARBs increase angiotensin II (AT2) levels and decrease the effect of AT2 on the AT1 receptor (AT1R). This systematic analysis reviews evidence of monoclonal antibodies (Aducanumab, Lecanemab, Donanemab, and Solanezumab) and ARBs in managing AD. An in-depth methodical search was conducted across PubMed, Science Direct, and Mendeley. PRISMA 2020 guidelines were followed for this study. Randomized control trials for antibodies and ARBs and one retrospective cohort study were included. The comparison was made among studies that shared similar measured outcomes. Antibodies were found to be more effective than ARBs, with Aducanumab and Lecanemab being the most effective. ARBs, on the other hand, were found to be the safer choice. Further trials of longer duration and larger sample sizes are needed to explore both groups' long-term safety and efficacy.
PubMed: 37746412
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.43984