-
PloS One 2016Clevidipine is an ultrashort-acting drug for rapid reduction of blood pressure by selectively acting on the L-type Ca2+ channels on arteriolar smooth muscle. The drug's... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Clevidipine is an ultrashort-acting drug for rapid reduction of blood pressure by selectively acting on the L-type Ca2+ channels on arteriolar smooth muscle. The drug's ultrashort action in reducing the blood pressure is due to its rapid hydrolysis by blood and extravascular tissue esterases, which does not depend on hepato-renal metabolism and excretion. An analysis of the perioperative management of blood pressure should be considered to compare with other intravenous antihypertensive agents.
METHODS
Analyses of the available evidence in randomized clinical trials following the PRISMA methodology as well as clinical significance according to the GRADE system were conducted. Placebo versus other antihypertensive drugs studies were included. Statistical assessments were done using the X2 and I2 tests.
RESULTS
Clevidipine was more effective in maintaining the blood pressure within pre-specified ranges compared with other antihypertensive drugs (MD, -17.87 CI 95%: -29.02 to -6.72; p = 0.02). The use of Clevidipine versus placebo and rescue antihypertensive intravenous drug showed a clear reduction in rates of treatment failure (RR 0.10; IC 95%; 0.05-0.18; p <0.0001). There was no difference in the incidence of adverse events compared with placebo (RR 1.47; 95% CI 0.89 to 2.43, p = 0.14) and with other antihypertensive drugs (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.35; p = 0.37). In addition, there was no difference in the incidence of atrial fibrillation (AF) between clevidipine and control groups (RR 1.09, IC del 95%: 0.65 a 1.83; p = 0.73).
CONCLUSIONS
Clevidipine is an ultrafast-acting drug that is highly effective for management of perioperative arterial hypertension. It is devoid of adverse effects associated with the use of other IV antihypertensives. Its favorable pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties make clevidipine the drug of choice for the management of acute perioperative hypertension. It is important to emphasize the need for further studies with a larger number of patients to confirm these findings and increase the degree of evidence.
Topics: Antihypertensive Agents; Atrial Fibrillation; Blood Pressure; Calcium Channel Blockers; Databases, Factual; Humans; Hypertension; Perioperative Care; Pyridines
PubMed: 27018586
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0150625 -
Medicine May 2021In recent years, the incidence rate of hypertensive nephropathy has been increasing quickly, which has been a major threat to people's health.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
In recent years, the incidence rate of hypertensive nephropathy has been increasing quickly, which has been a major threat to people's health. Renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system blockers have certain curative effects. However, there are some patients having serious adverse reactions, and the benefit population is limited, so the treatment of hypertensive renal damage is necessary to have beneficial supplement. More and more clinical studies have shown that ginkgo leaf extract and dipyridamole injection (GDI) combined with antihypertensive drugs has achieved good results in the treatment of hypertensive renal damage. It is supposed to be a supplementary treatment in hypertensive nephropathy.
OBJECTIVES
To systematically assess the efficacy and safety of GDI combined with antihypertensive drugs on hypertensive renal injury.
METHODS
Seven databases including PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Wanfang database, China biomedical literature service system (Sino Med), VIP Chinese Sci-tech journal database (VIP), and China national knowledge internet (CNKI) were retrieved to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the experimental group containing combined therapy of hypertensive nephropathy with GDI and antihypertensive drugs. The retrieval time was from the establishment of database to July 8, 2020. Two researchers independently selected literature, extracted data, and evaluated the risk of bias in the study. The methodological quality was evaluated with Cochrane handbook and meta-analysis was performed with Stata 14.0 software.
RESULTS
Eight studies were included in this study which involved 556 patients. The meta-analyses indicated that, compared with using antihypertensive drugs alone, combined treatment of GDI with antihypertensive drugs can decrease 24-hour urinary total protein (weighted mean difference [WMD] -0.61, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.82, -0.39; k = 6, P ≤ .001), blood urea nitrogen (WMD -1.27, 95% CI: -2.45, -0.10; k = 6, P = .033, serum creatinine (WMD -29.50, 95% CI: -56.44, -2.56; number of estimates [k] = 6, P = .032).
CONCLUSIONS
Our meta-analyses showed that GDI combined with antihypertensive drugs can improve the renal function of hypertensive patients with renal injury.
Topics: Antihypertensive Agents; Dipyridamole; Drug Therapy, Combination; Drugs, Chinese Herbal; Ginkgo biloba; Hematologic Tests; Humans; Hypertension, Renal; Nephritis; Plant Extracts; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Urinalysis; Vasodilator Agents
PubMed: 34106629
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000025852 -
Journal of Cardiovascular Pharmacology... May 2016Published clinical practice guidelines have addressed antihypertensive therapy and sexual dysfunction (SD) in many different ways. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Published clinical practice guidelines have addressed antihypertensive therapy and sexual dysfunction (SD) in many different ways.
OBJECTIVE
In this systematic review, we evaluated guidelines that address antihypertensive drug-associated SD, guideline recommendations, and recent guideline trends.
METHODS
Thirty sets of guidelines for hypertension management in adults that had been published in the English language since 2000 were reviewed. The primary outcome measure was antihypertensive-associated SD potential, which was independently evaluated using specific questions by 2 authors in a nonblinded standardized manner.
RESULTS
Sexual dysfunctions associated with thiazide-class diuretics, β-blockers, and centrally acting sympathoplegics were addressed by half of the guidelines reviewed. There is no clarity on β-blockers and thiazide-class diuretics because one-third of the guidelines are vague about individual β-blockers and diuretics, and there is no statement on third-generation β-blockers and thiazide-like diuretics that can improve erectile function. The revised guidelines never use terms such as loss of libido, ejaculatory dysfunction, lack of orgasm, and priapism. Summary versions of guidelines are inadequate to reflect the key interpretation of the primary guidelines on SD associated with antihypertensives, even in the major guidelines that were updated recently. Therapeutic issues such as exploring SD in clinical history, assessing SD prior to and during treatment with antihypertensives, substituting the offending agents with alternatives that possess a better safety profile, intervening with phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors, and avoiding the concomitant use of nitrovasodilators are superficially addressed by most guidelines, with the exception of 2013 European Society of Hypertension/European Society of Cardiology and Seventh Joint National Committee recommendations.
CONCLUSION
Future guideline revisions, including both full and summary reports, should provide a balanced perspective on antihypertensive-related SD issues to improve the impact of hypertension treatment guidelines on patient care and quality of life.
Topics: Antihypertensive Agents; Blood Pressure; Erectile Dysfunction; Humans; Hypertension; Male; Patient Selection; Penile Erection; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Quality of Life; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Sexual Behavior
PubMed: 26450998
DOI: 10.1177/1074248415598321 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2009Elevated blood pressure (known as hypertension) increases with age, and most rapidly over age 60. Systolic hypertension is more strongly associated with cardiovascular... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Elevated blood pressure (known as hypertension) increases with age, and most rapidly over age 60. Systolic hypertension is more strongly associated with cardiovascular disease than diastolic hypertension, and occurs more commonly in older people. It is important to know the benefits and harms of antihypertensive treatment of hypertension in this age group.
OBJECTIVES
To quantify antihypertensive drug effect on overall mortality, cardiovascular mortality and morbidity and withdrawal due to adverse effects in people 60 years and older with mild to moderate systolic or diastolic hypertension.
SEARCH STRATEGY
Updated search of electronic database of EMBASE, CENTRAL, MEDLINE until Dec 2008; previous search of two Japanese databases (1973-1995) and WHO-ISH Collaboration register (August 1997); references from reviews, trials and previously published meta-analyses; and experts.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized controlled trials of at least one year duration in hypertensive elders (at least 60 years old) comparing antihypertensive drug therapy with placebo or no treatment and providing morbidity and mortality data.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Outcomes assessed were total mortality (including cardiovascular, coronary heart disease and cerebrovascular mortality); total cardiovascular morbidity and mortality (representing combined coronary heart disease and cerebrovascular morbidity and mortality); and withdrawal due to adverse events.
MAIN RESULTS
Fifteen trials (24,055 subjects >/= 60 years) with moderate to severe hypertension were identified. These trials mostly evaluated first-line thiazide diuretic therapy for a mean duration of treatment of 4.5 years. Treatment reduced total mortality, RR 0.90 (0.84, 0.97); event rates per 1000 participants reduced from 116 to 104. Treatment also reduced total cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, RR 0.72 (0.68, 0.77); event rates per 1000 participants reduced from 149 to 106. In the three trials restricted to persons with isolated systolic hypertension the benefit was similar. In very elderly patients >/= 80 years the reduction in total cardiovascular mortality and morbidity was similar RR 0.75 [0.65, 0.87] however, there was no reduction in total mortality, RR 1.01 [0.90, 1.13]. Withdrawals due to adverse effects were increased with treatment, RR 1.71 [1.45, 2.00].
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Treating healthy persons (60 years or older) with moderate to severe systolic and/or diastolic hypertension reduces all cause mortality and cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. The decrease in all cause mortality was limited to persons 60 to 80 years of age.
Topics: Age Factors; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Antihypertensive Agents; Cause of Death; Humans; Hypertension; Middle Aged; Myocardial Infarction; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Stroke; Withholding Treatment
PubMed: 19821263
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000028.pub2 -
American Journal of Preventive Medicine Dec 2017Hypertension affects one third of the U.S. adult population. Although cost-effectiveness analyses of antihypertensive medicines have been published, a comprehensive... (Review)
Review
CONTEXT
Hypertension affects one third of the U.S. adult population. Although cost-effectiveness analyses of antihypertensive medicines have been published, a comprehensive systematic review across medicine classes is not available.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Health Technology Assessment were searched to identify original cost-effectiveness analyses published from 1990 through August 2016. Results were summarized by medicine class: angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs), angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), calcium channel blockers (CCBs), thiazide-type diuretics, β-blockers, and others. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were adjusted to 2015 U.S. dollars.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
Among 76 studies reviewed, 14 compared medicines with no treatment, 16 compared medicines with conventional therapy, 29 compared between medicine classes, 13 compared within medicine class, and 11 compared combination therapies. All antihypertensives were cost effective compared with no treatment (ICER/quality-adjusted life year [QALY]=dominant-$19,945). ARBs were more cost effective than CCBs (ICER/QALY=dominant-$13,016) in nine comparisons, whereas CCBs were more cost effective than ARBs (ICER/QALY=dominant) in two comparisons. ARBs were more cost effective than ACEIs (ICER/QALY=dominant-$34,244) and β-blockers (ICER/QALY=$1,498-$18,137) in all eight comparisons.
CONCLUSIONS
All antihypertensives were cost effective compared with no treatment. ARBs appeared to be more cost effective than CCBs, ACEIs, and β-blockers. However, these latter findings should be interpreted with caution because these findings are not robust due to the substantial variability across the studies, including study settings and analytic models, changes in the cost of generic medicines, and publication bias.
Topics: Adrenergic beta-Antagonists; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Antihypertensive Agents; Calcium Channel Blockers; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Drugs, Generic; Humans; Hypertension; Quality-Adjusted Life Years; Sodium Chloride Symporter Inhibitors
PubMed: 29153114
DOI: 10.1016/j.amepre.2017.06.020 -
Journal of Hypertension Dec 2022Hypertension and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs)/angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) have been reported to be associated with the prognosis of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The effects of hypertension on the prognosis of coronavirus disease 2019: a systematic review and meta-analysis on the interactions with age and antihypertensive treatment.
BACKGROUND
Hypertension and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs)/angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) have been reported to be associated with the prognosis of COVID-19, but the findings remain controversial. Here, we conducted a systematic review to summarize the current evidence.
METHODS
We retrieved all the studies by MEDLINE via PubMed, CENTRAL, and Embase using the MeSH terms until 30 April 2021. A fixed or random effect model was applied to calculate pooled adjusted odds ratio (AOR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Interactive analysis was performed to identify the interaction effect of hypertension and age on in-hospital mortality.
RESULTS
In total, 86 articles with 18 775 387 COVID-19 patients from 18 countries were included in this study. The pooled analysis showed that the COVID-19 patients with hypertension had increased risks of in-hospital mortality and other adverse outcomes, compared with those without hypertension, with an AOR (95% CI) of 1.36 (1.28-1.45) and 1.32 (1.24-1.41), respectively. The results were mostly repeated in countries with more than three independent studies. Furthermore, the effect of hypertension on in-hospital mortality is more evident in younger and older COVID-19 patients than in 60-69-year-old patients. ACEI/ARBs did not significantly affect the mortality and adverse outcomes of COVID-19 patients, compared with those receiving other antihypertensive treatments.
CONCLUSION
Hypertension is significantly associated with an increased risk of in-hospital mortality and adverse outcomes in COVID-19. The effect of hypertension on in-hospital mortality among consecutive age groups followed a U-shaped curve. ACEI/ARB treatments do not increase in-hospital mortality and other poor outcomes of COVID-19 patients with hypertension.
Topics: Humans; Middle Aged; Aged; COVID-19; Antihypertensive Agents; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; SARS-CoV-2; Hypertension; Prognosis
PubMed: 35950998
DOI: 10.1097/HJH.0000000000003266 -
Journal of Neurology Sep 2012Antihypertensive drugs reduce headache but it is unclear whether there are differences between drug classes. Calcium channel blockers (CCBs) decrease variability in... (Review)
Review
Antihypertensive drugs reduce headache but it is unclear whether there are differences between drug classes. Calcium channel blockers (CCBs) decrease variability in systolic blood pressure (SBPV) and stroke risk more than other classes, possibly due to decreased vascular tone. If so, there might be a correlation between drug-class effects on variability in SBP and on headache. We determined antihypertensive class effects on SBPV and headache during follow-up in a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. We determined pooled estimates of treatment effect on group variability in BP (variance ratio, VR) and on the odds ratio for headache (OR) by random-effects meta-analysis. Antihypertensive drugs reduced the incidence of headache compared to placebo (OR = 0.75, 95% CI 0.69-0.82, p < 0.0001, 198 comparisons, 43,672 patients), but there was significant heterogeneity between drug classes (p = 0.0007) with a greater effect of beta-blockers compared to placebo (VR = 0.49, 0.33-0.68, p < 0.0001, 16 trials) or all other drug classes (OR = 0.73, 0.62-0.85, p = 0.0002, 49 trials) and a lack of effectiveness of CCBs (vs. placebo-OR = 0.95, 0.79-1.15, 65 trials; vs. other drugs-OR = 1.19, 1.05-1.35, p = 0.009, 101 trials). Drug-class effects on headache were opposite to effects on variability in SBP (vs. other drugs: CCB-VR = 0.81, 0.71-0.85, p < 0.0001; beta-blocker VR = 1.17, 1.07-1.28, p < 0.0001), but were unrelated to differences in mean SBP. Antihypertensive drugs reduce headache but the effect differs between classes, corresponding to their effects on SBPV and the risk of stroke. This may partly be explained by consistent antihypertensive class effects on vascular tone in the peripheral (variability) and cerebrovascular circulations (headache).
Topics: Antihypertensive Agents; Blood Pressure; Databases, Factual; Headache; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 22354262
DOI: 10.1007/s00415-012-6449-y -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2017Eplerenone is an aldosterone receptor blocker that is chemically derived from spironolactone. In Canada, it is indicated for use as adjunctive therapy to reduce... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Eplerenone is an aldosterone receptor blocker that is chemically derived from spironolactone. In Canada, it is indicated for use as adjunctive therapy to reduce mortality for heart failure patients with New York Heart Association (NYHA) class II systolic chronic heart failure and left ventricular systolic dysfunction. It is also used as adjunctive therapy for patients with heart failure following myocardial infarction. Additionally, it is indicated for the treatment of mild and moderate essential hypertension for patients who cannot be treated adequately with other agents. It is important to determine the clinical impact of all antihypertensive medications, including aldosterone antagonists, to support their continued use in essential hypertension. No previous systematic reviews have evaluated the effect of eplerenone on cardiovascular morbidity, mortality, and magnitude of blood pressure lowering in patients with hypertension.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of eplerenone monotherapy versus placebo for primary hypertension in adults. Outcomes of interest were all-cause mortality, cardiovascular events (fatal or non-fatal myocardial infarction), cerebrovascular events (fatal or non fatal strokes), adverse events or withdrawals due to adverse events, and systolic and diastolic blood pressure.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Hypertension Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and two trials registers up to 3 March 2016. We handsearched references from retrieved studies to identify any studies missed in the initial search. We also searched for unpublished data by contacting the corresponding authors of the included studies and pharmaceutical companies involved in conducting studies on eplerenone monotherapy in primary hypertension. The search had no language restrictions.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We selected randomized placebo-controlled trials studying adult patients with primary hypertension. We excluded studies in people with secondary or gestational hypertension and studies where participants were receiving multiple antihypertensives.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Three review authors independently reviewed the search results for studies meeting our criteria. Three review authors independently extracted data and assessed trial quality using a standardized data extraction form. A fourth independent review author resolved discrepancies or disagreements. We performed data extraction and synthesis using a standardized format on Covidence. We conducted data analysis using Review Manager 5.
MAIN RESULTS
A total of 1437 adult patients participated in the five randomized parallel group studies, with treatment durations ranging from 8 to 16 weeks. The daily doses of eplerenone ranged from 25 mg to 400 mg daily. Meta-analysis of these studies showed a reduction in systolic blood pressure of 9.21 mmHg (95% CI -11.08 to -7.34; I = 58%) and a reduction of diastolic pressure of 4.18 mmHg (95% CI -5.03 to -3.33; I = 0%) (moderate quality evidence).There may be a dose response effect for eplerenone in the reduction in systolic blood pressure at doses of 400 mg/day. However, this finding is uncertain, as it is based on a single included study with low quality evidence. Overall there does not appear to be a clinically important dose response in lowering systolic or diastolic blood pressure at eplerenone doses of 50 mg to 400 mg daily. There did not appear to be any differences in the number of patients who withdrew due to adverse events or the number of patients with at least one adverse event in the eplerenone group compared to placebo. However, only three of the five included studies reported adverse events. Most of the included studies were of moderate quality, as we judged multiple domains as being at unclear risk in the 'Risk of bias' assessment.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Eplerenone 50 to 200 mg/day lowers blood pressure in people with primary hypertension by 9.21 mmHg systolic and 4.18 mmHg diastolic compared to placebo, with no difference of effect between doses of 50 mg/day to 200 mg/day. A dose of 25 mg/day did not produce a statistically significant reduction in systolic or diastolic blood pressure and there is insufficient evidence for doses above 200 mg/day. There is currently no available evidence to determine the effect of eplerenone on clinically meaningful outcomes such as mortality or morbidity in hypertensive patients. The evidence available on side effects is insufficient and of low quality, which makes it impossible to draw conclusions about potential harm associated with eplerenone treatment in hypertensive patients.
Topics: Adult; Antihypertensive Agents; Blood Pressure; Eplerenone; Essential Hypertension; Female; Humans; Hypertension; Male; Middle Aged; Patient Dropouts; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Spironolactone
PubMed: 28245343
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008996.pub2 -
Journal of Human Hypertension Nov 2017Non-adherence to antihypertensive medication is the most important cause of uncontrolled blood pressure and is influenced by multiple interrelating factors.... (Review)
Review
Non-adherence to antihypertensive medication is the most important cause of uncontrolled blood pressure and is influenced by multiple interrelating factors. Understanding the complexity of medication non-adherence and its associated factors is important to determine intervention strategies. Therefore, a systematic review was performed aimed to identify factors associated with antihypertensive medication non-adherence. Different databases were searched for observational studies reporting on factors associated with non-adherence to antihypertensive medication. Titles, abstracts and full texts were reviewed by three researchers. Subsequently, the methodological quality of each study was assessed. Factors that were extracted from the included studies were categorised as factors with consistent or inconsistent evidence to put their potential importance into perspective. Forty-four studies were included. Higher co-payment, side effects and a poor patient-provider relationship were identified as factors with consistent evidence since consistent significant relationships were found for these factors whenever studied. The relationships between non-adherence and multiple other factors were inconsistent among the reviewed studies. However, some of these factors deserve some consideration. Since multiple potentially relevant factors were identified, patient-tailored interventions focussing on identifying and addressing patients' specific barriers to adherence are needed. Further research should clarify the influence of inconsistent factors on adherence and their potential to be addressed in interventions.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Antihypertensive Agents; Blood Pressure; Drug Costs; Female; Health Expenditures; Humans; Hypertension; Male; Medication Adherence; Middle Aged; Physician-Patient Relations; Risk Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 28660885
DOI: 10.1038/jhh.2017.48 -
Biology Direct Oct 2023The social impact of glaucoma is worth of note: primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) is one of the leading causes of irreversible blindness worldwide, affecting some 68.56... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The social impact of glaucoma is worth of note: primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) is one of the leading causes of irreversible blindness worldwide, affecting some 68.56 million people with overall prevalence of 2.4%. Since one of the main risk factors for the development of POAG is the increase of intraocular pressure (IOP) causing retinal ganglion cells death, the medical treatment of POAG consists in the use of drugs endowed with neuroprotective effect and able to reduce IOP. These drugs include beta-blockers, prostaglandin analogues, carbonic anhydrase inhibitors, alpha or cholinergic agonists and rho kinase inhibitors. However, not all the patients respond to the same extent to the therapy in terms of efficacy and safety. Genetics and genome wide association studies have highlighted the occurrence of mutations and polymorphisms influencing the predisposition to develop POAG and its phenotype, as well as affecting the response to pharmacological treatment. The present systematic review and meta-analysis aims at identifying genetic variants and at verifying whether these can influence the responsiveness of patients to therapy for efficacy and safety. It follows the most updated Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 recommendations. The literature search was conducted consulting the most relevant scientific databases, i.e. PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science and Public Health Genomics and Precision Health Knowledge Base up to June 14th, 2023. The search retrieved 1026 total records, among which eight met the eligibility criteria for inclusion in the analysis. The results demonstrated that the most investigated pharmacogenetic associations concern latanoprost and timolol, and that efficacy was studied more in depth than safety. Moreover, the heterogeneity of design and paucity of studies prompt further investigation in randomized clinical trials. In fact, adequately powered and designed pharmacogenetic association studies are needed to provide body of evidence with good certainty for a more appropriate use of medical therapy in POAG.PROSPERO registration: CRD42023434867.
Topics: Humans; Glaucoma, Open-Angle; Antihypertensive Agents; Genome-Wide Association Study; Timolol; Genotype
PubMed: 37833756
DOI: 10.1186/s13062-023-00423-4