{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0427074939564867, 'fraction_numerical': 0.020950846091861403, 'mean_word_length': 4.914285714285715, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Comparative efficacy and tolerability of nisoldipine coat core and hydrochlorothiazide in mild-to-moderate hypertension.

This study compared the efficacy and tolerability of nisoldipine coat core (CC) 10-40 mg o.d. and hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) 25-50 mg o.d. Patients with mild-to-moderate essential hypertension received either nisoldipine CC 10 mg o.d. or HCTZ 25 mg o.d. Treatment was titrated at two-weekly intervals as necessary. The primary efficacy endpoint was a defined reduction in diastolic blood pressure (DBP). Response rates were similar for both the nisoldipine CC- and HCTZ-treated groups (74% and 70%, respectively). Secondary efficacy endpoints were reductions in both diastolic and systolic blood pressures (SBP). At treatment endpoint, the change from baseline in SBP was 16.2 mmHg for the nisoldipine CC group and 14.9 mmHg for the HCTZ group. Both drugs were well tolerated, and adverse events were generally minor and typical of these antihypertensive agents. Drug-related adverse events were greater in the nisoldipine CC- than the HCTZ-treated patients (50% and 37%, respectively). Nisoldipine CC was shown to demonstrate antihypertensive efficacy similar to HCTZ in the treatment of mild-to-moderate hypertension.