A comparison of nisoldipine ER and amlodipine for the treatment of mild to moderate hypertension

Charles Whitcomb, G. Enzmann, H. A. Pershadsingh, R. Johnson, V. Ciuryla, E. Reisin

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

3 Scopus citations


This multicentre, double-blind, double-dummy, randomised trial compared the efficacy and tolerability of nisoldipine extended release (10-40 mg) and amlodipine (2.5-10 mg) in 161 patients. The primary end point was a between-treatment comparison of change from baseline to week 8 in mean office diastolic blood pressure (DBP). The least squares mean reductions in systolic (S)BP/DBP (± standard error) for nisoldipine and amlodipine were -11.7/-9.3 ± 1.4/0.8 and -14.3/-12.0 ± 1.4/0.8 mmHg, respectively. The DBP treatment difference was 2.7 mmHg (90% confidence interval: 1.1 to 4.3 mmHg; p = 0.005). Tolerability profiles were similar between treatments. The drug acquisition cost per mmHg DBP reduction was 40% lower with nisoldipine; an acquisition cost analysis revealed that amlodipine was 80% more expensive than nisoldipine for treating hypertension. In summary, nisoldipine and amlodipine provide clinically equivalent antihypertensive efficacy; however, nisoldipine is more economical than amlodipine.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)509-513
Number of pages5
JournalInternational Journal of Clinical Practice
Issue number8
StatePublished - 2000
Externally publishedYes

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)


Dive into the research topics of 'A comparison of nisoldipine ER and amlodipine for the treatment of mild to moderate hypertension'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this