Systematic Review: Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Losartan vs. Candesartan for the Treatment of Hypertension

Hypertension is one of the most significant modifiable risk factors for cardiovascular disease (CVD) and remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. Effective management of hypertension is essential for preventing comp lications such as stroke, myocardial infarction, and heart failure. Angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) like losartan and candesartan are well-established therapeutic options for blood pressure (BP) control and are widely prescribed due to their favorable side-effect profiles and organ-protective properties. Despite being members of the same drug class, these ARBs differ in their pharmacokinetics, receptor binding affinity, and clinical efficacy. This systematic review aims to provide a detailed comparison of the efficacy and safety of losartan versus candesartan in managing hypertension. We conducted a comprehensive search of the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases, retrieving studies published from 2000 to 2024 that compared the two ARBs directly in hypertensive populations. A total of 25 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies, comprising more than 12,000 participants, were included in the analysis. The primary outcomes evaluated were the reduction in systolic and diastolic blood pressure, cardiovascular event prevention, and adverse event profiles. The results suggest that both losartan and candesartan effectively lower BP, but candesartan consistently demonstrated greater reductions in both systolic and diastolic BP compared to losartan. Candesartan also appeared to have superior cardiovascular outcomes, with a lower incidence of major cardiovascular events such as stroke, myocardial infarction, and heart failure hospitalizations. The safety profiles of both drugs were comparable, though losartan was associated with a slightly higher incidence of cough and discontinuation due to adverse events. Overall, candesartan may offer a slight clinical advantage over losartan, particularly in patients requiring more potent or sustained BP control. However, both drugs remain valuable options in the management of hypertension. Further long-term studies are recommended to confirm these findings and to investigate the potential benefits of each drug in specific patient subgroups.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
International Journal For Multidisciplinary Research
Published
2024-10-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.36948/ijfmr.2024.v06i05.29357
Primary Topic
Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Systematic Review: Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Losartan vs. Candesartan for the Treatment of Hypertension

Harsh Bansal, Arnau-Vives Maria Jose, Dhruvil. A. Kheni -, Sinchana S Kadur -
International Journal For Multidisciplinary Research
Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
article

Systematic Review: Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Losartan vs. Candesartan for the Treatment of Hypertension

Harsh Bansal, Arnau-Vives Maria Jose, Dhruvil. A. Kheni -, Sinchana S Kadur -
article en

Abstract

Hypertension is one of the most significant modifiable risk factors for cardiovascular disease (CVD) and remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. Effective management of hypertension is essential for preventing comp lications such as stroke, myocardial infarction, and heart failure. Angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) like losartan and candesartan are well-established therapeutic options for blood pressure (BP) control and are widely prescribed due to their favorable side-effect profiles and organ-protective properties. Despite being members of the same drug class, these ARBs differ in their pharmacokinetics, receptor binding affinity, and clinical efficacy. This systematic review aims to provide a detailed comparison of the efficacy and safety of losartan versus candesartan in managing hypertension. We conducted a comprehensive search of the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases, retrieving studies published from 2000 to 2024 that compared the two ARBs directly in hypertensive populations. A total of 25 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies, comprising more than 12,000 participants, were included in the analysis. The primary outcomes evaluated were the reduction in systolic and diastolic blood pressure, cardiovascular event prevention, and adverse event profiles. The results suggest that both losartan and candesartan effectively lower BP, but candesartan consistently demonstrated greater reductions in both systolic and diastolic BP compared to losartan. Candesartan also appeared to have superior cardiovascular outcomes, with a lower incidence of major cardiovascular events such as stroke, myocardial infarction, and heart failure hospitalizations. The safety profiles of both drugs were comparable, though losartan was associated with a slightly higher incidence of cough and discontinuation due to adverse events. Overall, candesartan may offer a slight clinical advantage over losartan, particularly in patients requiring more potent or sustained BP control. However, both drugs remain valuable options in the management of hypertension. Further long-term studies are recommended to confirm these findings and to investigate the potential benefits of each drug in specific patient subgroups.

International Journal For Multidisciplinary ResearchVol. 6(5)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 65%
Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.