Comparative effectiveness of amlodipine versus nifedipine prescribed at discharge in patients with ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack: A nationwide 5-year follow-up registry study
4 affiliations
- 1Department of Neurology, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
- 2China National Clinical Research Center for Neurological Diseases, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
- 3Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Clinical Trial, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
- 4Department of Epidemiology, Beijing Neurosurgical Institute, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Abstract
Background: Amlodipine and nifedipine are the most commonly prescribed calcium channel blockers (CCB) for patients suffering from ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA). Nevertheless, there is a scarcity of direct comparative evidence on their effectiveness. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of amlodipine and nifedipine in patients with ischemic stroke or TIA. Methods and findings: This observational study was based on the Third China National Stroke Registry, which recruited consecutive adult patients with ischemic stroke or TIA from 2015 to 2018. In this study, ischemic stroke or TIA patients were prescribed either amlodipine or nifedipine at discharge. The primary outcome was the distribution of modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score, which assesses functional outcomes in patients with stroke, at 5 years. The intergroup differences were examined using ordinal logistic regression, yielding odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Patient age, gender, body mass index, systolic blood pressure at admission, and onset date were adjusted. To improve baseline characteristic balance, inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was implemented. A total of 2,859 eligible patients were included, and there were 1847 patients in the amlodipine group and 1,058 patients in the nifedipine group after IPTW. The amlodipine group demonstrated significantly lower 5-year mRS scores in comparison to the nifedipine group, with an OR of 0.76 (95% CI [0.65, 0.89]; p < 0.001). A total of 956 (51.76%) amlodipine users and 632 (59.74%) nifedipine users achieved a mRS score > 0 at 5 years, with an OR of 0.71 (95% CI [0.61, 0.83]; p < 0.001). The sensitivity analyses yielded consistent results. The main limitations include the inherent observational design, the exclusive reliance on registry data, and relatively high loss-to-follow-up rate at 5 years. Conclusions: This study revealed that amlodipine, compared to nifedipine, may be associated with improved functional recovery in ischemic stroke or TIA patients. Randomized controlled trials are warranted to confirm these findings and refine CCB therapy. Why was this study done?: What did the researchers do and find?: What do these findings mean?: In a nationwide registry study, Xinya Li and colleagues compare the effectiveness of two calcium channel blockers prescribed at discharge of hospitalization due to stroke on patient functional outcomes.
Related
- Comparative effectiveness of Orsiro, Xience, Synergy, and Resolute stent in patients with acute myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a nationwide registry study
- Comparison of indomethacin and nifedipine regarding ductus arteriosus Doppler findings after laser therapy for monochorionic diamniotic twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome: A retrospective cohort study
- Claims-Based Body Mass Index and Obesity Comparative Effectiveness Research—Weighing the Evidence
- Comparative Effectiveness of Hysteroscopic Endometrial Resection Versus the 52-mg Levonorgestrel-Releasing Intrauterine System for Heavy Menstrual Bleeding: A Retrospective Cohort Study
- Analgesic Effectiveness of Ultrasound-Guided PECS II Block in Implantable Venous Port Catheter Placement: A Retrospective Comparative Study
BibTeX
@article{li2026comparative,
title = {{Comparative effectiveness of amlodipine versus nifedipine prescribed at discharge in patients with ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack: A nationwide 5-year follow-up registry study}},
author = {Xinya Li and Xue Xia and Meng Gao and Qin Xu and Yijun Zhang and Jing Jing and Yi Zhai and Xia Meng and Anxin Wang},
journal = {PLOS Medicine},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.1371/journal.pmed.1005277},
url = {https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1005277},
note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Comparative effectiveness of amlodipine versus nifedipine prescribed at discharge in patients with ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack: A nationwide 5-year follow-up registry study
AU - Xinya Li
AU - Xue Xia
AU - Meng Gao
AU - Qin Xu
AU - Yijun Zhang
AU - Jing Jing
AU - Yi Zhai
AU - Xia Meng
AU - Anxin Wang
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/12
JO - PLOS Medicine
DO - 10.1371/journal.pmed.1005277
UR - https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1005277
AB - Background: Amlodipine and nifedipine are the most commonly prescribed calcium channel blockers (CCB) for patients suffering from ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA). Nevertheless, there is a scarcity of direct comparative evidence on their effectiveness. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of amlodipine and nifedipine in patients with ischemic stroke or TIA. Methods and findings: This observational study was based on the Third China National Stroke Registry, which recruited consecutive adult patients with ischemic stroke or TIA from 2015 to 2018. In this study, ischemic stroke or TIA patients were prescribed either amlodipine or nifedipine at discharge. The primary outcome was the distribution of modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score, which assesses functional outcomes in patients with stroke, at 5 years. The intergroup differences were examined using ordinal logistic regression, yielding odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Patient age, gender, body mass index, systolic blood pressure at admission, and onset date were adjusted. To improve baseline characteristic balance, inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was implemented. A total of 2,859 eligible patients were included, and there were 1847 patients in the amlodipine group and 1,058 patients in the nifedipine group after IPTW. The amlodipine group demonstrated significantly lower 5-year mRS scores in comparison to the nifedipine group, with an OR of 0.76 (95% CI [0.65, 0.89]; p < 0.001). A total of 956 (51.76%) amlodipine users and 632 (59.74%) nifedipine users achieved a mRS score > 0 at 5 years, with an OR of 0.71 (95% CI [0.61, 0.83]; p < 0.001). The sensitivity analyses yielded consistent results. The main limitations include the inherent observational design, the exclusive reliance on registry data, and relatively high loss-to-follow-up rate at 5 years. Conclusions: This study revealed that amlodipine, compared to nifedipine, may be associated with improved functional recovery in ischemic stroke or TIA patients. Randomized controlled trials are warranted to confirm these findings and refine CCB therapy. Why was this study done?: What did the researchers do and find?: What do these findings mean?: In a nationwide registry study, Xinya Li and colleagues compare the effectiveness of two calcium channel blockers prescribed at discharge of hospitalization due to stroke on patient functional outcomes.
SN - 1549-1676
SN - 1549-1277
ER -