Study
Medication Imaging modality Follow-up (months) Outcome Result P -valuePREVENT [9 ] 825 Amlodipine versus placebo QCA 36 Progression of coronary atherosclerosis (mm) −0.095 versus −0.084 .38‡ PREVENT-substudy [9 ] 377 Amlodipine versus placebo B-mode ultrasound 36 CIMT (mm) −0.013 versus +0.033 .007‡ CAMELOT- NORMALIZE [13 , 29 ] 274 Amlodipine versus placebo IVUS 24
PAV (%)−0.8; P = .12 +0.3% (Favors Amlodipine)
.59‡ CAMELOT- NORMALIZE [13 , 29 ] 274 Enalapril versus placebo IVUS 24
PAV (%)−0.5; P = .32 617 B-mode ultrasound 24
Carotid wall thickness (mm)
0.82 versus 0.81
0.58‡ Plaque score 11.1 versus 11.7 .93‡
Part-2 [15 ]
Ramipril versus placebo 48 Carotid wall thickness (mm) 0.83 versus 0.81 .58‡ Plaque score 12 versus 13 .93‡ CAPARES [12 ] 635 Amlodipine versus Placebo QCA 4 MLD (mm) −0.30 ± 0.45 versus −0.29 ± 0.45 .84‡ SECURE [16 ] 732 Ramipril versus placebo B-mode ultrasound 52
CIMT (mm/yr)0.0180 versus 0.0137 versus 0.0217 .033*
QUIET [17 ] 450 Quinapril versus placebo QCA 36 Stenosis progression (%) 49 versus 47 NS‡
MLD index−0.21 ± 0.03 versus −0.18 ± 0.03 NS
in % diameter stenosis index+5.1 ± 1.0 versus 3.5 ± 1.0 NS 394 Enalapril versus placebo QCA 47.8
mean diameter (mm)−0.11 versus −0.11 NS SCAT [18 ]
minimum diameter (mm)−0.12 versus −0.12 NS
% diameter stenosis (%)+2.80 versus +2.90 NS Waseda et. al. [21 ] 64 Olmesartan IVUS 7 Vessel volume index (mm2 ) 9.9 ± 3.1 to 9.1 ± 2.7 <.01¶ MORE [20 ]. 64 Olmesartan versus atenolol B-ultrasound 24 CIMTin plaques >33.7
l (
l) −11.5 ± 4.4 versus +0.6 ± 2.5 .023 Nissen et. al. [14 ] 1515 Beta-blockers versus No BB IVUS 18–24 Change in atheroma volume/yr (mm3 /yr) −2.4 ± 0.5 versus −0.4 ± 0.8 .034