Letter

ASCOT: a tale of two treatment regimens

BMJ 2005; 331 doi: 10.1136/bmj.331.7523.1023 (Published 27 October 2005)
Cite this as: BMJ 2005;331:1023.1

Access to the full text of this article requires a subscription or payment. Please log in or subscribe below.

Is ASCOT all it's cracked up to be?

  1. James A Cave, general practitioner partner (ectopicmailbox-bmj1@yahoo.co.uk)
  1. Downland Practice, Chieveley, Newbury RG20 8UY

    EDITOR—Am I alone in thinking the ASCOT study fails to answer the question it was set toanswer, and moreover raises some more?1 McDougall et al seem sure that it has clearly shown that the new combination of angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor and calcium antagonist is beneficial compared with a β blocker and thiazide.2

    Firstly, did the inclusion criteria bias the study against β blockers? Patients with peripheral vascular disease and microalbuminuria were included whereas patients with biochemical abnormalities were not. This looks as if …

    Access to the full text of this article requires a subscription or payment

    Subscribe

    Article access

    Article access for 1 day

    Purchase this article for £20 $30 €32*

    The PDF version can be downloaded as your personal record

    * Prices do not include VAT

    Rapid responses

    THIS WEEK'S POLL

    Read related article

    See previous polls

    BMJ most popular