Genetic polymorphisms in the angiotensin II receptor gene and their association with open-angle glaucoma in a Japanese population.

What Was Tested

The paper reports a study of Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers, published as a randomized controlled trial.

The local renin-angiotensin system (RAS) is present in the ciliary body and plays a role in regulating aqueous humor dynamics and thus intraocular pressure (IOP).

Who Took Part

The abstract describes 698 subjects taking part.

By PubMed's age tags, the people studied were adults and older adults, both men and women.

A case-control study was performed in 698 Japanese subjects: 190 patients with primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG), 268 patients with normal-tension glaucoma (NTG), and 240 normal subjects.

The effects of oral angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB) on IOP were examined in association with the AGTR1 and AGTR2 polymorphisms in 20 normal subjects.

How the Study Was Run

The design is described as randomized, double-blind and crossover.

Random assignment meant chance, not the researchers, decided who got Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers and who got the comparison, which limits bias.

As a double-blind Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers study, the assignments were hidden from both participants and investigators until the end.

In the crossover set-up each of the subjects took both Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers and the comparison in turn, acting as their own control.

What Was Measured

PubMed files the paper under topics including Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers, Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists, Benzimidazoles, Biphenyl Compounds, Case-Control Studies, Genotype and Glaucoma, Open-Angle.

What This Means in Plain Language

The paper is a randomized, double-blind and crossover study of Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers in 698 subjects.

With several hundred people or more, it is a fairly large study for this kind of research.

Results are reported in around 4 sentences of the abstract; we leave them to the paper itself rather than summarise them.

The publication is from 2005 (Investigative ophthalmology & visual science), a journal based in United States.

More context: all human trials.