CAS Number: 88150-42-9

Norvasc | 88150-42-9

Norvasc is the brand name of amlodipine besylate, a widely prescribed, long-acting dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker developed by Pfizer, primarily indicated for the management of hypertension and both chronic stable and vasospastic angina. Its mechanism of action involves blocking calcium channels in vascular smooth muscle cells, leading to vasodilation and reduced blood pressure. With a long half‑life of 30–50 hours, Norvasc enables once‑daily dosing and provides smooth 24‑hour blood pressure control with minimal fluctuation. Common side effects include peripheral edema, headache, dizziness, and fatigue, while serious precautions apply in patients with severe hypotension or aortic stenosis. Although the patent for amlodipine has expired, making lower‑cost generics widely available, Norvasc remains a clinically effective and well‑established therapeutic option.

Product Information

HM Chemical Trading GmbH supplies industrial-grade specialty chemicals and raw materials with reliable international logistics support.

References

  • PCV21 ECONOMIC EVALUATION OF THE PROSPECTIVE RANDOMIZED EVALUATION OF VASCULAR EFFECT OF NORVASC STUDY (PREVENT):AN ITALIAN CUSTOMIZATION
    This study presents several pharmacoeconomic studies across different cardiovascular conditions. One study compares hawthorn extract to conventional ACE-inhibitor therapy for chronic heart failure (CHF) in Germany, finding similar or slightly better outcomes with hawthorn, though a full cost-utility analysis was not yet possible. Another Polish study on chronic venous insufficiency (CVI) reveals that patients’ self-estimated treatment costs are significantly higher than actual costs calculated from resource utilization. An Irish cost-effectiveness analysis shows that adding spironolactone to standard CHF therapy is cost-effective, with an incremental cost of €466 per life year gained, and prescription rates tripled following the RALES trial. An Italian evaluation of amlodipine for atherosclerosis finds it more effective but more costly than placebo, with an incremental cost of €3,235 per event-free patient. A Spanish study comparing aggressive atorvastatin (80 mg) to angioplasty in stable coronary artery disease concludes that atorvastatin is cost-saving and at least as effective as percutaneous coronary intervention. Finally, a Polish comparison of perindopril versus enalapril for hypertension reports better blood pressure control rates with perindopril (52.45% vs. 41.03%) based on JNC VI guidelines.
    DOI: 10.1016/S1098-3015(10)61292-2
  • Comparison of oral amlodipine with oral labetalol in achieving blood pressure control in women with postpartum hypertension – A randomised control study
    When comparing blood pressure control within 48 h, 19.8% of the labetalol group attained blood pressure control in < 48 h. In comparison, 38.6% of patients in the amlodipine group achieved better blood pressure control within 48 h, and the difference between these two proportions was significant. The length of hospital stays after treatment significantly differed between the two groups (2.8 ± 1.4 days) in the labetalol group and (2.0 ± 1.2 days) in the amlodipine group. There was also a significant difference in the number of doses required and the need for additional antihypertensives, all showing significant differences (p < 0.0001).
    DOI: 10.1016/j.preghy.2026.101461
Request Inquiry