Search

BACKGROUND: Whether the relative effects of blood pressure (BP)-lowering treatment on cardiovascular outcomes differ by sex, particularly when BP is not substantially elevated, has been uncertain. METHODS: We conducted an individual participant-level data meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of pharmacological BP lowering. We pooled the data and categorized participants by sex, systolic BP categories in 10-mm Hg increments from <120 to ≥170 mm Hg, and age categories spanning from <55 to ≥85 years. We used fixed-effect one-stage individual participant-level data meta-analyses and applied Cox proportional hazard models, stratified by trial, to analyze the data. RESULTS: We included data from 51 randomized controlled trials involving 358 636 (42% women) participants. Over 4.2 years of median follow-up, a 5-mm Hg reduction in systolic BP decreased the risk of major cardiovascular events both in women and men (hazard ratio [95% CI], 0.92 [0.89-0.95] for women and 0.90 [0.88-0.93] for men; P for interaction, 1). There was no evidence for heterogeneity of relative treatment effects by sex for the major cardiovascular disease, its components, or across the different baseline BP categories (all P for interaction, ≥0.57). The effects in women and men were consistent across age categories and the types of antihypertensive medications (all P for interaction, ≥0.14). CONCLUSIONS: The effects of BP reduction were similar in women and men across all BP and age categories at randomization and with no evidence to suggest that drug classes had differing effects by sex. This study does not substantiate sex-based differences in BP-lowering treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Treatment about hypertension management are substantially influenced by blood pressure (BP) levels measured before and soon after starting BP lowering drugs. We aimed to assess the utility of short-term BP changes in individuals in terms of long-term treatment response.Methods: Post hoc analyses of 2 randomized trials with 4-to-6 weeks active run-in for all participants, followed by randomization to active BP lowering treatment (combination perindopril±indapamide) or placebo. We categorized individuals by degree of systolic BP (SBP) change during active run-in treatment and assessed associations with subsequent postrandomization placebo-corrected BP reduction, cardiovascular events, and tolerability. We included individuals with baseline BP ≥140/90 mm Hg from the PROGRESS trial (Perindopril Protection Against Recurrent Stroke Study; 4275 individuals with cerebrovascular disease) and ADVANCE trial (The Action in Diabetes and Vascular Disease: Preterax and Diamicron-MR Controlled Evaluation; 6610 individuals with diabetes).Results: During the active run-in period, the proportion of participants with initial SBP changes in 4 categories (SBP increase, 0-9.9 mm Hg decrease, 10-19.9 mm Hg decrease, and ≥20 mm Hg decrease) were 17%, 27%, 28%, and 28% in PROGRESS and 21%, 22%, 24%, and 33% in ADVANCE. Randomization to active therapy achieved similar placebo-corrected long-term BP reductions across the 4 initial SBP change groups in both trials (P-values for heterogeneity >0.1). There was no significant difference in achieving BP <140/90 mm Hg at follow-up, major cardiovascular events, nor treatment tolerability according to the SBP change during active run-in period (all P-values >0.1).Conclusions: An individual's apparent BP change immediately after commencing therapy has limited clinical utility. Therefore, more emphasis should be given to use of evidence-based regimens and measures over the long-term to ensure sustained BP control.Registration: URL: https://www.Clinicaltrials: gov; Unique identifier: NCT00145925. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

[Figure: see text]. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

[Figure: see text]. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The optimal blood pressure (BP) goal in patients with diabetes mellitus remains controversial. We examined whether benefits and risks of intensified antihypertensive therapy in diabetes mellitus are influenced by either baseline BP or cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. We studied 10 948 people with diabetes mellitus, at moderate-to-high risk, in the ADVANCE trial (Action in Diabetes and Vascular Disease: Preterax and Diamicron Modified Release Controlled Evaluation). Cox models were used to determine whether baseline BP category or CVD risk modified the outcomes of combination perindopril-indapamide treatment, compared with placebo. During 4.3 years of follow-up, treatment with perindopril-indapamide versus placebo reduced mortality and major vascular (macrovascular or microvascular) events. There was no evidence of differences in these effects, regardless of baseline systolic BP (evaluated down to <120 mm Hg; P for heterogeneity, 0.85), diastolic BP (evaluated down to <70 mm Hg; P=0.49), or whether 10-year CVD risk was ≥20% or <20% ( P=0.08). The effects of randomized treatment on discontinuation of treatment because of cough or hypotension/dizziness were also statistically consistent across subgroups defined by baseline BP and CVD risk (all P ≥0.08). Adults with diabetes mellitus appear to benefit from more intensive BP treatment even at levels of BP and CVD risk that some guidelines do not currently recommend for intervention. Clinical Trial Registration- URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00751972. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Discontinuation of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor is recommended if patients experience ≥30% acute increase in serum creatinine after starting this therapy. However, the long-term effects of its continuation or discontinuation on major clinical outcomes after increases in serum creatinine are unclear. In the ADVANCE trial (Action in Diabetes and Vascular Disease: Preterax and Diamicron Modified Release Controlled Evaluation), 11 140 diabetes mellitus patients were randomly assigned to perindopril-indapamide or placebo after a 6-week active run-in period. The current study included 11 066 participants with 2 serum creatinine measurements recorded before and during the active run-in period (3 weeks apart). Acute increase in creatinine was determined using these 2 measurements and classified into 4 groups: increases in serum creatinine of <10%, 10% to 19%, 20% to 29%, and ≥30%. The primary study outcome was the composite of major macrovascular events, new or worsening nephropathy, and all-cause mortality. An acute increase in serum creatinine was associated with an elevated risk of the primary outcome ( P for trend <0.001). The hazard ratios were 1.11 (95% CI, 0.97-1.28) for those with an increase of 10% to 19%, 1.34 (1.07-1.66) for 20% to 29%, and 1.44 (1.15-1.81) for ≥30%, compared with <10%. However, there was no evidence of heterogeneity in the benefit of randomized treatment effects on the outcome across subgroups defined by acute serum creatinine increase ( P for heterogeneity=0.94). Acute increases in serum creatinine after starting perindopril-indapamide were associated with greater risks of subsequent major clinical outcomes. However, the continuation of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor-based therapy reduced the long-term risk of major clinical outcomes, irrespective of acute increase in creatinine. Clinical Trial Registration- URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00145925. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Both sodium reduction and the Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension (DASH) diet lower blood pressure (BP); however, the patterns of their effects on BP over time are unknown. In the DASH-Sodium trial, adults with pre-/stage 1 hypertension, not using antihypertensive medications, were randomly assigned to either a typical American diet (control) or DASH. Within their assigned diet, participants randomly ate each of 3 sodium levels (50, 100, and 150 mmol/d, at 2100 kcal) over 4-week periods. BP was measured weekly for 12 weeks; 412 participants enrolled (57% women; 57% black; mean age, 48 years; mean systolic BP [SBP]/diastolic BP [DBP], 135/86 mm Hg). For those assigned control, there was no change in SBP/DBP between weeks 1 and 4 on the high-sodium diet (weekly change, -0.04/0.06 mm Hg/week) versus a progressive decline in BP on the low-sodium diet (-0.94/-0.70 mm Hg/week; P interactions between time and sodium <0.001 for SBP and DBP). For those assigned DASH, SBP/DBP changed -0.60/-0.16 mm Hg/week on the high- versus -0.42/-0.54 mm Hg/week on the low-sodium diet (P interactions between time and sodium=0.56 for SBP and 0.10 for DBP). When comparing DASH to control, DASH changed SBP/DBP by -4.36/-1.07 mm Hg after 1 week, which accounted for most of the effect observed, with no significant difference in weekly rates of change for either SBP (P interaction=0.97) or DBP (P interaction=0.70). In the context of a typical American diet, a low-sodium diet reduced BP without plateau, suggesting that the full effects of sodium reduction are not completely achieved by 4 weeks. In contrast, compared with control, DASH lowers BP within a week without further effect thereafter.Clinical Trial Registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00000608. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Visit-to-visit variability in systolic blood pressure (SBP) is a risk factor for cardiovascular events. However, whether it provides additional predictive information beyond traditional risk factors, including mean SBP, in the long term is unclear. The ADVANCE trial (Action in Diabetes and Vascular Disease: Preterax and Diamicron Modified Release Controlled Evaluation) was a randomized controlled trial in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus; ADVANCE-ON (ADVANCE-Observational) followed-up patients subsequently. In these analyses, 9114 patients without major macrovascular or renal events or death during the first 24 months were included. Data on SBP from 6 visits during the first 24 months after randomization were used to estimate visit-to-visit variability in several ways: the primary measure was the standard deviation. Events accrued during the following 7.6 years. The primary outcome was a composite of major macrovascular and renal events and all-cause mortality. Standard deviation of SBP was log-linearly associated with an increased risk of the primary outcome (P<0.001) after adjustment for mean SBP and other cardiovascular risk factors. The hazard ratio (HR; 95% confidence interval [CI]) in the highest, compared with the lowest, tenth of the standard deviation was 1.39 (1.15-1.69). Results were similar for major macrovascular events alone and all-cause mortality alone (both P<0.01). Addition of standard deviation of SBP significantly improved 8-year risk classification (continuous net reclassification improvement, 5.3%). Results were similar for other measures of visit-to-visit variability, except maximum SBP. Visit-to-visit variability in SBP is an independent predictor of vascular complications and death, which improves risk prediction beyond that provided by traditional risk factors, including mean SBP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is a critical need for blood pressure-lowering strategies that have greater efficacy and minimal side effects. Low-dose combinations hold promise in this regard, but there are few data on very-low-dose therapy. We, therefore, conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials with at least one quarter-dose and one placebo and standard-dose monotherapy arm. A search was conducted of Medline, Embase, Cochrane Registry, Food and Drug Administration, and European Medicinal Agency websites. Data on blood pressure and adverse events were pooled using a fixed-effect model, and bias was assessed using Cochrane risk of bias. The review included 42 trials involving 20 284 participants. Thirty-six comparisons evaluated quarter-dose with placebo and indicated a blood pressure reduction of -4.7/-2.4 mm Hg (P<0.001). Six comparisons were of dual quarter-dose therapy versus placebo, observing a -6.7/ -4.4 mm Hg (P<0.001) blood pressure reduction. There were no trials of triple quarter-dose combination versus placebo, but one quadruple quarter-dose study observed a blood pressure reduction of -22.4/-13.1 mm Hg versus placebo (P<0.001). Compared with standard-dose monotherapy, the blood pressure differences achieved by single (37 comparisons), dual (7 comparisons), and quadruple (1 trial) quarter-dose combinations were +3.7/+2.6 (P<0.001), +1.3/-0.3 (NS), and -13.1/-7.9 (P<0.001) mm Hg, respectively. In terms of adverse events, single and dual quarter-dose therapy was not significantly different from placebo and had significantly fewer adverse events compared with standard-dose monotherapy. Quarter-dose combinations could provide improvements in efficacy and tolerability of blood pressure-lowering therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The provision of equitable acute coronary syndrome (ACS) care in Australia and New Zealand requires an understanding of the sources of variation in the provision of this care. Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the variation in care and outcomes between ACS patients with limited English proficiency (LEP) and English proficiency (EP) admitted to Australian and NZ hospitals. Methods: Data were collected from 4387 suspected/confirmed ACS patients from 286 hospitals between May 14 and 27, 2012, who were followed for 18 months. We compared hospital care and outcomes according to the proficiency of English using logistic regressions. Results: The 294 LEP patients were older (70.9 vs 66.3 years; P < .001) and had higher prevalence of hypertension (71.1% vs 62.8%; P = .004), diabetes (40.5% vs 24.3%; P < .001), and renal impairment (16.3% vs 11.1%; P = .007) compared with the 4093 EP patients. Once in hospital, there was no difference in receipt of percutaneous coronary intervention (57.0% vs 55.4%; P = .78) or coronary artery bypass graft surgery (10.5% vs 11.5%; P = .98). After adjustment for medical history, there were no significant differences (P > .05) between the 2 groups in the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events and/or all-cause death during the index admission and fromindex admission to 18months. Conclusions: These results suggest that LEP patients admitted to Australian or New Zealand hospitals with suspected ACS may not experience inequity in hospital care and outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Understanding how statins, ezetimibe, and PCSK9i (proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 serine protease inhibitors) are prescribed after a myocardial infarction (MI) or elective coronary revascularization may improve lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) intensification and reduce recurrent atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease events. We described the use and intensification of LLT among US veterans who had a MI or elective coronary revascularization between July 24, 2015, and December 9, 2019, within 12 months of hospital discharge. Methods: LLT intensification was defined as increasing statin dose, or initiating a statin, ezetimibe, or a PCSK9i, overall and among those with an LDL-C (low-density lipoprotein cholesterol) ≥ 70 or 100 mg/dL. Poisson regression was used to determine patient characteristics associated with a greater likelihood of LLT intensification following hospitalization for MI or elective coronary revascularization. Results: Among 81 372 index events (mean age, 69.0 years, 2.3% female, mean LDL-C 89.6 mg/dL, 33.8% with LDL-C <70 mg/dL), 39.7% were not taking any LLT, and 22.0%, 37.2%, and 0.6% were taking a low-moderate intensity statin, a high-intensity statin, and ezetimibe, respectively, before MI/coronary revascularization during the study period. Within 14 days, 3 months, and 12 months posthospitalization, 33.3%, 41.9%, and 47.3%, respectively, of veterans received LLT intensification. LLT intensification was most common among veterans taking no LLT (82.5%, n=26 637) before MI/coronary revascularization. Higher baseline LDL-C, having a lipid test, and attending a cardiology visit were each associated with a greater likelihood of LLT intensification, while age ≥ 75 versus <65 years was associated with a lower likelihood of LLT intensification within 12 months posthospitalization. Conclusions: Less than half of veterans received LLT intensification in the year after MI or coronary revascularization suggesting a missed opportunity to reduce atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Relative risks (RRs) for cardiovascular disease (CVD) by smoking rate exhibit a concave pattern, with RRs in low rate smokers exceeding a linear extrapolation from higher rate smokers. However, cigarettes/day does not by itself fully characterize smoking-related risks. A reexamination of the concave pattern using a comprehensive representation of smoking may enhance insights.Methods: Data were from the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Study, a prospective cohort enrolled in four areas of the US in 1987-1989. Follow-up was through 2008. Analyses included 14,233 participants, 245,915 person-years, and 3,411 CVD events.Results: The concave RRs with cigarettes/day were consistent with cigarettes/day modifying a linear RR association of pack-years with CVD (i.e., strength of the pack-years association depended on cigarettes/day, indicating that the manner of pack-years accrual impacted risk). Smoking fewer cigarettes/day for longer duration was more deleterious than smoking more cigarettes/day for shorter duration (P < 0.01). For 50 pack-years (365,000 cigarettes), estimated RRs of CVD were 2.1 for accrual at 20 cigarettes/day and 1.6 for accrual at 50 cigarettes/day. Years since smoking cessation did not alter the diminishing strength of association with increasing cigarettes/day. Analyses that accounted for competing risks did not affect findings.Conclusion: Pack-years remained the primary determinant of smoking-related CVD risk; however, accrual influenced RRs. For equal pack-years, smoking fewer cigarettes/day for longer duration was more deleterious than smoking more cigarettes/day for shorter duration. This observation provides clues to better understanding the biological mechanisms, and reinforces the importance of cessation rather than smoking less to reduce CVD risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]