Comparison of Frequency of Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular and Safety Events With Systolic Blood Pressure <120mm Hg Versus 135-139mm Hg in a Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial Primary Prevention Subgroup

2022 Guidelines of the Taiwan Society of Cardiology and the Taiwan Hypertension Society for the Management of Hypertension

Hypertension is the most important modifiable cause of cardiovascular (CV) disease and all-cause mortality worldwide. Despite the positive correlations between blood pressure (BP) levels and later CV events since BP levels as low as 100/60 mmHg have been reported in numerous epidemiological studies, the diagnostic criteria of hypertension and BP thresholds and targets of antihypertensive therapy have largely remained at the level of 140/90 mmHg in the past 30 years. The publication of both the SPRINT and STEP trials (comprising > 8,500 Caucasian/African and Chinese participants, respectively) provided evidence to shake this 140/90 mmHg dogma. Another dogma regarding hypertension management is the dependence on office (or clinic) BP measurements. Although standardized office BP measurements have been widely recommended and adopted in large-scale CV outcome trials, the practice of office BP measurements has never been ideal in real-world practice. Home BP monitoring (HBPM) is easy to perform, more likely to be free of environmental and/or emotional stress, feasible to document long-term BP variations, of good reproducibility and reliability, and more correlated with hypertension-mediated organ damage (HMOD) and CV events, compared to routine office BP measurements. In the 2022 Taiwan Hypertension Guidelines of the Taiwan Society of Cardiology (TSOC) and the Taiwan Hypertension Society (THS), we break these two dogmas by recommending the definition of hypertension as ≥ 130/80 mmHg and a universal BP target of < 130/80 mmHg, based on standardized HBPM obtained according to the 722 protocol. The 722 protocol refers to duplicate BP readings taken per occasion ("2"), twice daily ("2"), over seven consecutive days ("7"). To facilitate implementation of the guidelines, a series of flowcharts encompassing assessment, adjustment, and HBPM-guided hypertension management are provided. Other key messages include that: 1) lifestyle modification, summarized as the mnemonic S-ABCDE, should be applied to people with elevated BP and hypertensive patients to reduce life-time BP burden; 2) all 5 major antihypertensive drugs (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors [A], angiotensin receptor blockers [A], β-blockers [B], calcium-channel blockers [C], and thiazide diuretics [D]) are recommended as first-line antihypertensive drugs; 3) initial combination therapy, preferably in a single-pill combination, is recommended for patients with BP ≥ 20/10 mmHg above targets; 4) a target hierarchy (HBPM-HMOD- ambulatory BP monitoring [ABPM]) should be considered to optimize hypertension management, which indicates reaching the HBPM target first and then keeping HMOD stable or regressed, otherwise ABPM can be arranged to guide treatment adjustment; and 5) renal denervation can be considered as an alternative BP-lowering strategy after careful clinical and imaging evaluation.

Risk-Based Intensive Blood Pressure Lowering and Prevention of Heart Failure: A SPRINT Post Hoc Analysis

[Figure: see text].

Serious Adverse Events Cluster in Participants Experiencing the Primary Composite Cardiovascular Endpoint: A Post Hoc Analysis of the SPRINT Trial

BACKGROUND

Intensively treated participants in the SPRINT study experienced fewer primary cardiovascular composite study endpoints (CVD events) and lower mortality, although 38% of participants experienced a serious adverse event (SAE). The relationship of SAEs with CVD events is unknown.

METHODS

CVD events were defined as either myocardial infarction, acute coronary syndrome, decompensated heart failure, stroke, or death from cardiovascular causes. Cox models were utilized to understand the occurrence of SAEs with CVD events according to baseline atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk.

RESULTS

SAEs occurred in 96% of those experiencing a CVD event but only in 34% (P < 0.001) of those not experiencing a CVD event. Occurrence of SAEs monotonically increased across the range of baseline ASCVD risk being approximately twice as great in the highest compared with the lowest risk category. SAE occurrence was strongly associated with ASCVD risk but was similar within risk groups across treatment arms. In adjusted Cox models, experiencing a CVD event was the strongest predictor of SAEs in all risk groups. By the end of year 1, the hazard ratios for the low, middle, and high ASCVD risk tertiles, and baseline clinical CVD group were 2.56 (95% CI = 1.39-4.71); 2.52 (1.63-3.89); 3.61 (2.79-4.68); 1.86 (1.37-2.54), respectively-a trend observed in subsequent years until study end. Intensive treatment independently predicted SAEs only in the second ASVCD risk tertile.

CONCLUSIONS

The occurrence of SAEs is multifactorial and mostly related to prerandomization patient characteristics, most prominently ASCVD risk, which, in turn, relates to in-study CVD events.

Comparison of Frequency of Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Events Among Primary and Secondary Prevention Subgroups of the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial

The Pooled Cohort Equation (PCE) predicts 10-year risk of first-time atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) events and was incorporated in analyses of a primary and secondary prevention population in the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT). Whether PCE enhances risk prediction among secondary prevention populations is unknown. We sought to compare ASCVD events by level of PCE-predicted risk among primary and secondary prevention SPRINT populations. SPRINT randomized adults with hypertension and ≥1 CVD risk factor or previous CVD events to systolic blood pressure control targeting <120 mm Hg or 135 to 139 mm Hg. We calculated the hazard ratio (HR) of ASCVD events among secondary versus primary (reference) prevention subgroups overall and by predicted 10-year ASCVD risk categories (<10%, 10% to <20%, 20% to <30%, and ≥30%) and within risk subgroups, comparing to the lowest risk category. Among 8,151 participants, 16% with previous CVD, mean age was 66 years and 35% were women. The HR for ASCVD events overall was 2.51 (1.96, 3.20). HR was 2.97 (1.47, 5.99) among <10% 10-year risk and 2.23 (1.38, 3.59) among ≥30% risk. Within subgroups comparing ≥30% to <10% risk (reference) categories, the HR was 2.85 (1.76, 4.63) for primary and 2.14 (1.07, 4.30) for the secondary prevention. In conclusion, history of previous events was a potent risk factor for subsequent ASCVD events. The PCE does not enhance risk prediction among secondary prevention populations and may differentially underestimate risk in secondary prevention populations with lowest predicted risk.