Generalizability of SPRINT Results to the U.S. Adult Population

Impact of expected blood pressure reduction on patient preferences for pharmaceutical and renal denervation treatment

BACKGROUND

Effective patient-centered care requires an adequate understanding of patient preferences for different therapeutic options. We modelled patient preference for blood pressure (BP) management by pharmaceutical or interventional treatments such as renal denervation in patients with different profiles of uncontrolled hypertension.

METHODS

Modeling was based on the findings from a previously conducted quantitative discrete choice experiment (DCE). The likelihood of selecting either an interventional treatment option or additional antihypertensive medication option was calculated for three patient profiles that represent the range of patients with hypertension commonly encountered in clinical practice: treatment-naive, patients with uncontrolled BP while on one to three antihypertensive medications, and patients with drug-resistant hypertension. Variables in the preference model were treatment attributes from the DCE study: expected reduction in office SBP with each treatment, duration of treatment effect, risk of reversible drug side effects from drugs, and risk of temporary pain and/or bruising or vascular injury from interventions. Values of the variables were derived from published clinical studies or expert opinion.

RESULTS

The model predicted that the likelihood of choosing renal denervation over initiating pharmacotherapy was 17.2% for previously untreated patients, 23.7% for patients with moderate hypertension currently on pharmacotherapy, and 41.8% for patients with drug-resistant hypertension. The dominant variable driving preference in these models was the expected BP reduction. Patient preferences for intervention are greater when drug nonadherence or increased SBP reduction at 3 vs. 1 year are included in the model. Baseline BP, drug side effects, or risks of the procedure had little influence on decisions.

CONCLUSION

Modeling using patient preference weights predicts that a substantial minority of patients favor an interventional treatment such as renal denervation over initiation or escalation of medications. Awareness of a patient's interest in device-based versus pharmaceutical strategies should inform the shared decision-making process for hypertension treatment.

Integrating decision modeling and machine learning to inform treatment stratification

There is increasing interest in moving away from "one size fits all (OSFA)" approaches toward stratifying treatment decisions. Understanding how expected effectiveness and cost-effectiveness varies with patient covariates is a key aspect of stratified decision making. Recently proposed machine learning (ML) methods can learn heterogeneity in outcomes without pre-specifying subgroups or functional forms, enabling the construction of decision rules ('policies') that map individual covariates into a treatment decision. However, these methods do not yet integrate ML estimates into a decision modeling framework in order to reflect long-term policy-relevant outcomes and synthesize information from multiple sources. In this paper, we propose a method to integrate ML and decision modeling, when individual patient data is available to estimate treatment-specific survival time. We also propose a novel implementation of policy tree algorithms to define subgroups using decision model output. We demonstrate these methods using the SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial), comparing outcomes for "standard" and "intensive" blood pressure targets. We find that including ML into a decision model can impact the estimate of incremental net health benefit (INHB) for OSFA policies. We also find evidence that stratifying treatment using subgroups defined by a tree-based algorithm can increase the estimates of the INHB.

Generalizability of Randomized Clinical Trial Outcomes for Diabetes Control Resulting From Bariatric Surgery

Objective

To assess the external validity of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of bariatric surgical treatment on diabetes control.

Background

Multisite RCTs provide the strongest evidence supporting clinical treatments and have the greatest internal validity. However, characteristics of trial participants may not be representative of patients receiving treatment in the real world. There is a need to assess how the results of RCTs generalize to all contemporary patient populations undergoing treatments.

Methods

All patients undergoing sleeve gastrectomy at University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) between January 8, 2018 and May 19, 2023 had their baseline characteristics, weight change, and diabetes control compared with those enrolled in the surgical treatment and medications potentially eradicate diabetes efficiently (STAMPEDE) and diabetes surgery study (DSS) RCTs of bariatric surgery's effect on diabetes control. Weight loss and diabetes control were compared between UCLA patients who did and did not fit the entry criteria for these RCTs.

Results

Only 65 (17%) of 387 patients with diabetes fulfilled the eligibility criteria for STAMPEDE, and 29 (7.5%) fulfilled the criteria for DSS due to being older, having higher body mass index, and lower HbA1c. UCLA patients experienced slightly less weight loss than patients in the RCTs but had similar diabetes control. The 313 (81%) patients not eligible for study entry into either RCT had similar long-term diabetes control as those who were eligible for the RCTs.

Conclusions

Even though only a very small proportion of patients undergoing bariatric surgery met the eligibility criteria for the 2 major RCTs, most patients in this contemporary cohort had similar outcomes. Diabetes outcomes from STAMPEDE and DSS generalize to most patients undergoing bariatric surgery for diabetes control.

Disability level's impact on blood pressure-mortality association in older long-term care adults: evidence from a large Chinese cohort study

BACKGROUND

Evidence of the optimal blood pressure (BP) target for older adults with disability in long-term care is limited. We aim to analyze the associations of BP with mortality in older adults in long-term care setting with different levels of disability.

METHODS

This prospective cohort study was based on the government-led long-term care programme in Chengdu, China, including 41,004 consecutive disabled adults aged ≥ 60 years. BP was measured during the baseline survey by trained medical personnel using electronic sphygmomanometers. Disability profile was assessed using the Barthel index. The association between blood pressure and mortality was analyzed with doubly robust estimation, which combined exposure model by inverse probability weighting and outcome model fitted with Cox regression. The non-linearity was examined by restricted cubic spline. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality, and the secondary endpoints were cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular mortality.

RESULTS

The associations between systolic blood pressure (SBP) and all-cause mortality were close to a U-shaped curve in mild-moderate disability group (Barthel index ≥ 40), and a reversed J-shaped in severe disability group (Barthel index < 40). In mild-moderate disability group, SBP < 135 mmHg was associated with elevated all-cause mortality risks (HR 1.21, 95% CI, 1.10-1.33), compared to SBP between 135 and 150 mmHg. In severe disability group, SBP < 150 mmHg increased all-cause mortality risks (HR 1.21, 95% CI, 1.16-1.27), compared to SBP between 150 and 170 mmHg. The associations were robust in subgroup analyses in terms of age, gender, cardiovascular comorbidity and antihypertensive treatment. Diastolic blood pressure (DBP) < 67 mmHg (HR 1.29, 95% CI, 1.18-1.42) in mild-moderate disability group and < 79 mmHg (HR 1.15, 95% CI, 1.11-1.20) in severe disability group both demonstrated an increased all-cause mortality risk.

CONCLUSION

The optimal SBP range was found to be higher in older individuals in long-term care with severe disability (150-170mmHg) compared to those with mild to moderate disability (135-150mmHg). This study provides new evidence that antihypertensive treatment should be administered cautiously in severe disability group in long-term care setting. Additionally, assessment of disability using the Barthel index can serve as a valuable tool in customizing the optimal BP management strategy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (Registration Number: ChiCTR2100049973).

Representation of Real-World Adults With Chronic Kidney Disease in Clinical Trials Supporting Blood Pressure Treatment Targets

BACKGROUND

Little is known about how well trial participants with chronic kidney disease (CKD) represent real-world adults with CKD. We assessed the population representativeness of clinical trials supporting the 2021 Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes blood pressure (BP) guidelines in real-world adults with CKD.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Using a cross-sectional analysis, we identified patients with CKD who met the guideline definition of hypertension based on use of antihypertensive medications or sustained systolic BP ≥120 mm Hg in 2019 in the Veterans Affairs and Kaiser Permanente of Southern California. We applied the eligibility criteria from 3 BP target trials, SPRINT (Systolic Pressure Intervention Trial), ACCORD (Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes), and AASK (African American Study of Kidney Disease), to estimate the proportion of adults with a systolic BP above the guideline-recommended target and the proportion who met eligibility criteria for ≥1 trial. We identified 503 480 adults in the Veterans Affairs and 73 412 adults in Kaiser Permanente of Southern California with CKD and hypertension in 2019. We estimated 79.7% in the Veterans Affairs and 87.3% in the Kaiser Permanente of Southern California populations had a systolic BP ≥120 mm Hg; only 23.8% [23.7%-24.0%] in the Veterans Affairs and 20.8% [20.5%-21.1%] in Kaiser Permanente of Southern California were trial-eligible. Among trial-ineligible patients, >50% met >1 exclusion criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

Major BP target trials were representative of fewer than 1 in 4 real-world adults with CKD and hypertension. A large proportion of adults who are at risk for cardiovascular morbidity from hypertension and susceptible to adverse treatment effects lack relevant treatment information.

2024 Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics: A Report of US and Global Data From the American Heart Association

BACKGROUND

The American Heart Association (AHA), in conjunction with the National Institutes of Health, annually reports the most up-to-date statistics related to heart disease, stroke, and cardiovascular risk factors, including core health behaviors (smoking, physical activity, nutrition, sleep, and obesity) and health factors (cholesterol, blood pressure, glucose control, and metabolic syndrome) that contribute to cardiovascular health. The AHA Heart Disease and Stroke Statistical Update presents the latest data on a range of major clinical heart and circulatory disease conditions (including stroke, brain health, complications of pregnancy, kidney disease, congenital heart disease, rhythm disorders, sudden cardiac arrest, subclinical atherosclerosis, coronary heart disease, cardiomyopathy, heart failure, valvular disease, venous thromboembolism, and peripheral artery disease) and the associated outcomes (including quality of care, procedures, and economic costs).

METHODS

The AHA, through its Epidemiology and Prevention Statistics Committee, continuously monitors and evaluates sources of data on heart disease and stroke in the United States and globally to provide the most current information available in the annual Statistical Update with review of published literature through the year before writing. The 2024 AHA Statistical Update is the product of a full year's worth of effort in 2023 by dedicated volunteer clinicians and scientists, committed government professionals, and AHA staff members. The AHA strives to further understand and help heal health problems inflicted by structural racism, a public health crisis that can significantly damage physical and mental health and perpetuate disparities in access to health care, education, income, housing, and several other factors vital to healthy lives. This year's edition includes additional global data, as well as data on the monitoring and benefits of cardiovascular health in the population, with an enhanced focus on health equity across several key domains.

RESULTS

Each of the chapters in the Statistical Update focuses on a different topic related to heart disease and stroke statistics.

CONCLUSIONS

The Statistical Update represents a critical resource for the lay public, policymakers, media professionals, clinicians, health care administrators, researchers, health advocates, and others seeking the best available data on these factors and conditions.

Generalisability and potential deaths averted from intensive blood pressure treatment among the elderly population in the US and China: A nationally representative cross-sectional study

Background

The Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) from the US and the Strategy of Blood Pressure Intervention in the Elderly Hypertensive Patients (STEP) trial from China have consistently demonstrated clinical benefits from intensive blood pressure (BP) treatment among elderly adults with hypertension. However, we have little data on the generalisability and potential implications of a scale-up of intensive BP treatment to all eligible elderly in the US and China.

Methods

We used two nationally representative data sets from China (Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study (CHALRS), 2011-2012) and the US (National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), 2007-2012) and linked them with CHARLS follow-up data (2013) and the National Death Index (1999-2015), respectively. We estimated the percentage, number, and characteristics of elderly (≥60 years old) meeting the STEP and SPRINT eligibility criteria, and deaths that would be prevented or postponed with the implementation of intensive BP treatment.

Results

Among the Chinese adults aged 60 years and over, 38.89% (95% confidence interval (CI) = 36.97-40.84) or 85.39 (95% CI = 81.14-89.64) million subjects met the STEP criteria, and 40.90 million (47.90%) adults were not taking antihypertensive medications. In the US, 23.77% (95% CI = 22.32%-25.28) or 12.46 (95% CI = 11.68-13.24) million elderly were eligible for the SPRINT, and 5.78 million (46.36%) were untreated. Overall, 0.07 (95% CI = 0.06-0.08) million deaths in the US and 0.31 (95% CI = 0.25-0.39) in China would be averted annually if intensive BP treatment was implemented, while 120 000 and 680 000 of hypotension cases would be identified yearly inthe US and China, respectively.

Conclusions

A substantial percentage of Chinese and the US elderly meet the eligibility criteria for STEP and SPRINT. If intensive BP treatment was adopted, 70 000 and 310 000 deaths would be prevented or postponed yearly in the US and China, respectively.

Use of Antihypertensives, Blood Pressure, and Estimated Risk of Dementia in Late Life: An Individual Participant Data Meta-Analysis

Importance

The utility of antihypertensives and ideal blood pressure (BP) for dementia prevention in late life remains unclear and highly contested.

Objectives

To assess the associations of hypertension history, antihypertensive use, and baseline measured BP in late life (age >60 years) with dementia and the moderating factors of age, sex, and racial group.

Data Source and Study Selection

Longitudinal, population-based studies of aging participating in the Cohort Studies of Memory in an International Consortium (COSMIC) group were included. Participants were individuals without dementia at baseline aged 60 to 110 years and were based in 15 different countries (US, Brazil, Australia, China, Korea, Singapore, Central African Republic, Republic of Congo, Nigeria, Germany, Spain, Italy, France, Sweden, and Greece).

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Participants were grouped in 3 categories based on previous diagnosis of hypertension and baseline antihypertensive use: healthy controls, treated hypertension, and untreated hypertension. Baseline systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) were treated as continuous variables. Reporting followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses of Individual Participant Data reporting guidelines.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The key outcome was all-cause dementia. Mixed-effects Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess the associations between the exposures and the key outcome variable. The association between dementia and baseline BP was modeled using nonlinear natural splines. The main analysis was a partially adjusted Cox proportional hazards model controlling for age, age squared, sex, education, racial group, and a random effect for study. Sensitivity analyses included a fully adjusted analysis, a restricted analysis of those individuals with more than 5 years of follow-up data, and models examining the moderating factors of age, sex, and racial group.

Results

The analysis included 17 studies with 34 519 community dwelling older adults (20 160 [58.4%] female) with a mean (SD) age of 72.5 (7.5) years and a mean (SD) follow-up of 4.3 (4.3) years. In the main, partially adjusted analysis including 14 studies, individuals with untreated hypertension had a 42% increased risk of dementia compared with healthy controls (hazard ratio [HR], 1.42; 95% CI 1.15-1.76; P = .001) and 26% increased risk compared with individuals with treated hypertension (HR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.03-1.53; P = .02). Individuals with treated hypertension had no significant increased dementia risk compared with healthy controls (HR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.99-1.28; P = .07). The association of antihypertensive use or hypertension status with dementia did not vary with baseline BP. There was no significant association of baseline SBP or DBP with dementia risk in any of the analyses. There were no significant interactions with age, sex, or racial group for any of the analyses.

Conclusions and Relevance

This individual patient data meta-analysis of longitudinal cohort studies found that antihypertensive use was associated with decreased dementia risk compared with individuals with untreated hypertension through all ages in late life. Individuals with treated hypertension had no increased risk of dementia compared with healthy controls.

Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics-2023 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association

BACKGROUND

The American Heart Association, in conjunction with the National Institutes of Health, annually reports the most up-to-date statistics related to heart disease, stroke, and cardiovascular risk factors, including core health behaviors (smoking, physical activity, diet, and weight) and health factors (cholesterol, blood pressure, and glucose control) that contribute to cardiovascular health. The Statistical Update presents the latest data on a range of major clinical heart and circulatory disease conditions (including stroke, congenital heart disease, rhythm disorders, subclinical atherosclerosis, coronary heart disease, heart failure, valvular disease, venous disease, and peripheral artery disease) and the associated outcomes (including quality of care, procedures, and economic costs).

METHODS

The American Heart Association, through its Epidemiology and Prevention Statistics Committee, continuously monitors and evaluates sources of data on heart disease and stroke in the United States to provide the most current information available in the annual Statistical Update with review of published literature through the year before writing. The 2023 Statistical Update is the product of a full year's worth of effort in 2022 by dedicated volunteer clinicians and scientists, committed government professionals, and American Heart Association staff members. The American Heart Association strives to further understand and help heal health problems inflicted by structural racism, a public health crisis that can significantly damage physical and mental health and perpetuate disparities in access to health care, education, income, housing, and several other factors vital to healthy lives. This year's edition includes additional COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) publications, as well as data on the monitoring and benefits of cardiovascular health in the population, with an enhanced focus on health equity across several key domains.

RESULTS

Each of the chapters in the Statistical Update focuses on a different topic related to heart disease and stroke statistics.

CONCLUSIONS

The Statistical Update represents a critical resource for the lay public, policymakers, media professionals, clinicians, health care administrators, researchers, health advocates, and others seeking the best available data on these factors and conditions.

Patient Preferences for Pharmaceutical and Device-Based Treatments for Uncontrolled Hypertension: Discrete Choice Experiment

BACKGROUND

Discrete choice experiment is a survey method used to understand how individuals make decisions and to quantify the relative importance of features. Using discrete choice experiment methods, we quantified patient benefit-risk preferences for hypertension treatments, including pharmaceutical and interventional treatments, like renal denervation.

METHODS

Respondents from the United States with physician-confirmed uncontrolled hypertension selected between treatments involving a procedure or pills, using a structured survey. Treatment features included interventional, noninterventional, or no hypertension treatment; number of daily blood pressure (BP) pills; expected reduction in office systolic BP; duration of effect; and risks of drug side effects, access site pain, or vascular injury. The results of a random-parameters logit model were used to estimate the importance of each treatment attribute.

RESULTS

Among 400 patients completing the survey between 2020 and 2021, demographics included: 52% women, mean age 59.2±13.0 years, systolic BP 155.1±12.3 mm Hg, and 1.8±0.9 prescribed antihypertensive medications. Reduction in office systolic BP was the most important treatment attribute. The remaining attributes, in decreasing order, were duration of effect, whether treatment was interventional, number of daily pills, risk of vascular injury, and risk of drug side effects. Risk of access site pain did not influence choice. In general, respondents preferred noninterventional over interventional treatments, yet only a 2.3 mm Hg reduction in office systolic BP was required to offset this preference. Small reductions in office systolic BP would offset risks of vascular injury or drug side effects. At least a 20% risk of vascular injury or drug side effects would be tolerated in exchange for improved BP.

CONCLUSIONS

Reduction in systolic BP was identified as the most important driver of patient treatment preference, while treatment-related risks had less influence. The results indicate that respondents would accept interventional treatments in exchange for modest reductions in systolic BP compared with those observed in renal denervation trials.

A clinical algorithm to determine target blood pressure in the elderly: evidence and limitations from a clinical perspective

As the elderly population is growing rapidly, management of hypertension in South Korea faces major challenges because the proportion of elderly hypertension patients is also increasing. The characteristics of this population are also much more complex than younger patients. Elderly hypertension is characterized by wide variations in (1) fitness or biological age, (2) white-coat effect, (3) poor functional status or frailty, (4) dependency in activities of daily living or institutionalization, (5) orthostatic hypotension, and (6) multiple comorbidities. All of these should be considered when choosing optimal target blood pressure in individual patients. Recent randomized clinical trials have shown that the benefits of intensive blood pressure control for elderly patients is greater than previously thought. For generalization of these results and implementation of the guidelines based on these studies, defining the clinician's role for individualization is critically important. For individualized decisions for target blood pressure (BP) in the elderly with hypertension, four components should first be checked. These consist of (1) the minimum requirement of functional status and capability of activities of daily living, (2) lack of harmful evidence by the target BP, (3) absence of white-coat hypertension, and (4) standing systolic BP ≥ 110 mmHg without orthostatic symptoms. Risk of decreased organ perfusion by arterial stenosis should be screened before starting intensive BP control. When the target BP differs among comorbidities, the lowest target BP should be given preference. After starting intensive BP lowering therapy, tolerability should be monitored, and the titration should be based on the mean level of blood pressure by office supplemented by out-of-office BPs. Applications of the clinical algorithms will be useful to achieve more standardized and simplified applications of target BP in the elderly.

Cost-Effectiveness of Recommendations From the Surgeon General's Call-to-Action to Control Hypertension

In response to high prevalence of hypertension and suboptimal rates of blood pressure (BP) control in the United States, the Surgeon General released a Call-to-Action to Control Hypertension (Call-to-Action) in the fall of 2020 to address the negative consequences of uncontrolled BP. In addition to morbidity and mortality associated with hypertension, hypertension has an annual cost to the US healthcare system of $71 billion. The Call-to-Action makes recommendations for improving BP control, and the purpose of this review was to summarize the literature on the cost-effectiveness of these strategies. We identified a number of studies that demonstrate the cost saving or cost-effectiveness of recommendations in the Call-to-Action including strategies to promote access to and availability of physical activity opportunities and healthy food options within communities, advance the use of standardized treatment approaches and guideline-recommended care, to promote the use of healthcare teams to manage hypertension, and to empower and equip patients to use self-measured BP monitoring and medication adherence strategies. While the current review identified numerous cost-effective methods to achieve the Surgeon General's recommendations for improving BP control, future work should determine the cost-effectiveness of the 2017 American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association Hypertension guidelines, interventions to lower therapeutic inertia, and optimal team-based care strategies, among other areas of research. Economic evaluation studies should also be prioritized to generate more comprehensive data on how to provide efficient and high value care to improve BP control.

Association of Intensive Blood Pressure Control and Living Arrangement on Cardiovascular Outcomes by Race: Post Hoc Analysis of SPRINT Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Living alone, a key proxy of social isolation, is a risk factor for cardiovascular disease. In addition, Black race is associated with less optimal blood pressure (BP) control than in other racial or ethnic groups. However, it is not clear whether living arrangement status modifies the beneficial effects of intensive BP control on reduction in cardiovascular events among Black individuals.

OBJECTIVE

To examine whether the association of intensive BP control with cardiovascular events differs by living arrangement among Black individuals and non-Black individuals (eg, individuals who identified as Alaskan Native, American Indian, Asian, Native Hawaiian, Pacific Islander, White, or other) in the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT).

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This secondary analysis incorporated data from SPRINT, a multicenter study of individuals with increased risk for cardiovascular disease and free of diabetes, enrolled at 102 clinical sites in the United States between November 2010 and March 2013. Race and living arrangement (ie, living alone or living with others) were self-reported. Data were collected between November 2010 and March 2013 and analyzed from January 2021 to October 2021.

EXPOSURES

The SPRINT participants were randomized to a systolic BP target of either less than 120 mm Hg (intensive treatment group) or less than 140 mm Hg (standard treatment group). Antihypertensive medications were adjusted to achieve the targets in each group.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Cox proportional hazards model was used to investigate the association of intensive treatment with the incident composite cardiovascular outcome (by August 20, 2015) according to living arrangement among Black individuals and other individuals. Transportability formula was applied to generalize the SPRINT findings to hypothetical external populations by varying the proportion of Black race and living arrangement status.

RESULTS

Among the 9342 total participants, the mean (SD) age was 67.9 (9.4) years; 2793 participants [30%] were Black, 2714 [29%] lived alone, and 3320 participants (35.5%) were female. Over a median (IQR) follow-up of 3.22 (2.74-3.76) years, the primary composite cardiovascular outcome was observed in 67 of 1001 Black individuals living alone (6.7%), 76 of 1792 Black individuals living with others (4.2%), 108 of 1713 non-Black individuals living alone (6.3%), and 311 of 4836 non-Black individuals living with others (6.4%). The intensive treatment group showed a significantly lower rate of the composite cardiovascular outcome than the standard treatment group among Black individuals living with others (hazard ratio [HR], 0.53 [95% CI, 0.33-0.85]) but not among those living alone (HR, 1.07 [95% CI, 0.66-1.73]; P for interaction = .04). The association was observed among individuals who were not Black regardless of living arrangement status. Using transportability, we found a smaller or null association between intensive control and cardiovascular outcomes among hypothetical populations of 60% Black individuals or more and 60% or more of individuals living alone.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Intensive BP control was associated with a lower rate of cardiovascular events among Black individuals living with others and individuals who were not Black but not among Black individuals living alone.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01206062.

Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics-2022 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association

BACKGROUND

The American Heart Association, in conjunction with the National Institutes of Health, annually reports the most up-to-date statistics related to heart disease, stroke, and cardiovascular risk factors, including core health behaviors (smoking, physical activity, diet, and weight) and health factors (cholesterol, blood pressure, and glucose control) that contribute to cardiovascular health. The Statistical Update presents the latest data on a range of major clinical heart and circulatory disease conditions (including stroke, congenital heart disease, rhythm disorders, subclinical atherosclerosis, coronary heart disease, heart failure, valvular disease, venous disease, and peripheral artery disease) and the associated outcomes (including quality of care, procedures, and economic costs).

METHODS

The American Heart Association, through its Statistics Committee, continuously monitors and evaluates sources of data on heart disease and stroke in the United States to provide the most current information available in the annual Statistical Update. The 2022 Statistical Update is the product of a full year's worth of effort by dedicated volunteer clinicians and scientists, committed government professionals, and American Heart Association staff members. This year's edition includes data on the monitoring and benefits of cardiovascular health in the population and an enhanced focus on social determinants of health, adverse pregnancy outcomes, vascular contributions to brain health, and the global burden of cardiovascular disease and healthy life expectancy.

RESULTS

Each of the chapters in the Statistical Update focuses on a different topic related to heart disease and stroke statistics.

CONCLUSIONS

The Statistical Update represents a critical resource for the lay public, policymakers, media professionals, clinicians, health care administrators, researchers, health advocates, and others seeking the best available data on these factors and conditions.

Association of Systolic Blood Pressure With Dementia Risk and the Role of Age, U-Shaped Associations, and Mortality

IMPORTANCE

The optimal systolic blood pressure (SBP) to minimize the risk of dementia in older age is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether the association between SBP and dementia risk is U-shaped and whether age and comorbidity play a role in this association.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cohort study used an individual participant data approach to analyze 7 prospective, observational, population-based cohort studies that were designed to evaluate incident dementia in older adults. These studies started between 1987 and 2006 in Europe and the US. Participants had no dementia diagnosis and had SBP and/or diastolic blood pressure (BP) data at baseline and incident dementia status during follow-up. Data analysis was conducted from November 7, 2019, to October 3, 2021.

EXPOSURES

Baseline systolic BP.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

All-cause dementia (defined using Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders [Third Edition Revised] or Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders [Fourth Edition] and established at follow-up measurements or in clinical practice), mortality, and combined dementia and mortality were the outcomes. Covariates included baseline antihypertensive medication use, sex, educational level, body mass index, smoking status, diabetes, stroke history, myocardial infarction history, and polypharmacy. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used, and nonlinear associations were explored using natural splines.

RESULTS

The study analyzed 7 cohort studies with a total of 17 286 participants, among whom 10 393 were women (60.1%) and the mean (SD) baseline age was 74.5 (7.3) years. Overall, dementia risk was lower for individuals with higher SBP, with the lowest risk associated with an SBP of approximately 185 mm Hg (95% CI, 161-230 mm Hg; P = .001). Stratified by overlapping 10-year baseline age groups, the lowest dementia risk was observed at somewhat lower systolic BP levels in those older than 75 years (158 [95% CI, 152-178] mm Hg to 170 [95% CI, 160-260] mm Hg). For mortality, there was a clear U-shaped association, with the lowest risk at 160 mm Hg (95% CI, 154-181 mm Hg; P < .001). This U-shape occurred across all age groups, with the lowest dementia risk associated with an SBP of 134 mm Hg (95% CI, 102-149 mm Hg; P = .03) in those aged 60 to 70 years and increasing to between 155 mm Hg (95% CI, 150-166 mm Hg; P < .001) and 166 mm Hg (95% CI, 154-260 mm Hg; P = .02) for age groups between 70 and 95 years. Combined dementia and mortality risk curves closely resembled those for mortality. Associations of diastolic BP with dementia risk were generally similar but were less distinct.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This cohort study found that dementia risk was lower for older individuals with higher SBP levels and that more distinctly U-shaped associations appeared for those older than 75 years, but these associations cannot be explained by SBP-associated changes in mortality risk. The findings may warrant future trials on tailored BP management in older age groups that take life expectancy and health context into consideration.

Associations of High-Sensitivity Troponin and Natriuretic Peptide Levels With Outcomes After Intensive Blood Pressure Lowering: Findings From the SPRINT Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Elevated high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hscTnT) and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NTproBNP) levels are associated with risk of heart failure (HF) and mortality among individuals in the general population. However, it is unknown if this risk is modifiable.

Objective

To test the hypothesis that elevated hscTnT and NTproBNP levels would identify individuals with the greatest risk for mortality and HF and the largest benefit associated with intensive systolic blood pressure (SBP) lowering.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This is a nonprespecified post hoc analysis of the multicenter, prospective, randomized clinical Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT), conducted from October 20, 2010, to August 20, 2015. A total of 9361 patients without diabetes with increased risk for cardiovascular disease were randomized to receive intensive vs standard SBP lowering. Statistical analysis was performed on an intention-to-treat basis from September 30, 2019, to July 29, 2021.

Interventions

Participants were randomized to undergo intensive (<120 mm Hg) or standard (<140 mm Hg) SBP lowering. High-sensitivity cardiac troponin T and NTproBNP levels were measured from stored specimens collected at enrollment, with elevated levels defined as 14 ng/L or more for hscTnT (to convert to micrograms per liter, multiply by 0.001) and 125 pg/mL or more for NTproBNP (to convert to nanograms per liter, multiply by 1.0).

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome of this ancillary study was HF and mortality.

Results

Of the 9361 participants enrolled in SPRINT, 8828 (5578 men [63.2%]; mean [SD] age, 68.0 [9.5] years) had measured hscTnT levels and 8836 (5585 men [63.2%]; mean [SD] age, 68.0 [9.5] years) had measured NTproBNP levels; 2262 of 8828 patients (25.6%) had elevated hscTnT levels, 3371 of 8836 patients (38.2%) had elevated NTproBNP, and 1411 of 8828 patients (16.0%) had both levels elevated. Randomization to the intensive SBP group led to a 4.9% (95% CI, 1.7%-7.5%) absolute risk reduction (ARR) over 4 years in death and HF (421 events) for those with elevated hscTnT and a 1.7% (95% CI, 0.7%-2.5%) ARR for those without elevated levels. Similarly, for those with elevated NTproBNP, the ARR for death and HF over 4 years was 4.6% (95% CI, 2.3%-6.5%) vs 1.8% (95% CI, 0.9%-2.5%) in those without elevated levels. For those with elevated levels of both biomarkers, the ARR for death and HF over 4 years was 7.8% (95% CI, 3.3%-11.3%) vs 1.7% (95% CI, 0.8%-2.3%) in those with neither biomarker elevated. No significant treatment group by biomarker category interactions were detected.

Conclusions and Relevance

Intensive SBP control led to large absolute differences in death and HF among patients with abnormal hscTnT and NTproBNP levels. These findings demonstrate that risk associated with elevation of these biomarkers is modifiable with intensive BP control. A prospective, randomized clinical trial is needed to evaluate whether these biomarkers may help guide selection of patients for intensive SBP lowering.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01206062.

A Framework for Systematic Assessment of Clinical Trial Population Representativeness Using Electronic Health Records Data

BACKGROUND

Clinical trials are the gold standard for generating robust medical evidence, but clinical trial results often raise generalizability concerns, which can be attributed to the lack of population representativeness. The electronic health records (EHRs) data are useful for estimating the population representativeness of clinical trial study population.

OBJECTIVES

This research aims to estimate the population representativeness of clinical trials systematically using EHR data during the early design stage.

METHODS

We present an end-to-end analytical framework for transforming free-text clinical trial eligibility criteria into executable database queries conformant with the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership Common Data Model and for systematically quantifying the population representativeness for each clinical trial.

RESULTS

We calculated the population representativeness of 782 novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) trials and 3,827 type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) trials in the United States respectively using this framework. With the use of overly restrictive eligibility criteria, 85.7% of the COVID-19 trials and 30.1% of T2DM trials had poor population representativeness.

CONCLUSION

This research demonstrates the potential of using the EHR data to assess the clinical trials population representativeness, providing data-driven metrics to inform the selection and optimization of eligibility criteria.

Heart Failure Primary Prevention: What Does SPRINT Add?: Recent Advances in Hypertension

Hypertension is the most prevalent modifiable factor for the development of heart failure. However, the optimal blood pressure (BP) target for preventing heart failure remains uncertain. The SPRINT (Systolic BP Intervention Trial) was a large, randomized open-label trial (n=9361 participants) that showed the superiority of a systolic BP target of <120 mm Hg compared with <140 mm Hg, with a 36% lower rate of acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) events. This beneficial effect was consistent across all the key prespecified subgroups, including advanced age, chronic kidney disease, and prior cardiovascular disease. Participants who had an ADHF event had a markedly increased risk of subsequent cardiovascular disease events, including recurrent ADHF. Randomization to the intensive arm did not affect the recurrence of ADHF after the initial ADHF event (hazard ratio, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.50-1.67]; P=0.81). A separate analysis demonstrated that the reduction in ADHF events in the intensive treatment group in SPRINT was not due to the differential use of diuretics between the 2 treatment groups. Although intensive BP treatment resulted in a lower cardiovascular disease event rate, this was not significantly associated with changes in left ventricular mass, function, or fibrosis, as assessed in SPRINT HEART, an ancillary study to SPRINT. Intensive BP treatment, however, significantly attenuated increases in carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity. Overall, these data highlight the importance of preventing ADHF in high cardiovascular risk hypertensive patients by optimal BP reduction as tested in SPRINT.

Estimating Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial Participant Posttrial Survival Using Pooled Epidemiologic Cohort Data

Background

Intensive systolic blood pressure treatment (<120 mm Hg) in SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial) improved survival compared with standard treatment (<140 mm Hg) over a median follow‐up of 3.3 years. We projected life expectancy after observed follow‐up in SPRINT using SPRINT‐eligible participants in the NHLBI‐PCS (National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Pooled Cohorts Study).

Methods and Results

We used propensity scores to weight SPRINT‐eligible NHLBI‐PCS participants to resemble SPRINT participants. In SPRINT participants, we estimated in‐trial survival (<4 years) using a time‐based flexible parametric survival model. In SPRINT‐eligible NHLBI‐PCS participants, we estimated posttrial survival (≥4 years) using an age‐based flexible parametric survival model and applied the formula to SPRINT participants to predict posttrial survival. We projected overall life expectancy for each SPRINT participant and compared it to parametric regression (eg, Gompertz) projections based on SPRINT data alone. We included 8584 SPRINT and 10 593 SPRINT‐eligible NHLBI‐PCS participants. After propensity weighting, mean (SD) age was 67.9 (9.4) and 68.2 (8.8) years, and 35.5% and 37.6% were women in SPRINT and NHLBI‐PCS, respectively. Using the NHLBI‐PCS–based method, projected mean life expectancy from randomization was 21.0 (7.4) years with intensive and 19.1 (7.2) years with standard treatment. Using the Gompertz regression, life expectancy was 11.2 (2.3) years with intensive and 10.5 (2.2) years with standard treatment.

Conclusions

Combining SPRINT and NHLBI‐PCS observed data likely offers a more realistic estimate of life expectancy than parametrically extrapolating SPRINT data alone. These results offer insight into the potential long‐term effectiveness of intensive SBP goals.

Characteristics of Populations Excluded From Clinical Trials Supporting Intensive Blood Pressure Control Guidelines

Background Only one third of patients recommended intensified treatment by the 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guideline for high blood pressure would have been eligible for the clinical trials on which recommendations were largely based. We sought to identify characteristics of adults who would have been trial-ineligible in order to inform clinical practice and research priorities. Methods and Results We examined the proportion of adults diagnosed with hypertension who met trial inclusion and exclusion criteria, stratified by age, diabetes mellitus status, and guideline recommendations in a cross-sectional study of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 2013-2016. Of the 107.7 million adults (95% CI, 99.3-116.0 million) classified as having hypertension by the ACC/AHA guideline, 23.1% (95% CI, 20.8%-25.5%) were below the target blood pressure of 130/80 mm Hg, 22.2% (95% CI, 20.1%-24.4%) would be recommended nonpharmacologic treatment, and 54.6% (95% CI, 52.5%-56.7%) would be recommended additional pharmacotherapy. Only 20.6% (95% CI, 18.8%-22.4%) of adults with hypertension would be trial-eligible. The majority of adults <50 years were excluded because of low cardiovascular risk and lack of access to primary care. The majority of adults aged ≥70 years were excluded because of multimorbidity and limited life expectancy. Reasons for trial exclusion were similar for patients with and without diabetes mellitus. Conclusions Intensive blood pressure treatment trials were not representative of many younger adults with low cardiovascular risk and older adults with multimorbidity who are now recommended more intensive blood pressure goals.

Applicability and cost-effectiveness of the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) in the Chinese population: A cost-effectiveness modeling study

BACKGROUND

The Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) showed significant reductions in death and cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk with a systolic blood pressure (SBP) goal of <120 mm Hg compared with a SBP goal of <140 mm Hg. Our study aimed to assess the applicability of SPRINT to Chinese adults. Additionally, we sought to predict the medical and economic implications of this intensive SBP treatment among those meeting SPRINT eligibility.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

We used nationally representative baseline data from the China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study (CHARLS) (2011-2012) to estimate the prevalence and number of Chinese adults aged 45 years and older who meet SPRINT criteria. A validated microsimulation model was employed to project costs, clinical outcomes, and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) among SPRINT-eligible adults, under 2 alternative treatment strategies (SBP goal of <120 mm Hg [intensive treatment] and SBP goal of <140 mm Hg [standard treatment]). Overall, 22.2% met the SPRINT criteria, representing 116.2 (95% CI 107.5 to 124.8) million people in China. Of these, 66.4%, representing 77.2 (95% CI 69.3 to 85.0) million, were not being treated for hypertension, and 22.9%, representing 26.6 (95% CI 22.4 to 30.7) million, had a SBP between 130 and 139 mm Hg, yet were not taking antihypertensive medication. We estimated that over 5 years, compared to standard treatment, intensive treatment would reduce heart failure incidence by 0.84 (95% CI 0.42 to 1.25) million cases, reduce CVD deaths by 2.03 (95% CI 1.44 to 2.63) million cases, and save 3.84 (95% CI 1.53 to 6.34) million life-years. Estimated reductions of 0.069 (95% CI -0.28, 0.42) million myocardial infarction cases and 0.36 (95% CI -0.10, 0.82) million stroke cases were not statistically significant. Furthermore, over a lifetime, moving from standard to intensive treatment increased the mean QALYs from 9.51 to 9.87 (an increment of 0.38 [95% CI 0.13 to 0.71]), at a cost of Int$10,997 per QALY gained. Of all 1-way sensitivity analyses, high antihypertensive drug cost and lower treatment efficacy for CVD death resulted in the 2 most unfavorable results (Int$25,291 and Int$18,995 per QALY were gained, respectively). Simulation results indicated that intensive treatment could be cost-effective (82.8% probability of being below the willingness-to-pay threshold of Int$16,782 [1× GDP per capita in China in 2017]), with a lower probability in people with SBP 130-139 mm Hg (72.9%) but a higher probability among females (91.2%). Main limitations include lack of specific SPRINT eligibility information in the CHARLS survey, uncertainty about the implications of different blood pressure measurement techniques, the use of several sources of data with large reliance on findings from SPPRINT, limited information about the serious adverse event rate, and lack of information and evidence for medication effectiveness on renal disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Although adoption of the SPRINT treatment strategy would increase the number of Chinese adults requiring SBP treatment intensification, this approach has the potential to prevent CVD events, to produce gains in life-years, and to be cost-effective under common thresholds.

Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics-2021 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association

BACKGROUND

The American Heart Association, in conjunction with the National Institutes of Health, annually reports the most up-to-date statistics related to heart disease, stroke, and cardiovascular risk factors, including core health behaviors (smoking, physical activity, diet, and weight) and health factors (cholesterol, blood pressure, and glucose control) that contribute to cardiovascular health. The Statistical Update presents the latest data on a range of major clinical heart and circulatory disease conditions (including stroke, congenital heart disease, rhythm disorders, subclinical atherosclerosis, coronary heart disease, heart failure, valvular disease, venous disease, and peripheral artery disease) and the associated outcomes (including quality of care, procedures, and economic costs).

METHODS

The American Heart Association, through its Statistics Committee, continuously monitors and evaluates sources of data on heart disease and stroke in the United States to provide the most current information available in the annual Statistical Update. The 2021 Statistical Update is the product of a full year's worth of effort by dedicated volunteer clinicians and scientists, committed government professionals, and American Heart Association staff members. This year's edition includes data on the monitoring and benefits of cardiovascular health in the population, an enhanced focus on social determinants of health, adverse pregnancy outcomes, vascular contributions to brain health, the global burden of cardiovascular disease, and further evidence-based approaches to changing behaviors related to cardiovascular disease.

RESULTS

Each of the 27 chapters in the Statistical Update focuses on a different topic related to heart disease and stroke statistics.

CONCLUSIONS

The Statistical Update represents a critical resource for the lay public, policy makers, media professionals, clinicians, health care administrators, researchers, health advocates, and others seeking the best available data on these factors and conditions.

Eligibility of the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) to the Chinese Adults

Objective

To explore the proportion and characteristic of Chinese adults meeting The Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) eligibility criteria and assess its generalizability.

Method

Our study was based on a cross-sectional, population-based survey with a sample of 26,093 participants aged over 20 years. The SPRINT eligibility criteria were age ≥ 50 years, elevated SBP of 130 to 180 mmHg depending on the number of antihypertensive medication classes being taken, and increased cardiovascular disease (CVD) but without diabetes, history of stroke and estimated glomerular filtration rate < 20 ml/min/1.73 m², or receiving dialysis.

Results

Overall, we estimated that 4,036 (15.5%) participants would meet the SPRINT eligibility criteria. They were generally older, likely to be female, lower educational level, tended to be more overweight, and had higher Framingham risk score compared with overall population or subjects aged ≥ 50 years. Of participants eligible for SPRINT, most (56.2%) of them were not treated for hypertension, and 542 (13.4%) were not previously considered to have hypertension or need for antihypertension therapy. Among the 11,637 adults with hypertension, 3,494 (30.0%) would potentially benefit from treatment intensification. The most common antihypertensive medication class being taken was diuretic agents.

Conclusion

A substantial percentage of Chinese subjects meet the SPRINT eligibility criteria. Further studies are needed to assess the cost-effectiveness from treatment intensification in Chinese setting.

Factors Associated With Failure to Achieve the Intensive Blood Pressure Target in the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT)

SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial) found that randomization of nondiabetic participants at high cardiovascular risk to an intensive (systolic blood pressure [SBP] <120 mm Hg) versus standard (SBP <140 mm Hg) target resulted in 25% risk reduction in the first cardiovascular composite event (ie, cardiovascular death or nonfatal myocardial infarction, stroke, or hospitalization for heart failure) and a 27% risk reduction in all-cause mortality. In this post hoc analysis, we sought to determine the factors associated with failure to achieve the SBP target in 4678 SPRINT participants randomized to the intensive treatment group. Using a generalized estimating equation model, we assessed variables associated with failure to achieve the intensive SBP target as a repeated outcome collected during serial follow-up visits, including the occurrence of serious adverse events. In the multivariable model adjusted for baseline demographic, clinical, and laboratory variables, older age, higher SBP, underlying chronic kidney disease, higher number of antihypertensives, and moderate cognitive impairment at screening were associated with failure to achieve the intensive SBP target. Occurrence of a serious adverse event during the trial was associated with 20% higher odds of failure to achieve the SBP target. Participants of Hispanic ethnicity had 47% lower odds of failure to achieve the intensive SBP target relative to non-Hispanic Whites. Understanding barriers to achieving intensive SBP targets should allow clinicians to optimize management of hypertension in patients at high risk for cardiovascular disease.

Applicability and Eligibility of the International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches (ISCHEMIA) for Patients who Underwent Revascularization with Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

In the International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches (ISCHEMIA) trial, an early invasive strategy did not decrease mortality compared to a conservative strategy for stable ischemic heart disease (SIHD) patients with moderate-to-severe ischemia, and the role of revascularization would be revised. However, the applicability and potential influence of this trial in daily practice remains unclear. Our objective was to assess the eligibility and representativeness of the ISCHEMIA trial on the patients with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). From a multicenter registry, we extracted a consecutive 13,223 SIHD patients with PCI (baseline cohort). We applied ISCHEMIA eligibility criteria and compared the baseline characteristics between the eligible patients and the actual study participants (randomized controlled trial (RCT) patients). In 3463 patients with follow-up information (follow-up cohort), the 2 year composite of major adverse cardiac events was evaluated between the eligible patients and RCT patients, as well as eligible and non-eligible patients in the registry. In the baseline cohort, 77.3% of SIHD patients with moderate-to-severe ischemia were eligible for the ISCHEMIA. They were comparable with RCT patients for baseline characteristics and outcomes unlike the non-eligible patients. In conclusion, the trial results seem applicable for the majority of PCI patients with moderate-to-severe ischemia except for the non-eligible patients.

Blood Pressure Targets for Older Patients-Do Advanced Age and Frailty Really Not Matter?

In 2017, Hypertension Canada removed advanced age and frailty as considerations for caution when deciding on intensive therapy in their guidelines for the diagnosis, risk assessment, prevention, and treatment of hypertension in adults. Dementia is not mentioned. In this commentary, we review why advanced age and frailty were removed, and examine what is currently known about the relationship between hypertension and both incident and prevalent dementia. We make the case that the presence of frailty (especially when severe) and dementia should be considered when deciding on intensive therapy in future iterations of Hypertension Canada guidelines.

Effect of Antihypertensive Medication Reduction vs Usual Care on Short-term Blood Pressure Control in Patients With Hypertension Aged 80 Years and Older: The OPTIMISE Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Deprescribing of antihypertensive medications is recommended for some older patients with polypharmacy and multimorbidity when the benefits of continued treatment may not outweigh the harms.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to establish whether antihypertensive medication reduction is possible without significant changes in systolic blood pressure control or adverse events during 12-week follow-up.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

The Optimising Treatment for Mild Systolic Hypertension in the Elderly (OPTIMISE) study was a randomized, unblinded, noninferiority trial conducted in 69 primary care sites in England. Participants, whose primary care physician considered them appropriate for medication reduction, were aged 80 years and older, had systolic blood pressure lower than 150 mm Hg, and were receiving at least 2 antihypertensive medications were included. Participants enrolled between April 2017 and September 2018 and underwent follow-up until January 2019.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants were randomized (1:1 ratio) to a strategy of antihypertensive medication reduction (removal of 1 drug [intervention], n = 282) or usual care (control, n = 287), in which no medication changes were mandated.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was systolic blood pressure lower than 150 mm Hg at 12-week follow-up. The prespecified noninferiority margin was a relative risk (RR) of 0.90. Secondary outcomes included the proportion of participants maintaining medication reduction and differences in blood pressure, frailty, quality of life, adverse effects, and serious adverse events.

RESULTS

Among 569 patients randomized (mean age, 84.8 years; 276 [48.5%] women; median of 2 antihypertensive medications prescribed at baseline), 534 (93.8%) completed the trial. Overall, 229 (86.4%) patients in the intervention group and 236 (87.7%) patients in the control group had a systolic blood pressure lower than 150 mm Hg at 12 weeks (adjusted RR, 0.98 [97.5% 1-sided CI, 0.92 to ∞]). Of 7 prespecified secondary end points, 5 showed no significant difference. Medication reduction was sustained in 187 (66.3%) participants at 12 weeks. Mean change in systolic blood pressure was 3.4 mm Hg (95% CI, 1.1 to 5.8 mm Hg) higher in the intervention group compared with the control group. Twelve (4.3%) participants in the intervention group and 7 (2.4%) in the control group reported at least 1 serious adverse event (adjusted RR, 1.72 [95% CI, 0.7 to 4.3]).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among older patients treated with multiple antihypertensive medications, a strategy of medication reduction, compared with usual care, was noninferior with regard to systolic blood pressure control at 12 weeks. The findings suggest antihypertensive medication reduction in some older patients with hypertension is not associated with substantial change in blood pressure control, although further research is needed to understand long-term clinical outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

EudraCT Identifier: 2016-004236-38; ISRCTN identifier: 97503221.

The global burden of hypertension exceeds 1.4 billion people: should a systolic blood pressure target below 130 become the universal standard?

: In 2010, 1.4 billion people globally had hypertension, with 14% controlled to systolic blood pressure (SBP, mmHg) below 140, which contributes to 18 million cardiovascular deaths annually. Recent hypertension guidelines endorsed SBP targets below 130 or lower for all or some hypertensive patients to reduce cardiovascular events (CVEs) more than the prior SBP target less than 140. In 2016, the Australian Guideline strongly recommended target SBP below 120 for adults at very high risk for CVE or aged above 75 years. In 2017 and 2018, the Canadian Guideline recommended automated office SBP (AOSBP) below 120 in adults at high risk and aged above 75 years (grade B). In 2017, the US Guideline recommended SBP below 130 for all adults (moderate-to-high risk class I; lower-risk grade IIb). In 2018, the European Guideline recommended SBP below 140 for all adults, and, if tolerated, a SBP range of 120-129 for adults aged below 65 years and 130-139 for adults aged at least 65 years (class I). The guidelines were variably influenced by Systolic blood PRessure INTervention trial and meta-analyses indicating fewer CVE when mean in-trial SBP was below 130 versus above 130. Clinicians considering lower SBP targets should be aware that: AOSBP preceded by 5-min rest is approximately 10-15 mmHg lower than usual office SBP; hypertensive patients with office SBP consistently versus intermittently below 140 have fewer CVE; benefits of mean office SBP or AOSBP below 120 remain unproven and could increase adverse events. Clinicians worldwide will do well to control SBP to below 140 in most hypertensive patients on most visits, which should lead to mean in-clinic SBP of 120-129.

Clinical Trial Generalizability Assessment in the Big Data Era: A Review

Clinical studies, especially randomized, controlled trials, are essential for generating evidence for clinical practice. However, generalizability is a long‐standing concern when applying trial results to real‐world patients. Generalizability assessment is thus important, nevertheless, not consistently practiced. We performed a systematic review to understand the practice of generalizability assessment. We identified 187 relevant articles and systematically organized these studies in a taxonomy with three dimensions: (i) data availability (i.e., before or after trial (a priori vs. a posteriori generalizability)); (ii) result outputs (i.e., score vs. nonscore); and (iii) populations of interest. We further reported disease areas, underrepresented subgroups, and types of data used to profile target populations. We observed an increasing trend of generalizability assessments, but < 30% of studies reported positive generalizability results. As a priori generalizability can be assessed using only study design information (primarily eligibility criteria), it gives investigators a golden opportunity to adjust the study design before the trial starts. Nevertheless, < 40% of the studies in our review assessed a priori generalizability. With the wide adoption of electronic health records systems, rich real‐world patient databases are increasingly available for generalizability assessment; however, informatics tools are lacking to support the adoption of generalizability assessment practice.

Managing Hypertension in the elderly: What's new?

Hypertension is the leading modifiable risk factor for cardiovascular events and mortality in the world. Hypertension is a major risk factor for cardiovascular events and mortality in the elderly. The 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association hypertension guidelines recommend treatment of noninstitutionalized ambulatory community-dwelling persons aged 65 years and older with an average systolic blood pressure of 130 ​mm Hg or higher or a diastolic blood pressure of 80 ​mm Hg or higher with lifestyle measures plus antihypertensive drug to lower the blood pressure to less than 130/80 ​mm Hg For elderly adults with hypertension and a high burden of comorbidities and limited life expectancy, clinical judgment, patient preference, and a team-based approach to assess risk/benefit is reasonable for decisions about the intensity of SBP lowering and the choice of antihypertensive drugs to use for treatment. Randomized clinical trials need to be performed in frail elderly patients with hypertension living in nursing homes. Elderly frail persons with prevalent and frequent falls, marked cognitive impairment, and multiple comorbidities requiring multiple antihypertensive drugs also need to be included in randomized clinical trials. Data on patients older than 85 years treated for hypertension are also sparse. These patients need clinical trial data. Finally, the effect of different antihypertensive drugs on clinical outcomes including serious adverse events needs to be investigated in elderly frail patients with hypertension and different comorbidities.

Systolic blood pressure trajectory and cardiovascular outcomes: An analysis using data in the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial

BACKGROUND

Blood pressure changes in response to medication intensification differ over time across individuals, and could affect their cardiovascular outcomes. We aimed to investigate the relationship between systolic blood pressure (SBP) trajectory and cardiovascular outcomes using data from the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT).

METHODS

Groups of SBP trajectory were modelled separately in the standard and intensive treatment groups. SBP at each site visit post randomisation were used for modelling by group-based trajectory with latent class growth model. We classified six SBP trajectories (on target [reference group], near target, and off target in the intensive treatment group; on target-below 130, on target-below 140, and off target in the standard treatment group). A Cox-proportional hazard model was used to analyse the effects of SBP trajectory on the primary composite outcome, death from any cause, and the composite of the primary outcome or death from any cause.

RESULTS

The respective mean SBP was 119 ± 5, 128 ± 6, 141 ± 8, 124 ± 4, 136 ± 4, and 147 ± 6 mm Hg. With respect to the primary composite outcomes, the standard-on target (below 130) had the highest risk (adjusted hazard ratio [lower to upper confidence interval], 2.525 [1.865-3.420]), despite its mean SBP was the second lowest of the six groups. The standard-on target (below 140) had a higher risk (1.323 [1.056-1.657]) when compared with the intensive-on target. However, the standard-on target (below 140) had a similar risk (1.12 [0.861-1.458]) when compared with the intensive-near target, despite an 8 mm Hg difference in mean SBP (136 vs 128 mm Hg, P < .001).

CONCLUSION

An SBP treatment target of <120 mm Hg was only associated with a better cardiovascular outcome compared with a treatment target of <140 mm Hg, provided that the target of <120 mm Hg was reached.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01206062. Registered 21 September 2010.

Managing the elderly patient with hypertension: current strategies, challenges, and considerations

Introduction: Hypertension is the leading modifiable risk factor for cardiovascular events and mortality in the world.Areas covered: An extensive literature review of articles and clinical trials on PUBMED on the topic of hypertension in the elderly from 1976 through January 2020 was conducted. This review article discusses clinical trials on treatment of hypertension in the elderly, the 2017 American College of Cardiology (ACC)/American Heart Association (AHA) hypertension guidelines, the 2018 European Society of Cardiology/European Society of Hypertension guidelines, and the treatment of hypertension and of resistant hypertension in the elderly.Expert opinion: The 2017 ACC/AHA hypertension guidelines recommend treatment of noninstitutionalized ambulatory community-dwelling adults aged 65 years and older with an average systolic blood pressure of 130 mm Hg or higher with lifestyle measures plus antihypertensive drug to lower the blood pressure to less than 130/80 mm Hg. For elderly adults with hypertension and a high burden of comorbidities and limited life expectancy, clinical judgment, patient preference, and a team-based approach to assess risk/benefit is reasonable for decisions about the intensity of SBP lowering and the choice of antihypertensive drugs to use for treatment.

Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics-2020 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association

BACKGROUND

The American Heart Association, in conjunction with the National Institutes of Health, annually reports on the most up-to-date statistics related to heart disease, stroke, and cardiovascular risk factors, including core health behaviors (smoking, physical activity, diet, and weight) and health factors (cholesterol, blood pressure, and glucose control) that contribute to cardiovascular health. The Statistical Update presents the latest data on a range of major clinical heart and circulatory disease conditions (including stroke, congenital heart disease, rhythm disorders, subclinical atherosclerosis, coronary heart disease, heart failure, valvular disease, venous disease, and peripheral artery disease) and the associated outcomes (including quality of care, procedures, and economic costs).

METHODS

The American Heart Association, through its Statistics Committee, continuously monitors and evaluates sources of data on heart disease and stroke in the United States to provide the most current information available in the annual Statistical Update. The 2020 Statistical Update is the product of a full year's worth of effort by dedicated volunteer clinicians and scientists, committed government professionals, and American Heart Association staff members. This year's edition includes data on the monitoring and benefits of cardiovascular health in the population, metrics to assess and monitor healthy diets, an enhanced focus on social determinants of health, a focus on the global burden of cardiovascular disease, and further evidence-based approaches to changing behaviors, implementation strategies, and implications of the American Heart Association's 2020 Impact Goals.

RESULTS

Each of the 26 chapters in the Statistical Update focuses on a different topic related to heart disease and stroke statistics.

CONCLUSIONS

The Statistical Update represents a critical resource for the lay public, policy makers, media professionals, clinicians, healthcare administrators, researchers, health advocates, and others seeking the best available data on these factors and conditions.

Impact of the SPRINT Trial on Hypertension Management

The Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial is the first large prospective randomized controlled trial to demonstrate the benefit of an intensive systolic blood pressure (SBP) treatment target (<120 mm Hg) compared to a standard target (<140 mm Hg) in reducing cardiovascular morbidity and mortality and all-cause mortality in high-risk hypertensive patients. The impact of SPRINT on hypertension treatment has been large, but major questions remain about the feasibility of achieving the SPRINT intensive SBP target in routine practice, the generalizability of the SPRINT findings to hypertensive populations that were excluded from the trial, and the cost effectiveness of adopting the SPRINT intensive treatment goal. In this review, we discuss the generalizability of SPRINT data to the general population of adults with hypertension and with various comorbidities, the cost effectiveness of intensive SBP-lowering therapy, and the implications of SPRINT for future hypertension guideline development and clinical practice.

Is the association between blood pressure and mortality in older adults different with frailty? A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

to investigate whether the association between blood pressure and clinical outcomes is different in older adults with and without frailty, using observational studies.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL were searched from 1st January 2000 to 13th June 2018. PROSPERO CRD42017081635. We included all observational studies reporting clinical outcomes in older adults with an average age over 65 years living in the community with and without treatment that measured blood pressure and frailty using validated methods. Two independent reviewers evaluated study quality and risk of bias using the ROBANS tool. We used generic inverse variance modelling to pool risks of all-cause mortality adjusted for age and sex.

RESULTS

nine observational studies involving 21,906 older adults were included, comparing all-cause mortality over a mean of six years. Fixed effects meta-analysis of six studies demonstrated that in people with frailty, there was no mortality difference associated with systolic blood pressure <140 mm Hg compared to systolic blood pressure >140 mm Hg (HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.16). In the absence of frailty, systolic blood pressure <140 mm Hg was associated with lower risk of death compared to systolic blood pressure >140 mm Hg (HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.96).

CONCLUSIONS

evidence from observational studies demonstrates no mortality difference for older people with frailty whose systolic blood pressure is <140 mm Hg, compared to those with a systolic blood pressure >140 mm Hg. Current evidence fails to capture the complexities of blood pressure measurement, and the association with non-fatal outcomes.

Blood pressure targets in the elderly: many guidelines, much confusion

Collapse

Phenomapping of subgroups in hypertensive patients using unsupervised data-driven cluster analysis: An exploratory study of the SPRINT trial

BACKGROUND

Hypertensive patients are highly heterogeneous in cardiovascular prognosis and treatment responses. A better classification system with phenomapping of clinical features would be of greater value to identify patients at higher risk of developing cardiovascular outcomes and direct individual decision-making for antihypertensive treatment.

METHODS

An unsupervised, data-driven cluster analysis was performed for all baseline variables related to cardiovascular outcomes and treatment responses in subjects from the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT), in order to identify distinct subgroups with maximal within-group similarities and between-group differences. Cox regression was used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for cardiovascular outcomes and compare the effect of intensive antihypertensive treatment in different clusters.

RESULTS

Four replicable clusters of patients were identified: cluster 1 (index hypertensives); cluster 2 (chronic kidney disease hypertensives); cluster 3 (obese hypertensives) and cluster 4 (extra risky hypertensives). In terms of prognosis, individuals in cluster 4 had the highest risk of developing primary outcomes. In terms of treatment responses, intensive antihypertensive treatment was shown to be beneficial only in cluster 4 (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.55-0.98) and cluster 1 (HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.37-0.79) and was associated with an increased risk of severe adverse effects in cluster 2 (HR 1.18, 95% CI 1.05-1.32).

CONCLUSION

Using a data-driven approach, SPRINT subjects can be stratified into four phenotypically distinct subgroups with different profiles on cardiovascular prognoses and responses to intensive antihypertensive treatment. Of note, these results should be taken as hypothesis generating that warrant further validation in future prospective studies.

The new US and European guidelines in hypertension: A multi-dimensional analysis

The Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) compared the clinical outcomes between target systolic blood pressure (SBP) levels between 140 and 120 mmHg or lower. Both,the 2017 ACC/AHA and the 2018 ESC/ESH guidelines in hypertension are derived from the SPRINT trial and advise initiation and/or intensification of treatment at lower blood pressure thresholds. The ACC/AHA guidance supersedes the 2014 Eight Joint National Committee guideline (JNC-8) which advised initiation of treatment when the BP was 140/90 mmHg or higher; in adults 60 years or over, the target was 150/90 mmHg. Compared to JNC-8, the new guidelines lower the SBP target by 10 mmHg in patients under age of 60 years, and by 20 mmHg in the elderly. We performed a qualitative multi-dimensional analysis in order to answer two key questions: will the new guidelines deliver the stated benefits? and, will translation to the clinic be simple, risk-free, and affordable? A major investment by national healthcare administrations will be necessary for the initiation and support of this program but this decision can only be justified by a valid expectation of clinical benefit. At this time, a definitive answer is not available and a "wait and see" attitude appears appropriate and reasonable. In the interim, efforts are best directed to the immediate problem of untreated hypertension worldwide.

Applicability of the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) to the Canadian Population

BACKGROUND

The Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) showed significant reductions in major cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality with a systolic blood pressure (BP) goal of < 120 mm Hg compared with < 140 mm Hg. We sought to determine the proportion of Canadian adults who meet SPRINT eligibility criteria.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study using cycles 1-3 of the nationally representative Canadian Health Measures Survey to estimate the prevalence and characteristics of Canadian adults between the ages of 20 and 79 who meet SPRINT eligibility criteria: age ≥ 50 years, elevated systolic BP of 130-180 mm Hg, and increased cardiovascular risk (with chronic kidney disease, Framingham Risk Score ≥ 15% in 10 years, and/or cardiovascular disease) but without diabetes, stroke, or end-stage renal disease.

RESULTS

An estimated 1.3 million (5.2%) Canadian adults met SPRINT eligibility criteria; 14.3% (95% confidence interval, 10.6%-17.9%), or 182,600 people, were not previously considered to have hypertension or need for antihypertensive therapy. Of adults aged 50-79 years treated for hypertension, 18.7% (95% confidence interval, 15.5%-21.8%), or 754,400 individuals, would potentially benefit from treatment intensification.

CONCLUSIONS

If fully implemented, intensive systolic BP lowering to < 120 mm Hg in SPRINT-eligible high-risk individuals would substantially increase the proportion of Canadian adults receiving BP treatment initiation or intensification.

Generalizability of SPRINT-CKD cohort to CKD patients referred to renal clinics

BACKGROUND

The Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial-CKD substudy (SPRINT-CKD) has suggested a lower blood pressure (BP) target in CKD patients. However, it is questionable whether the SPRINT-CKD results may be generalized to CKD patients under nephrology care.

METHODS

To compare SPRINT-CKD cohort versus referred CKD patients in terms of patients' risk profile and outcomes, we pooled four prospective cohorts of consecutive CKD patients referred to 40 Italian renal clinics. We implemented the same inclusion/exclusion criteria adopted in SPRINT and same endpoints: (1) a composite of fatal and non-fatal cardiovascular (CV) events (2) all-cause mortality and (3) ESRD (composite of chronic dialysis, transplantation or 50% eGFR decline). Findings were compared with those attained in the control arm of SPRINT-CKD trial that mirrored standard BP management in clinical practice.

RESULTS

Out of 2847 patients referred to renal clinics, only 20.1% (n = 571) were identified as eligible for SPRINT-CKD. Age (72 ± 9 years), gender (42.2% female) and systolic BP (142 ± 10 mmHg) did not differ from the SPRINT-CKD while referred patients had a worse risk profile at baseline: larger prevalence of prior CV disease (25.7% versus 19.5%), higher Framingham risk score (31.9 ± 14.6% versus 27.2 ± 24.7%) and lower GFR (38 ± 11 versus 48 ± 10 mL/min/1.73 m²). During 4.0 years of follow-up, 86 CV events (50 fatal), 78 all-cause death and 59 ESRD occurred with annual incidence rates higher than those observed in the SPRINT-CKD control group (CV events 4.18 vs 3.19; all-cause death 3.64 vs 2.21; ESRD 2.80 vs 0.41%/year).

CONCLUSIONS

The SPRINT-CKD cohort is poorly representative of the CKD population under nephrology care, thus suggesting that conclusions may not apply to patients referred to nephrologist.

Preventing Heart Failure by Treating Systolic Hypertension: What Does the SPRINT Add?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Previous trials definitively established that lowering systolic blood pressure (BP) to 140 mmHg prevented heart failure (HF) exacerbations, but the potential benefits and risks of further BP reduction remain unclear due to a paucity of trial-based data.

RECENT FINDINGS

A recent secondary analysis of the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) found that in older, high-risk, non-diabetic participants with systolic hypertension, a BP treatment target < 120 mmHg resulted in a 36% lower rate of acute decompensated HF as compared with a BP target < 140 mmHg. Those participants with incident HF had a 26-fold increased risk of subsequent cardiovascular events and death. Based in part on the SPRINT results, the 2017 American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology/HF Society Guideline for the Management of HF acknowledged that targeting a significant reduction in BP in those at increased risk for cardiovascular disease is a novel risk-based strategy to prevent HF. SPRINT redefines systolic BP target goals in older, high-risk patients and provides a key opportunity for preventing HF in this patient group.

Cognitive Change After Cardiac Surgery Versus Cardiac Catheterization: A Population-Based Study

BACKGROUND

Despite concern that cardiac surgery may adversely affect cognition, little evidence is available from population-based studies using presurgery data. With the use of the Health and Retirement Study, we compared memory change after participant-reported cardiac catheterization or cardiac surgery.

METHODS

Participants were community-dwelling adults aged 65 years and older who self-reported cardiac catheterization or "heart surgery" at any biennial Health and Retirement Study interview between 2000 and 2014. Participants may have undergone the index procedure any time in the preceding 2 years. We modeled preprocedure to postprocedure change in composite memory score, derived from objective memory testing, using linear mixed effects models. We modeled postprocedure subjective memory decline with logistic regression. To quantify clinical relevance, we used the predicted memory change to estimate impact on ability to manage medications and finances independently.

RESULTS

Of 3,105 participants, 1,921 (62%) underwent catheterization and 1,184 (38%) underwent operation. In adjusted analyses, surgery participants had little difference in preprocedure to postprocedure memory change compared with participants undergoing cardiac catheterization (-0.021 memory units; 95% confidence interval: -0.046 to 0.005 memory units, p = 0.12). If the relationship were causal, the point estimate for memory decline would confer an absolute 0.26% or 0.19% decrease in ability to manage finances or medications, respectively, corresponding to 4.6 additional months of cognitive aging. Cardiac surgery was not associated with subjective memory decline (adjusted odds ratio 0.93, 95% confidence interval: 0.74 to 1.18).

CONCLUSIONS

In this large, population-based cohort, memory declines after heart surgery and cardiac catheterization were similar. These findings suggest intermediate-term population-level adverse cognitive effects of cardiac surgery, if any, are likely subtle.

A data-zone scoring system to assess the generalizability of clinical trial results to individual patients

INTRODUCTION

Evaluating the applicability of a clinical trial to a specific patient is difficult. A novel framework, the Trial Score, was created to quantify the generalizability of a trial's result based on participants' baseline characteristics and not on the trial's inclusion and exclusion criteria.

METHODS

For each Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) participant, the Euclidean distance in six-dimensional space from the theoretical "average" participant was calculated to produce an individual Trial Score that incorporates multiple distinct continuous-variable baseline characteristics. We prospectively defined the "data-rich," "data-limited," and "data-free" zones as Trial Scores < 90th percentile, the 90th-97.5th percentile, and >97.5th percentile, respectively. Trial Scores were then calculated for National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey participants to map data zones of the general population. Individual participant data from the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes blood pressure trial (ACCORD-BP) was used to test if participants further from the average SPRINT participant behave differently than the overall SPRINT results.

RESULTS

The National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey cohort and the ACCORD-BP trial demonstrate large percentages of participants in SPRINT's data-free and data-limited zones. Time-to-event rates seen with intensive and standard blood pressure control in SPRINT were the same as ACCORD-BP participants within SPRINT's data-rich zone (hazard ratio 0.97, p = 0.84 and hazard ratio 0.95, p = 0.70). However, these rates were significantly different than those of ACCORD-BP participants outside SPRINT's data-rich zone (hazard ratio 0.64, p < 0.01 and hazard ratio 0.77, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

ACCORD-BP participants with SPRINT Trial Scores in the 90th percentile or below have similar event rates to SPRINT participants in both the intensive and standard blood pressure groups. Quantifying the difference between an individual patient and the average clinical trial participant holds promise as a tool to more precisely determine applicability of a specific trial to individual patients.

Determining the Optimal Systolic Blood Pressure for Hypertensive Patients: A Network Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There is clinical trial evidence that lowering systolic blood pressure (SBP) to < 120 mm Hg is beneficial, and this has influenced the latest American guideline on hypertension. We therefore used network meta-analysis to study the association between SBP and cardiovascular outcomes.

METHODS

We searched for randomized controlled trials targeting different blood pressure levels that reported cardiovascular events. The mean achieved SBP in each trial was classified into 5 groups (110-119, 120-129, 130-139, 140-149, and 150-159 mm Hg). The primary variables of cardiovascular mortality, stroke, and myocardial infarction were assessed using frequentist and Bayesian approaches.

RESULTS

Fourteen trials with altogether 44,015 patients were included. Stroke and major adverse cardiovascular events were reduced when lowering SBP to 120-129 mm Hg compared with 130-139 mm Hg (odds ratio [OR] 0.83, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.69-0.99 and OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.73-0.96), 140-149 mm Hg (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.55-0.97 and OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.60-0.90), and 150-159 mm Hg (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.26-0.71 and OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.30-0.57), respectively. More intensive control to < 120 mm Hg further reduced stroke (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.38-0.87; OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.32-0.81; and OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.16-0.56). In contrast, SBP ≥ 150 mm Hg increased myocardial infarction and cardiovascular mortality compared with 120-129 mm Hg (OR 1.73, 95% CI 1.06-2.82 and OR 2.18, 95% CI 1.32-3.59) and 130-139 mm Hg (OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.01-2.32 and OR 1.71, 95% CI 1.11-2.61). No significant relationship between SBP and all-cause mortality was found.

CONCLUSIONS

SBP < 130 mm Hg is associated with a lower risk of stroke and major adverse cardiovascular events. Further lowering to < 120 mm Hg can be considered to reduce stroke risk if the therapy is tolerated. Long-term SBP should not exceed 150 mm Hg because of the increased risk of myocardial infarction and cardiac deaths.