The predictive ability of blood pressure in elderly trial patients

Modeling biomarker variability in joint analysis of longitudinal and time-to-event data

The role of visit-to-visit variability of a biomarker in predicting related disease has been recognized in medical science. Existing measures of biological variability are criticized for being entangled with random variability resulted from measurement error or being unreliable due to limited measurements per individual. In this article, we propose a new measure to quantify the biological variability of a biomarker by evaluating the fluctuation of each individual-specific trajectory behind longitudinal measurements. Given a mixed-effects model for longitudinal data with the mean function over time specified by cubic splines, our proposed variability measure can be mathematically expressed as a quadratic form of random effects. A Cox model is assumed for time-to-event data by incorporating the defined variability as well as the current level of the underlying longitudinal trajectory as covariates, which, together with the longitudinal model, constitutes the joint modeling framework in this article. Asymptotic properties of maximum likelihood estimators are established for the present joint model. Estimation is implemented via an Expectation-Maximization (EM) algorithm with fully exponential Laplace approximation used in E-step to reduce the computation burden due to the increase of the random effects dimension. Simulation studies are conducted to reveal the advantage of the proposed method over the two-stage method, as well as a simpler joint modeling approach which does not take into account biomarker variability. Finally, we apply our model to investigate the effect of systolic blood pressure variability on cardiovascular events in the Medical Research Council elderly trial, which is also the motivating example for this article.

Long-term systolic blood pressure variability independent of mean blood pressure is associated with mortality and cardiovascular events: A systematic review and meta-analysis

The association between long-term systolic blood pressure variability (SBPV) and cardiovascular (CV) outcomes after being adjusted with mean blood pressure (BP) is questionable. This systematic review aims to evaluate the associations between mean BP adjusted long-term SBPV and CV outcomes. A systematic search was conducted on PubMed, Scopus, and Science Direct on January 4, 2023. A total of 9,944,254 subjects from 43 studies were included in this meta-analysis. Long-term SBPV increased the risk of all-cause mortality (HR 1.21 [95%CI 1.16-1.25], I2=100%), CV mortality (HR 1.10 [95%CI 1.07-11.4], I2 = 90%), MACE (HR 1.10 [1.07-1.13], I2 = 91%), cerebrovascular stroke (HR 1.22 [1.16-1.29], I2=100%), and myocardial infarction (HR 1.13 [95%CI (1.07-1.19)], I2=91%). European populations generally had higher risk compared to other continents. In conclusion, long-term SBPV is associated with all-cause mortality, CV mortality, MACE, MI, and stroke. Poor outcomes related to long-term SBPV seem more dominated by cerebrovascular than coronary events.

First-line diuretics versus other classes of antihypertensive drugs for hypertension

BACKGROUND

Different first-line drug classes for patients with hypertension are often assumed to have similar effectiveness with respect to reducing mortality and morbidity outcomes, and lowering blood pressure. First-line low-dose thiazide diuretics have been previously shown to have the best mortality and morbidity evidence when compared with placebo or no treatment. Head-to-head comparisons of thiazides with other blood pressure-lowering drug classes would demonstrate whether there are important differences.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of first-line diuretic drugs with other individual first-line classes of antihypertensive drugs on mortality, morbidity, and withdrawals due to adverse effects in patients with hypertension. Secondary objectives included assessments of the need for added drugs, drug switching, and blood pressure-lowering.

SEARCH METHODS

Cochrane Hypertension's Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Hypertension Specialized Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and trials registers to March 2021. We also checked references and contacted study authors to identify additional studies. A top-up search of the Specialized Register was carried out in June 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized active comparator trials of at least one year's duration were included. Trials had a clearly defined intervention arm of a first-line diuretic (thiazide, thiazide-like, or loop diuretic) compared to another first-line drug class: beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers, alpha adrenergic blockers, angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, angiotensin II receptor blockers, direct renin inhibitors, or other antihypertensive drug classes. Studies had to include clearly defined mortality and morbidity outcomes (serious adverse events, total cardiovascular events, stroke, coronary heart disease (CHD), congestive heart failure, and withdrawals due to adverse effects).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 20 trials with 26 comparator arms randomizing over 90,000 participants. The findings are relevant to first-line use of drug classes in older male and female hypertensive patients (aged 50 to 75) with multiple co-morbidities, including type 2 diabetes. First-line thiazide and thiazide-like diuretics were compared with beta-blockers (six trials), calcium channel blockers (eight trials), ACE inhibitors (five trials), and alpha-adrenergic blockers (three trials); other comparators included angiotensin II receptor blockers, aliskiren (a direct renin inhibitor), and clonidine (a centrally acting drug). Only three studies reported data for total serious adverse events: two studies compared diuretics with calcium channel blockers and one with a direct renin inhibitor. Compared to first-line beta-blockers, first-line thiazides probably result in little to no difference in total mortality (risk ratio (RR) 0.96, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84 to 1.10; 5 trials, 18,241 participants; moderate-certainty), probably reduce total cardiovascular events (5.4% versus 4.8%; RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.00; 4 trials, 18,135 participants; absolute risk reduction (ARR) 0.6%, moderate-certainty), may result in little to no difference in stroke (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.09; 4 trials, 18,135 participants; low-certainty), CHD (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.07; 4 trials, 18,135 participants; low-certainty), or heart failure (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.19; 1 trial, 6569 participants; low-certainty), and probably reduce withdrawals due to adverse effects (10.1% versus 7.9%; RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.85; 5 trials, 18,501 participants; ARR 2.2%; moderate-certainty). Compared to first-line calcium channel blockers, first-line thiazides probably result in little to no difference in total mortality (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.08; 7 trials, 35,417 participants; moderate-certainty), may result in little to no difference in serious adverse events (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.24; 2 trials, 7204 participants; low-certainty), probably reduce total cardiovascular events (14.3% versus 13.3%; RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.89 to 0.98; 6 trials, 35,217 participants; ARR 1.0%; moderate-certainty), probably result in little to no difference in stroke (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.18; 6 trials, 35,217 participants; moderate-certainty) or CHD (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.08; 6 trials, 35,217 participants; moderate-certainty), probably reduce heart failure (4.4% versus 3.2%; RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.82; 6 trials, 35,217 participants; ARR 1.2%; moderate-certainty), and may reduce withdrawals due to adverse effects (7.6% versus 6.2%; RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.88; 7 trials, 33,908 participants; ARR 1.4%; low-certainty). Compared to first-line ACE inhibitors, first-line thiazides probably result in little to no difference in total mortality (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.07; 3 trials, 30,961 participants; moderate-certainty), may result in little to no difference in total cardiovascular events (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.02; 3 trials, 30,900 participants; low-certainty), probably reduce stroke slightly (4.7% versus 4.1%; RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.99; 3 trials, 30,900 participants; ARR 0.6%; moderate-certainty), probably result in little to no difference in CHD (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.12; 3 trials, 30,900 participants; moderate-certainty) or heart failure (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.04; 2 trials, 30,392 participants; moderate-certainty), and probably reduce withdrawals due to adverse effects (3.9% versus 2.9%; RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.84; 3 trials, 25,254 participants; ARR 1.0%; moderate-certainty). Compared to first-line alpha-blockers, first-line thiazides probably result in little to no difference in total mortality (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.09; 1 trial, 24,316 participants; moderate-certainty), probably reduce total cardiovascular events (12.1% versus 9.0%; RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.80; 2 trials, 24,396 participants; ARR 3.1%; moderate-certainty) and stroke (2.7% versus 2.3%; RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.01; 2 trials, 24,396 participants; ARR 0.4%; moderate-certainty), may result in little to no difference in CHD (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.11; 2 trials, 24,396 participants; low-certainty), probably reduce heart failure (5.4% versus 2.8%; RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.58; 1 trial, 24,316 participants; ARR 2.6%; moderate-certainty), and may reduce withdrawals due to adverse effects (1.3% versus 0.9%; RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.89; 3 trials, 24,772 participants; ARR 0.4%; low-certainty). For the other drug classes, data were insufficient. No antihypertensive drug class demonstrated any clinically important advantages over first-line thiazides.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

When used as first-line agents for the treatment of hypertension, thiazides and thiazide-like drugs likely do not change total mortality and likely decrease some morbidity outcomes such as cardiovascular events and withdrawals due to adverse effects, when compared to beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers, ACE inhibitors, and alpha-blockers.

Antihypertensive Agents in Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND

This systematic review summarizes the benefits of treating blood pressure (BP) in individuals 65 years and older.

METHODS

We included randomized trials that evaluated BP-lowering medications or BP targets in individuals 65 years and older. Trials were selected and appraised by pairs of independent reviewers.

RESULTS

We included 19 trials (42,134 patients). In individuals 65 years or older, antihypertensive therapy was associated with a reduction in all-cause mortality [relative risk: 0.88 (95% CI: 0.81 to 0.94); high certainty evidence; mean follow-up 31 months], cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, heart failure, stroke, and chronic kidney disease. Individuals 75 years or older had a significant reduction in the risk of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, stroke, and heart failure. Strict systolic BP targets (<120 mm Hg and <130 mm Hg) were associated with a significant reduction in the risk of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality and heart failure, whereas more liberal systolic targets (<150 mm Hg and <160 mm Hg) were associated with lower risk of heart failure and stroke. Older adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) had lower risk of chronic kidney disease without a significant reduction in other outcomes. However, there was no significant difference in estimates (i.e., interaction) between those with and without DM.

CONCLUSIONS

Individuals aged 65 years and older or 75 years and older who receive antihypertensive therapy have statistically significant reduction in the risk of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, heart failure, and stroke. There was no statistically significant difference in estimates between those with and without DM.

Effect Modification by Age on the Benefit or Harm of Antihypertensive Treatment for Elderly Hypertensives: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The influence of age on balance of benefit vs. potential harm of blood pressure (BP)-lowering therapy for elderly hypertensives is unclear. We evaluated the modifying effects of age on BP lowering for various adverse outcomes in hypertensive patients older than 60 years without specified comorbidities.

METHODS

All relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were systematically identified. Coronary heart disease, stroke, heart failure (HF), cardiovascular death, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), renal failure (RF), and all-cause death were assessed. Meta-regression analysis was used to explore the relationship between achieved systolic BP (SBP) and the risk of adverse events. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool the estimates.

RESULTS

Our study included 18 RCTs (n = 53,993). Meta-regression analysis showed a lower achieved SBP related with a lower risk of stroke and cardiovascular death, but an increased risk of RF. The regression slopes were comparable between populations stratifying by age 75 years. In subgroup analysis, the relative risks of a more aggressive BP lowering strategy were similar between patients aged older or less than 75 years for all outcomes except for RF (P for interaction = 0.02). Compared to treatment with final achieved SBP 140-150 mm Hg, a lower achieved SBP (<140 mm Hg) was significantly associated with decreased risk of stroke (relative risk = 0.68; 95% confidence interval = 0.55-0.85), HF (0.77; 0.60-0.99), cardiovascular death (0.68; 0.52-0.89), and MACE (0.83; 0.69-0.99).

CONCLUSIONS

To treat hypertension in the elderly, age had trivial effect modification on most outcomes, except for renal failure. Close monitoring of renal function may be warranted in the management of elderly hypertension.

Prediction of Prehypertenison and Hypertension Based on Anthropometry, Blood Parameters, and Spirometry

Hypertension and prehypertension are risk factors for cardiovascular diseases. However, the associations of both prehypertension and hypertension with anthropometry, blood parameters, and spirometry have not been investigated. The purpose of this study was to identify the risk factors for prehypertension and hypertension in middle-aged Korean adults and to study prediction models of prehypertension and hypertension combined with anthropometry, blood parameters, and spirometry. Binary logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the statistical significance of prehypertension and hypertension, and prediction models were developed using logistic regression, naïve Bayes, and decision trees. Among all risk factors for prehypertension, body mass index (BMI) was identified as the best indicator in both men [odds ratio (OR) = 1.429, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.304⁻1.462)] and women (OR = 1.428, 95% CI = 1.204⁻1.453). In contrast, among all risk factors for hypertension, BMI (OR = 1.993, 95% CI = 1.818⁻2.186) was found to be the best indicator in men, whereas the waist-to-height ratio (OR = 2.071, 95% CI = 1.884⁻2.276) was the best indicator in women. In the prehypertension prediction model, men exhibited an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.635, and women exhibited a predictive power with an AUC of 0.777. In the hypertension prediction model, men exhibited an AUC of 0.700, and women exhibited an AUC of 0.845. This study proposes various risk factors for prehypertension and hypertension, and our findings can be used as a large-scale screening tool for controlling and managing hypertension.

Effectiveness and safety of beta blockers in the management of hypertension in older adults: a systematic review to help reduce inappropriate prescribing

BACKGROUND

The benefit from a blood pressure lowering therapy with beta blockers may not outweigh its risks, especially in older populations. The aim of this study was to look for evidence on risks and benefits of beta blockers in older adults and to use this evidence to develop recommendations for the electronic decision support tool of the PRIMA-eDS project.

METHODS

Systematic review of the literature using a stage approach with searches for systematic reviews and meta-analyses first, and individual studies only if the previous searches are inconclusive. The target population were older adults (≥65 years old) with hypertension. We included studies reporting on the effectiveness and/or safety of beta blockers on clinically relevant endpoints (e.g. mortality, cardiovascular events, and stroke) in the management of hypertension. The recommendations were developed according to the GRADE methodology.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies were included, comprising one meta-analysis, four randomized controlled trials, six secondary analyses of randomized controlled trials and four observational studies. Seven studies involved only older adults and eight studies reported subgroup analyses by age. With regard to a composite endpoint (death, stroke or myocardial infarction) beta blockers were associated with a higher risk of events then were other antihypertensive agents. Further, beta blockers showed no benefit compared to other antihypertensive agents or placebo regarding mortality. They appear to be less effective than other antihypertensive agents in reducing cardiovascular events. Contradictory results were found regarding the effect of beta blockers on stroke. None of the studies explored the effect on quality of life, hospitalisation, functional impairment/status, safety endpoints or renal failure.

CONCLUSION

The quality of current evidence to interpret the benefits of beta blockers in hypertension is rather weak. It cannot be recommended to use beta blockers in older adults as first line agent for hypertension.

Changes in selected metabolic parameters in patients over 65 receiving hydrochlorothiazide plus amiloride, atenolol or placebo in the MRC elderly trial

Background

Treatment of hypertension reduces incidence of stroke, myocardial infarction and heart failure perhaps partly by controlling different metabolic parameters. There is limited information regarding the changes in potassium, sodium, weight, cholesterol and glucose levels in patients using anti-hypertensives. This study aimed to determine changes in potassium, sodium, glucose, cholesterol, weight, urea and urate levels in patients using anti-hypertensives. Furthermore, to describe these changes and differences between the atenolol, hydrochlorothiazide plus amiloride and placebo arms of the Medical Research Council (MRC) elderly randomised controlled trial.

Methods

Patients were randomly allocated to one of the three treatment arms. Measurements were taken at baseline, end of year one and end of year two in 4396 subjects. Linear Mixed Models (LMM) were used to determine the longitudinal profiles of sodium, potassium, weight, cholesterol, glucose, urea and urate. Estimates of changes within groups and difference between groups were obtained.

Results

Patients randomised to receive hydrochlorothiazide + amiloride experienced a significantly greater mean reduction in potassium, sodium and weight compared to placebo at end of year one - mean differences in change −0.18 mmol/L, (95 % CI: −0.21, −0.15); −1.45 mmol/L, (95 % CI: −1.62, −1.29) and −0.46 kgs (95 % CI: −0.73, −0.20) respectively, and greater increases in cholesterol, urea and urate - mean differences in change 0.16 mmol/L, (95 % CI: 0.10,0.22); 0.77 mmol/L, (95 % CI: 0.68, 0.87) and 53.10 μmol/L, (95 % CI: 49.35, 56.85) respectively. Changes were in the same direction but smaller in the atenololarm except for potassium and weight (increases). No group differences in glucose were found.

Conclusion

Results were in line with expectation except for lack of change in glucose in the hydrochlorothiazide + amiloride arms.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12872-016-0368-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Blood pressure variability and cardiovascular disease: systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

 To systematically review studies quantifying the associations of long term (clinic), mid-term (home), and short term (ambulatory) variability in blood pressure, independent of mean blood pressure, with cardiovascular disease events and mortality.

DATA SOURCES

 Medline, Embase, Cinahl, and Web of Science, searched to 15 February 2016 for full text articles in English.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR STUDY SELECTION

 Prospective cohort studies or clinical trials in adults, except those in patients receiving haemodialysis, where the condition may directly impact blood pressure variability. Standardised hazard ratios were extracted and, if there was little risk of confounding, combined using random effects meta-analysis in main analyses. Outcomes included all cause and cardiovascular disease mortality and cardiovascular disease events. Measures of variability included standard deviation, coefficient of variation, variation independent of mean, and average real variability, but not night dipping or day-night variation.

RESULTS

 41 papers representing 19 observational cohort studies and 17 clinical trial cohorts, comprising 46 separate analyses were identified. Long term variability in blood pressure was studied in 24 papers, mid-term in four, and short-term in 15 (two studied both long term and short term variability). Results from 23 analyses were excluded from main analyses owing to high risks of confounding. Increased long term variability in systolic blood pressure was associated with risk of all cause mortality (hazard ratio 1.15, 95% confidence interval 1.09 to 1.22), cardiovascular disease mortality (1.18, 1.09 to 1.28), cardiovascular disease events (1.18, 1.07 to 1.30), coronary heart disease (1.10, 1.04 to 1.16), and stroke (1.15, 1.04 to 1.27). Increased mid-term and short term variability in daytime systolic blood pressure were also associated with all cause mortality (1.15, 1.06 to 1.26 and 1.10, 1.04 to 1.16, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

 Long term variability in blood pressure is associated with cardiovascular and mortality outcomes, over and above the effect of mean blood pressure. Associations are similar in magnitude to those of cholesterol measures with cardiovascular disease. Limited data for mid-term and short term variability showed similar associations. Future work should focus on the clinical implications of assessment of variability in blood pressure and avoid the common confounding pitfalls observed to date.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

 PROSPERO CRD42014015695.

The effect of antihypertensive treatment on the incidence of stroke and cognitive decline in the elderly: a meta-analysis

AIM

To evaluate the effectiveness of antihypertensives in reducing neurocognitive outcomes in elderly patients.

PATIENTS & METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature search of randomized trials in which hypertensive patients with a mean age ≥65 years received antihypertensive or control treatment. Outcomes were stroke, transient ischemic attack, cognitive decline and dementia. We included 14 trials for meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Compared to placebo, antihypertensive treatment reduced the risk of stroke (RR: 0.67 [95% CI: 0.57-0.79]). Reduced risk was significant for transient ischemic attack, fatal stroke, nonfatal stroke and total stroke. There were insufficient data to compare individual agents.

CONCLUSION

Antihypertensive treatment is associated with a significant reduction in stroke in elderly individuals. Reductions in dementia and cognitive decline were not significant; however, there was short follow-up. Comparative effectiveness evidence is limited.

Visit-to-Visit Variability of Blood Pressure and Coronary Heart Disease, Stroke, Heart Failure, and Mortality: A Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Variability of blood pressure (BP) across outpatient visits is frequently dismissed as random fluctuation around a patient's underlying BP.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the association of visit-to-visit variability (VVV) of systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP with cardiovascular disease (CVD) and mortality outcomes.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

SETTING

Post hoc analysis of ALLHAT (Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial).

PARTICIPANTS

25 814 ALLHAT participants.

MEASUREMENTS

The VVV of SBP was defined as the SD across SBP measurements obtained at 7 visits conducted from 6 to 28 months after ALLHAT enrollment. Participants without CVD events during the first 28 months of follow-up were followed from the 28-month visit through the end of active ALLHAT follow-up. Outcomes included fatal coronary heart disease (CHD) or nonfatal myocardial infarction, all-cause mortality, stroke, and heart failure.

RESULTS

During follow-up, 1194 fatal CHD or nonfatal MI events, 1948 deaths, 606 strokes, and 921 heart failure events occurred. After multivariable adjustment, including for mean SBP, the hazard ratio comparing participants in the highest versus lowest quintile of SD of SBP (≥14.4 mm Hg vs. <6.5 mm Hg) was 1.30 (95% CI, 1.06 to 1.59) for fatal CHD or nonfatal MI, 1.58 (CI, 1.32 to 1.90) for all-cause mortality, 1.46 (CI, 1.06 to 2.01) for stroke, and 1.25 (CI, 0.97 to 1.61) for heart failure. Higher VVV of diastolic BP was also associated with CVD events and mortality.

LIMITATION

Long-term outcomes were not available.

CONCLUSION

Higher VVV of SBP is associated with an increased risk for CVD and mortality. Future studies should examine whether reducing VVV of BP lowers this risk.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

National Institutes of Health.

Visit-to-visit variability of blood pressure and cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Visit-to-visit variability of blood pressure (BP) has been associated with cardiovascular disease (CVD) and mortality in some but not all studies. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the association between visit-to-visit variability of BP and CVD and all-cause mortality. Medical databases were searched through June 4, 2014, for studies meeting the following eligibility criteria: adult participants; BP measurements at ≥3 visits; follow-up for CVD, coronary heart disease, stroke, or mortality outcomes; events confirmed via database, death certificate, or event ascertainment committee; and adjustment for confounders. Data were extracted by 2 reviewers and pooled using a random-effects model. Overall, 8870 abstracts were identified of which 37 studies, representing 41 separate cohorts, met inclusion criteria. Across studies, visit-to-visit variability of systolic BP and diastolic BP showed significant associations with outcomes in 181 of 312 (58.0%) and 61 of 188 (32.4%) analyses, respectively. Few studies provided sufficient data for pooling risk estimates. For each 5 mm Hg higher SD of systolic BP, the pooled hazard ratio for stroke across 7 cohorts was 1.17 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07-1.28), for coronary heart disease across 4 cohorts was 1.27 (95% CI, 1.07-1.51), for CVD across 5 cohorts was 1.12 (95% CI, 0.98-1.28), for CVD mortality across 5 cohorts was 1.22 (95% CI, 1.09-1.35), and for all-cause mortality across 4 cohorts was 1.20 (95% CI, 1.05-1.36). In summary, modest associations between visit-to-visit variability of BP and CVD and all-cause mortality are present in published studies. However, these findings are limited by the small amount of data available for meta-analysis.