Update on the Management of Hypertension: Recent Clinical Trials and the JNC 7

Association between NPPA promoter methylation and hypertension: results from Gusu cohort and replication in an independent sample

Background

Atrial natriuretic peptide (ANP), one of the main members of the natriuretic peptides system, has been associated with hypertension and related complications, but the underlying molecular mechanisms are not very clear. Here, we aimed to examine whether DNA methylation, a molecular modification to the genome, of the natriuretic peptide A gene (NPPA), the coding gene of ANP, was associated with hypertension.

Methods

Peripheral blood DNA methylation of NPPA promoter was quantified by target bisulfite sequencing in 2498 community members (mean aged 53 years, 38% men) as a discovery sample and 1771 independent participants (mean aged 62 years, 54% men) as a replication sample. In both samples, we conducted a single CpG association analysis, followed by a gene-based association analysis, to examine the association between NPPA promoter methylation and hypertension, adjusting for age, sex, education level, cigarette smoking, alcohol consumption, obesity, fasting glucose, and lipids. Multiple testing was controlled by the false discovery rate approach.

Results

Of the 9 CpG loci assayed, hypermethylation at 5 CpGs (CpG1, CpG3, CpG6, CpG8, and CpG9) was significantly associated with a lower odds of prevalent hypertension in the discovery sample, and one CpG methylation (CpG1 located at Chr1:11908353) was successfully replicated in the replication sample (OR = 0.82, 95%CI 0.74–0.91, q = 0.002) after adjusting for covariates and multiple testing. The gene-based analysis found that DNA methylation of the 9 CpGs at NPPA promoter as a whole was significantly associated with blood pressure and prevalent hypertension in both samples (all P < 0.05).

Conclusions

DNA methylation levels at NPPA promoter were decreased in Chinese adults with hypertension. Aberrant DNA methylation of the NPPA gene may participate in the mechanisms of hypertension.

Bevacizumab induced hypertension in gynecologic cancer: Does it resolve after completion of therapy?

Hypertension (HTN) induced by bevacizumab is a side effect that is often thought to resolve after treatment. However, there are currently no reports on rates of resolution. We assess the incidence and timing of the resolution of bevacizumab induced HTN.

We evaluated all patients treated with bevacizumab for gynecologic malignancies at a single institution from 2012 through 2014. HTN was retrospectively diagnosed and staged by CTCAE v4.0 criteria. Resolution of HTN was defined as ≥ 2 values return to baseline blood pressure and/or discontinuation/decrease of blood pressure medications.

We identified 104 patients; 35 were excluded due to receiving bevacizumab at time of analysis. Grade 2 or higher induced HTN was identified in 34/69 (49.3%) patients, of which 26/69 (37.7%) had grade 2 HTN and 8/69 (11.6%) had grade 3/4 HTN. Onset of HTN occurred at a median of 67 (14–791) days. Resolution of HTN occurred in 28/34 (82.4%) patients with a median time to resolution of 87 (3–236) days. BMI, history of HTN, blood pressure medications, prior bevacizumab treatment, number of bevacizumab cycles, CA-125 and albumin at initiation of treatment were not independent risk factors associated with developing HTN in multivariate analysis. Median PFS for those with HTN was 12.5 (1.9–45.8) months vs 11.0 (2.1–44.7) for those without (p = 0.17).

Hypertension induced by bevacizumab resolved in 82% of patients in a median of 87 days. There were no identifiable risk factors associated with induced HTN and HTN was not a biomarker for improved prognosis in our cohort.

•

Bevacizumab induced HTN in gynecologic cancers has a resolution rate of 82% with a median of 87 days.

•

We found no specific risk factors for development of bevacizumab induced HTN in gynecologic cancers.

•

Development of bevacizumab induced hypertension does not correlate with improved PFS in our cohort.

Impact of angiotensin receptor blockade in combination with hydrochlorothiazide 25 mg in 2121 patients with stage 1-2 hypertension

The antihypertensive effects of telmisartan 80 mg versus valsartan 160 mg, both combined with hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) 25 mg, were assessed in a pooled analysis from two large trials with identical study designs in patients with stage 1-2 hypertension. The trials were double-blind with a 4:4:1 randomization scheme to compare once-daily telmisartan 80 mg and HCTZ 25 mg versus once-daily valsartan 160 mg and HCTZ 25 mg versus once-daily placebo on reductions in clinic blood pressure (BP). The primary end point was changes from baseline in BP at the end of 8 weeks. In total, 2121 patients were randomized (telmisartan-HCTZ, 942, valsartan-HCTZ, 952, and placebo, 227) and had baseline seated BPs of 154/102 and 155/102 mm Hg in the two studies, respectively. Changes from baseline in BP after administration of telmisartan-HCTZ (-24.5/-18.0 mm Hg) were significantly greater than for both placebo (-4.1/-6.5 mm Hg) and valsartan-HCTZ (-22.3/-16.8 mm Hg) (versus placebo, P<0.0001 for systolic and diastolic BP; versus valsartan-HCTZ, P=0.0004 for systolic BP and P=0.0019 for diastolic BP). Adverse event rates were higher in the placebo group than in the active treatment groups (placebo, 41%, telmisartan-HCTZ, 30%, and valsartan-HCTZ, 30%, P<0.05). These data confirm that telmisartan-HCTZ at doses of 80/25 mg lowered systolic and diastolic BP to a greater extent than valsartan-HCTZ at doses of 160/25 mg in stage 1-2 hypertension. The magnitude of the BP-lowering effect provides support for the use of angiotensin receptor blockers with higher doses of a thiazide diuretic (25 mg) to improve hypertension control.

Improving blood pressure control: increase the dose of diuretic or switch to a fixed-dose angiotensin receptor blocker/diuretic? the valsartan hydrochlorothiazide diuretic for initial control and titration to achieve optimal therapeutic effect (Val-DICTATE) trial

To assess the strategy of increasing the dose of a diuretic compared with using an angiotensin receptor blocker in combination with a diuretic, the authors performed a multicenter, randomized, parallel group trial in hypertensive patients (baseline blood pressure [BP], 153/97 mm Hg) whose BP remained uncontrolled on initial low-dose diuretic monotherapy (hydrochlorothiazide [HCTZ] 12.5 mg Hg). Patients with stage 1 and 2 hypertension were randomized to treatment with valsartan/HCTZ (160/12.5 mg) or to doubling of the HCTZ dose (25 mg). The primary end point was the percentage of patients whose clinic BP values were <140/90 mm Hg following 4 weeks of double-blind therapy. A significantly higher proportion (P<.001) of hypertensive patients met BP control levels in the valsartan/HCTZ (160/12.5 mg) group compared with the HCTZ 25 mg group (37% vs 16%). Changes from baseline in BP were significantly greater (P<.001) for both systolic BP and diastolic BP in the combination therapy arm compared with the diuretic monotherapy arm (-12. 4/-7.5 mm Hg in valsartan/HCTZ 160/12.5 mg group vs -5.6/-2.1 mm Hg in HCTZ 25 mg group). Tolerability and adverse events were similar in the 2 treatment groups. This study suggests that in the management of hypertension, utilizing an angiotensin receptor blocker/diuretic combination was more effective in lowering BP and achieving BP goals when compared with increasing the dose of the diuretic.

Effects of the Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers Telmisartan vs Valsartan in Combination With Hydrochlorothiazide 25 mg Once Daily for the Treatment of Hypertension

To attain recent goals of blood pressure (BP) control, multiple drug therapy combinations are required, including higher doses of thiazide diuretics in combination with other classes of antihypertensive drug therapy. Thus, the authors evaluated the antihypertensive effects of telmisartan vs valsartan when combined with hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) 25 mg in a large (N=1066), placebo-controlled trial in patients with stage 1 or 2 hypertension. The primary end points were the changes from baseline in seated diastolic and systolic BP at the end of the 8-week treatment period. Safety end points included adverse events, changes in laboratory parameters, and pulse rate. Changes from baseline in BP following telmisartan-HCTZ (-24.0/-17.6 mm Hg) were significantly greater than both placebo (-4.4/-6.8 mm Hg) and valsartan-HCTZ (-21.2/-16.1 mm Hg) (vs placebo, P<.001 for systolic and diastolic BP; vs valsartan-HCTZ, P=.004 for systolic BP and P=.019 for diastolic BP). The total number of patients with at least 1 adverse event reported were similar among the 3 treatment groups (placebo, 49%; telmisartan-HCTZ, 43%; and valsartan-HCTZ, 38%). In conclusion, telmisartan-HCTZ at doses of 80/25 mg lowered both systolic and diastolic BP to a greater extent than valsartan-HCTZ at doses of 160/25 mg. These data support using a higher dose of a thiazide diuretic (25 mg) with a long-acting angiotensin receptor blocker as a useful strategy for improving hypertension control.

Optimizing hypertension management in clinical practice

A clear relationship exists between elevated blood pressure (BP) and various manifestations of cardiovascular disease. Despite the availability of numerous treatment guidelines, hypertension remains inadequately controlled, with only a small proportion of patients achieving target BP levels. Many factors, both patient and physician related, contribute to this poor level of hypertension control. Major determinants include the implementation of inappropriate treatment regimens that do not enable patients to achieve goal and poor patient compliance. For example, it is widely acknowledged that most patients require two or more antihypertensive drugs to achieve BP goal; however, physicians may be reluctant to employ such treatment strategies. The aim of this review is to explore factors that contribute to poor hypertension control rates and how to overcome these, including the rationale for selecting combination therapy, with particular reference to angiotensin II receptor blocker combinations.

Guidelines for Prevention of Stroke in Patients With Ischemic Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack

The aim of this new statement is to provide comprehensive and timely evidence-based recommendations on the prevention of ischemic stroke among survivors of ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack. Evidence-based recommendations are included for the control of risk factors, interventional approaches for atherosclerotic disease, antithrombotic treatments for cardioembolism, and the use of antiplatelet agents for noncardioembolic stroke. Further recommendations are provided for the prevention of recurrent stroke in a variety of other specific circumstances, including arterial dissections; patent foramen ovale; hyperhomocysteinemia; hypercoagulable states; sickle cell disease; cerebral venous sinus thrombosis; stroke among women, particularly with regard to pregnancy and the use of postmenopausal hormones; the use of anticoagulation after cerebral hemorrhage; and special approaches for the implementation of guidelines and their use in high-risk populations.

Can we justify goal blood pressure of <140/90 mm hg in most hypertensives?

Hypertension is a common disorder with well-recognized consequences on the heart, brain, and kidney as target organs. Guidelines espouse a treatment goal of blood pressure reduction to <140 mm Hg for the systolic pressure and <90 mm Hg for the diastolic pressure in most hypertensive patients. In this review, the basis for these recommendations, the practical achievement of these goals in various practice settings, and the risk versus the benefit of achieving such goals in most hypertensive patients are examined.

Chronic kidney disease: the global challenge

The worldwide rise in the number of patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and consequent end-stage renal failure necessitating renal replacement therapy is threatening to reach epidemic proportions over the next decade, and only a small number of countries have robust economies able to meet the challenges posed. A change in global approach to CKD from treatment of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) to much more aggressive primary and secondary prevention is therefore imperative. In this Seminar, we examine the epidemiology of CKD worldwide, with emphasis on early detection and prevention, and the feasibility of methods for detection and primary prevention of CKD. We also review the risk factors and markers of progressive CKD. We explore current understanding of the mechanisms underlying renal scarring leading to ESRD to inform on current and future interventions as well as evidence relating to interventions to slow the progression of CKD. Finally, we make strategic recommendations based on future research to stem the worldwide growth of CKD. Consideration is given to health economics. A global and concerted approach to CKD must be adopted in both more and less developed countries to avoid a major catastrophe.