Sustained SBP control and long-term nursing home admission among Medicare beneficiaries

OBJECTIVES

Sustaining SBP control reduces the risk for cardiovascular events that impair function but its association with nursing home admission has not been well studied.

METHODS

We conducted an analysis of sustained SBP control and long-term nursing home admissions using data from the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT) linked to Medicare claims restricted to participants with fee-for-service coverage, at least eight study visits with SBP measurements, who were not living in a nursing home during a 48-month baseline BP assessment period (n = 6557). Sustained SBP control was defined as less than 140 mmHg at less than 50%, 50% to less than 75%, 75% to less than 100%, and 100% of visits. Nursing home admissions were identified using the Medicare Long Term Care Minimum Data Set.

RESULTS

The mean age of participants was 73.8 years and 44.3% were men. Over a median follow-up of 9.2 years, 844 participants (12.8%) had a nursing home admission. Rates of nursing home admission per 100 person-years were 16.3 for participants with SBP control at less than 50%, 14.1 at 50% to less than 75%, 7.8 at 75% to less than 100%, and 5.3 at 100% of visits. Compared with those with sustained SBP control at less than 50% of visits, hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) for nursing home admission were 0.79 (0.66-0.93), 0.70 (0.58-0.84), and 0.57 (0.44-0.74) among participants with SBP control at 50% to less than 75%, 75% to less than 100%, and 100% of visits, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Among Medicare beneficiaries in ALLHAT, sustained SBP control was associated with a lower risk of long-term nursing home admission.

Association of Sustained Blood Pressure Control with Lower Risk for High-Cost Multimorbidities Among Medicare Beneficiaries in ALLHAT

BACKGROUND

Clustering of chronic conditions is associated with high healthcare costs. Sustaining blood pressure (BP) control could be a strategy to prevent high-cost multimorbidity clusters.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the association between sustained systolic BP (SBP) control and incident multimorbidity cluster dyads and triads.

DESIGN

Cohort study of Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT) linked to Medicare claims.

PARTICIPANTS

ALLHAT included adults with hypertension and ≥1 coronary heart disease risk factor. This analysis was restricted to 5234 participants with ≥ 8 SBP measurements during a 48-month BP assessment period.

MAIN MEASURES

SBP control was defined as <140 mm Hg at <50%, 50 to <75%, 75 to <100%, and 100% of study visits during the BP assessment period. High-cost multimorbidity clusters included dyads (stroke/chronic kidney disease [CKD], stroke/chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [COPD], stroke/heart failure [HF], stroke/asthma, COPD/CKD) and triads (stroke/CKD/asthma, stroke/CKD/COPD, stroke/CKD/depression, stroke/CKD/HF, stroke/HF/asthma) identified during follow-up.

KEY RESULTS

Incident dyads occurred in 1334 (26%) participants and triads occurred in 481 (9%) participants over a median follow-up of 9.2 years. Among participants with SBP control at <50%, 50 to <75%, 75 to <100%, and 100% of visits, 32%, 23%, 23%, and 19% of participants developed high-cost dyads, respectively, and 13%, 9%, 8%, and 5% of participants developed high-cost triads, respectively. Compared to those with sustained BP control at <50% of visits, adjusted HRs (95% CI) for incident dyads were 0.66 (0.57, 0.75), 0.67 (0.59, 0.77), and 0.51 (0.42, 0.62) for SBP control at 50 to <75%, 75 to <100%, and 100% of visits, respectively. The corresponding HRs (95% CI) for incident triads were 0.69 (0.55, 0.85), 0.56 (0.44, 0.71), and 0.32 (0.22, 0.47).

CONCLUSIONS

Among Medicare beneficiaries in ALLHAT, sustained SBP was associated with a lower risk of developing high-cost multimorbidity dyads and triads.

Association of Sustained Blood Pressure Control with Multimorbidity Progression Among Older Adults

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Due to the high costs and excess mortality associated with multimorbidity, there is a need to develop approaches for delaying its progression. High blood pressure (BP) is a common chronic condition and a risk factor for many additional chronic conditions, making it an ideal target for intervention. The purpose of this analysis was to determine the association between the level of sustained BP control and the progression of multimorbidity.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT) linked to Medicare claims.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 6,591 ALLHAT participants with Medicare who had systolic BP (SBP) measurements at eight or more study visits.

MEASUREMENTS

SBP control was categorized as lower than 140 mm Hg at less than 50%, 50% to less than 75%, 75% to less than 100%, and 100% of visits. Multimorbidity progression was defined by the number of incident chronic conditions, including arthritis, asthma, atrial fibrillation, cancer, chronic kidney disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, coronary heart disease, dementia, depression, diabetes mellitus, heart failure, hyperlipidemia, osteoporosis, and stroke. Recurrent event survival analysis was used to calculate rate ratios (RRs) for the association of sustained SBP control with progression of multimorbidity.

RESULTS

Rates of incident conditions per 10 person-years (95% CIs) were 5.2 (5.1-5.4), 4.7 (4.5-4.8), 4.4 (4.2-4.5), and 4.0 (3.8-4.2) for participants with SBP control at less than 50%, 50% to less than 75%, 75% to less than 100%, and 100% of visits, respectively, over a median follow-up of 9.0 years. Compared with participants with SBP control at less than 50% of visits, adjusted RRs (95% CIs) for multimorbidity progression were 0.90 (0.86-0.95), 0.85 (0.81-0.89), and 0.77 (0.72-0.82) for those with SBP control at 50% to less than 75%, 75% to less than 100%, and 100% of visits, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Sustaining BP control may be an effective approach to slow multimorbidity progression and may reduce the population burden of multimorbidity.

Sustained blood pressure control and coronary heart disease, stroke, heart failure, and mortality: An observational analysis of ALLHAT

Achieving blood pressure (BP) control is associated with lower cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk, but less is known about CVD risk associated with sustained BP control over time. This observational analysis of the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT) was restricted to participants with four to seven visits with systolic BP (SBP) measurements during a 22-month period (n = 24 309). The authors categorized participants as having sustained BP control (SBP < 140 mm Hg) at 100%, 75% to <100%, 50% to <75%, and <50% of visits during this period. Outcomes included fatal coronary heart disease (CHD)/nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, heart failure (HF), a composite CVD outcome (fatal CHD/nonfatal MI, stroke, or HF), and mortality. Hazard ratios (HRs) for the association of category of sustained BP control for each outcome were obtained using proportional hazards models. SBP control was present among 20.0% of participants at 100%, 16.4% at 75% to less than 100%, 27.0% at 50% to less than 75%, and 36.6% at less than 50% of visits. Compared to those with SBP control at 100% visits, adjusted HR (95% CI) among those with SBP control at <50% of visits was 1.16 (0.93-1.44) for fatal CHD/nonfatal MI, 1.71 (1.26-2.32) for stroke, 1.63 (1.30-2.06) for HF, 1.39 (1.20-1.62) for the composite CVD outcome, and 1.14 (0.99-1.30) for mortality. Sustained SBP control may be beneficial for preventing stroke, HF, and CVD outcomes in adults taking antihypertensive medication.

Rapid eGFR change as a determinant of cardiovascular and renal disease outcomes and of mortality in hypertensive adults with and without type 2 diabetes

A rapid decline in estimated glomerular filtration rate over 2 years in a large hypertensive cohort was associated with similar risks for overall cardiovascular disease in people with or without diabetes mellitus, but with higher all-cause mortality, heart failure, and end stage renal disease risk in people with diabetes.

Risk Factors Influencing Outcomes of Atrial Fibrillation in ALLHAT

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

ALLHAT, a randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, multicenter clinical trial of high risk hypertensive participants, compared treatment with an ACE-inhibitor (lisinopril) or calcium channel blocker (amlodipine) with a diuretic (chlorthalidone). Primary outcome was the occurrence of fatal coronary heart disease or nonfatal myocardial infarction. For this report, post-hoc analyses were conducted to determine the contribution of baseline characteristics of participants with or without baseline or incident atrial fibrillation (AF) and atrial flutter (AFL) to stroke, heart failure (HF), coronary heart disease (CHD), and mortality outcomes.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Minnesota Coding of baseline and biennial in-trial ECGs was used to determine the 334 baseline and 537 incident AF/AFL cases, respectively participants with AF/AFL: Cox regression was used to estimate hazard ratios of presence versus absence of either baseline or incident AF/AFL (as time-dependent covariate) for occurrence of stroke, CHD, HF, or mortality, while adjusting for selected baseline characteristics. Adjusted Cox regression was used to obtain hazard ratios (HRs) for presence versus absence of selected baseline characteristics among those with and without either baseline or incident AF/AFL. After adjusting for baseline characteristics, baseline AF/AFL was associated with stroke, HF, and mortality (HRs [95% CIs] 3.18, [2.34-4.33]; 2.65 [2.02-3.49]; and 2.10 [CI, 1.73-2.55], respectively, P < 0.05). Incident AF/AFL was a significant risk factor for HF and mortality (HRs 2.80 and 2.06, respectively, P < 0.05). Risk factor profiles for clinical outcomes for those with and without baseline or incident AF/AFL were largely similar.

CONCLUSIONS

AF/AFL is a significant risk factor for stroke, HF, and mortality. Additional risk factors for these outcomes were generally similar for participants with and without baseline or incident AF/AFL.

The Effects of eGFR Change on CVD, Renal, and Mortality Outcomes in a Hypertensive Cohort Treated With 3 Different Antihypertensive Medications

BACKGROUND

Impaired renal function is a risk factor for cardiovascular disease, end-stage renal disease (ESRD), and mortality. The impact of short-term renal function decline on outcomes is less well studied. The association of antihypertensive medications with the impact of short-term estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) decline is not known.

METHODS

We examined 20,207 hypertensive participants with baseline and 2-year creatinine levels from which eGFR changes were estimated. The associations between eGFR change with incident coronary heart disease (CHD), stroke, heart failure (HF), all-cause mortality, and ESRD during 2.9 years of in-trial follow up, and with mortality during in-trial and post-trial follow-up (7.6 years), were studied. Results were assessed by primary hypertension (HTN) treatment (chlorthalidone, lisinopril, and amlodipine) and adjusted for baseline eGFR levels.

RESULTS

In the short run, an eGFR decline below the cohort median (-1.28 ml/minute/1.73 m2/2 years) vs. above the median, or a 5 ml/min/1.73 m2/year decline vs. no decline, was associated with significant hazard risk for CHD (1.06-1.28), HF (1.24-1.91), ESRD (2.84-6.01), and mortality (1.08-1.19), but not with stroke risk. In the long term, there was a significant association with mortality (1.11-1.34). Interaction terms for outcomes by antihypertensive treatments were not statistically significant except for ESRD between amlodipine vs. chlorthalidone (hazard ratio: 3.17 [2.59, 3.88] vs. 2.41 [1.98, 2.97]; P interaction = 0.005) for a 5 ml/min/1.73 m2/year eGFR decline.

CONCLUSION

Decline in eGFR over 2 years is associated with increased risk of clinical outcomes beyond the effects of baseline eGFR. These risks were the same irrespective of the primary medication used to treat HTN.

Baseline Quality of Life and Risk of Stroke in the ALLHAT Study (Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial)

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The visual analogue scale is a self-reported, validated tool to measure quality of life (QoL). Our purpose was to determine whether baseline QoL predicted strokes in the ALLHAT study (Antihypertensive and Lipid Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial) and evaluate determinants of poststroke change in QoL. In the ALLHAT study, among the 33 357 patients randomized to treatment arms, 1525 experienced strokes; 1202 (79%) strokes were nonfatal. This study cohort includes 32 318 (97%) subjects who completed the baseline visual analogue scale QoL estimate.

METHODS

QoL was measured on a visual analogue scale and adjusted using a Torrance transformation (transformed QoL [TQoL]). Kaplan-Meier curves and adjusted proportional hazards analyses were used to estimate the effect of TQoL on the risk of stroke, on a continuous scale (0-1) and by quartiles (≤0.81, >0.81≤0.89, >0.89≤0.95, >0.95). We analyzed the change from baseline to first poststroke TQoL using adjusted linear regression.

RESULTS

After adjusting for multiple stroke risk factors, the hazard ratio for stroke events for baseline TQoL was 0.93 (95% confidence interval, 0.89-0.98) per 0.1 U increase. The lowest baseline TQoL quartile had a 20% increased stroke risk (hazard ratio=1.20 [95% confidence interval, 1.00-1.44]) compared with the reference highest quartile TQoL. Poststroke TQoL change was significant within all treatment groups (P≤0.001). Multivariate regression analysis revealed that baseline TQoL was the strongest predictor of poststroke TQoL with similar results for the untransformed QoL.

CONCLUSIONS

The lowest baseline TQoL quartile had a 20% higher stroke risk than the highest quartile. Baseline TQoL was the only factor that predicted poststroke change in TQoL.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00000542.

Conditional moving linear regression: modeling the recruitment process for ALLHAT

Effective recruitment is a prerequisite for successful execution of a clinical trial. ALLHAT, a large hypertension treatment trial (N = 42, 418), provided an opportunity to evaluate adaptive modeling of recruitment processes using conditional moving linear regression. Our statistical modeling of recruitment, comparing Brownian and fractional Brownian motion, indicates that fractional Brownian motion combined with moving linear regression is better than classic Brownian motion in terms of higher conditional probability of achieving a global recruitment goal in four week ahead projections. Further research is needed to evaluate how recruitment modeling can assist clinical trialists in planning and executing clinical trials. Clinical Trial Registration: www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT00000542.

Association of 3 Different Antihypertensive Medications With Hip and Pelvic Fracture Risk in Older Adults: Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

On the basis of observational studies, the use of thiazide diuretics for the treatment of hypertension is associated with reduced fracture risk compared with nonuse. Data from randomized clinical trials are lacking.

OBJECTIVE

To examine whether the use of thiazide diuretics for the treatment of hypertension is associated with reduced fracture risk compared with nonuse.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Using Veterans Affairs and Medicare claims data, this study examined hip and pelvic fracture hospitalizations in Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial participants randomized to first-step therapy with a thiazide-type diuretic (chlorthalidone), a calcium channel blocker (amlodipine besylate), or an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (lisinopril). Recruitment was from February 1994 to January 1998; in-trial follow-up ended in March 2002. The mean follow-up was 4.9 years. Posttrial follow-up was conducted through the end of 2006, using passive surveillance via national databases. For this secondary analysis, which used an intention-to-treat approach, data were analyzed from February 1, 1994, through December 31, 2006.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Hip and pelvic fracture hospitalizations.

RESULTS

A total of 22 180 participants (mean [SD] age, 70.4 [6.7] years; 43.0% female; and 49.9% white non-Hispanic, 31.2% African American, and 19.1% other ethnic groups) were followed for up to 8 years (mean [SD], 4.9 [1.5] years) during masked therapy. After trial completion, 16 622 participants for whom claims data were available were followed for up to 5 additional years (mean [SD] total follow-up, 7.8 [3.1] years). During the trial, 338 fractures occurred. Participants randomized to receive chlorthalidone vs amlodipine or lisinopril had a lower risk of fracture on adjusted analyses (hazards ratio [HR], 0.79; 95% CI, 0.63-0.98; P = .04). Risk of fracture was significantly lower in participants randomized to receive chlorthalidone vs lisinopril (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.58-0.98; P = .04) but not significantly different compared with those randomized to receive amlodipine (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.63-1.08; P = .17). During the entire trial and posttrial period of follow-up, the cumulative incidence of fractures was nonsignificantly lower in participants randomized to receive chlorthalidone vs lisinopril or amlodipine (HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.74-1.03; P = .10) and vs each medication separately. In sensitivity analyses, when 1 year after randomization was used as the baseline (to allow for the effects of medications on bone to take effect), similar results were obtained for in-trial and in-trial plus posttrial follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

These findings from a large randomized clinical trial provide evidence of a beneficial effect of thiazide-type diuretic therapy in reducing hip and pelvic fracture risk compared with treatment with other antihypertensive medications.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00000542.

Electrocardiographic measures of left ventricular hypertrophy in the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial

Left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) predicts cardiovascular risk in hypertensive patients. We analyzed baseline/follow-up electrocardiographies in 26,376 Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial participants randomized to amlodipine (A), lisinopril (L), or chlorthalidone (C). Prevalent/incident LVH was examined using continuous and categorical classifications of Cornell voltage. At 2 and 4 years, prevalence of LVH in the C group (5.57%; 6.14%) was not statistically different from A group (2 years: 5.47%; P = .806, 4 years: 6.54%; P = .857) or L group (2 years: 5.64%; P = .857, 4 years: 6.50%; P = .430). Incident LVH followed similarly, with no difference at 2 years for C (2.99%) compared to A (2.57%; P = .173) or L (3.16%; P = .605) and at 4 years (C = 3.52%, A = 3.29%, L = 3.71%; P = .521 C vs. A, P = .618 C vs. L). Mean Cornell voltage decreased comparably across treatment groups (Δ baseline, 2 years = +3 to -27 μV, analysis of variance P = .8612; 4 years = +10 to -17 μV, analysis of variance P = .9692). We conclude that risk reductions associated with C treatment in secondary end points of the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial cannot be attributed to differential improvements in electrocardiography LVH.

Should Antihypertensive Treatment Recommendations Differ in Patients With and Without Coronary Heart Disease? (from the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial [ALLHAT])

Thiazide-type diuretics have been recommended for initial treatment of hypertension in most patients, but should this recommendation differ for patients with and without coronary heart disease (CHD)? The Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT) was a randomized, double-blind hypertension treatment trial in 42,418 participants with high risk of combined cardiovascular disease (CVD) (25% with preexisting CHD). This post hoc analysis compares long-term major clinical outcomes in those assigned amlodipine (n = 9048) or lisinopril (n = 9,054) with those assigned chlorthalidone (n = 15,255), stratified by CHD status. After 4 to 8 years, randomized treatment was discontinued. Total follow-up (active treatment + passive surveillance using national databases for deaths and hospitalizations) was 8 to 13 years. For most CVD outcomes, end-stage renal disease, and total mortality, there were no differences across randomized treatment arms regardless of baseline CHD status. In-trial rates of CVD were significantly higher for lisinopril compared with chlorthalidone, and rates of heart failure were significantly higher for amlodipine compared with chlorthalidone in those with and without CHD (overall hazard ratios [HRs] 1.10, p <0.001, and 1.38, p <0.001, respectively). During extended follow-up, significant outcomes according to CHD status interactions (p = 0.012) were noted in amlodipine versus chlorthalidone comparison for CVD and CHD mortality (HR 0.88, p = 0.04, and 0.84, p = 0.04, respectively) in those with CHD at baseline (HR 1.06, p = 0.15, and 1.08, p = 0.17) and in those without. The results of the overall increased stroke mortality in lisinopril compared with chlorthalidone (HR 1.2; p = 0.03) and hospitalized heart failure in amlodipine compared with chlorthalidone (HR 1.12; p = 0.01) during extended follow-up did not differ by baseline CHD status. In conclusion, these results provide no reason to alter our previous recommendation to include a properly dosed diuretic (such as chlorthalidone 12.5 to 25 mg/day) in the initial antihypertensive regimen for most hypertensive patients.

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.

Impaired fasting glucose and body mass index as determinants of mortality in ALLHAT: is the obesity paradox real?

Emerging literature suggests that obesity may be "protective" against mortality and cardiovascular outcomes, while dysglycemia may worsen outcomes regardless of obesity. The authors measured the association of weight, smoking, and glycemia with mortality in the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT). Among 5423 ALLHAT participants without established diabetes or cardiovascular disease, 3980 (73%) had normal fasting glucose and 1443 (27%) had impaired fasting glucose (IFG) levels at study entry. After a median of 4.9 years follow-up, 554 (10%) had died (37% cardiovascular). IFG was associated with higher all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.23; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02-1.50), while obesity was associated with lower all-cause mortality (adjusted HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.60-0.96). However, after excluding underweight individuals (body mass index [BMI] <22 kg/m(2) ) and smokers, neither obesity nor IFG was associated with all-cause mortality [corrected]. Although obesity appeared protective against mortality, this association was not significant in never-smokers or after exclusion of BMI <22 kg/m(2) . The obesity paradox may result from confounding by a sicker, underweight referent population and smoking.

Risk of hospitalized gastrointestinal bleeding in persons randomized to diuretic, ACE-inhibitor, or calcium-channel blocker in ALLHAT

Calcium channel blockers (CCBs) are an important class of medication useful in the treatment of hypertension. Several observational studies have suggested an association between CCB therapy and gastrointestinal (GI) hemorrhage. Using administrative databases, the authors re-examined in a post-hoc analysis whether the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT) participants randomized to the CCB amlodipine had a greater risk of hospitalized GI bleeding (a prespecified outcome) compared with those randomized to the diuretic chlorthalidone or the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor lisinopril. Participants randomized to chlorthalidone did not have a reduced risk for GI bleeding hospitalizations compared with participants randomized to amlodipine (hazard ratio [HR], 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.92-1.28). Those randomized to lisinopril were at increased risk of GI bleeding compared with those randomized to chlorthalidone (HR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.00-1.36). In a post-hoc comparison, participants assigned to lisinopril therapy had a higher risk of hospitalized GI hemorrhage (HR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.06-1.51) vs those assigned to amlodipine. In-study use of atenolol prior to first GI hemorrhage was related to a lower incidence of GI bleeding (HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.57-0.83). Hypertensive patients on amlodipine do not have an increased risk of GI bleeding hospitalizations compared with those taking either chlorthalidone or lisinopril.

Long-term follow-up of moderately hypercholesterolemic hypertensive patients following randomization to pravastatin vs usual care: the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT-LLT)

The authors conducted a randomized, controlled, multicenter trial, in which they assigned well-controlled hypertensive participants aged 55 years and older with moderate hypercholesterolemia to receive pravastatin (n=5170) or usual care (n=5185) for 4 to 8 years, when trial therapy was discontinued. Passive surveillance using national databases to ascertain deaths and hospitalizations continued for a total follow-up of 8 to 13 years to assess whether mortality and morbidity differences persisted or new differences developed. During the post-trial period, fatal and nonfatal outcomes were available for 98% and 64% of participants, respectively. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality and the secondary outcomes included cardiovascular mortality, coronary heart disease (CHD), stroke, heart failure, cardiovascular disease, and end-stage renal disease. No significant differences appeared in mortality for pravastatin vs usual care (hazard ratio [HR], 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.89-1.03) or other secondary outcomes. Similar to the previously reported in-trial result, there was a significant treatment effect for CHD in black patients (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.64-0.98). However, the in-trial result showing a significant treatment by race effect did not remain significant during the entire follow-up (P=.08). These findings are consistent with evidence from other large trials that show statins prevent CHD and add evidence that they are effective for CHD prevention in black patients.

Clinical significance of incident hypokalemia and hyperkalemia in treated hypertensive patients in the antihypertensive and lipid-lowering treatment to prevent heart attack trial

Concerns exist that diuretic-induced changes in serum potassium may have adverse effects in hypertensive patients. The Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial, a large practice-based clinical trial, made it possible to examine consequences of observed changes in potassium during care in conventional practice settings. Normokalemic participants randomized to chlorthalidone (C) versus amlodipine or lisinopril as a first-step drug were stratified by year-1 potassium. Postyear-1 outcomes among hypokalemics (potassium, <3.5 mmol/L) and hyperkalemics (potassium, >5.4 mmol/L) were compared with normokalemics (potassium, 3.5-5.4 mmol/L). Year-1 hypokalemia incidence was 6.8%; incidence in C (12.9%) differed from amlodipine (2.1%; P<0.001) and lisinopril (1.0%; P<0.01). Hyperkalemia incidence (2.0%) was greater in lisinopril (3.6%) than in C (1.2%; P<0.01) or amlodipine (1.9%; P<0.01). Coronary heart disease occurred in 8.1% with hypokalemia, 8.0% with normokalemia, and 11.1% with hyperkalemia. Overall, mortality was higher in hypokalemics than in normokalemics (Cox hazard ratio, 1.21 [95% CI, 1.02-1.44]) with statistically significant (interaction, P<0.01) disparity in hazard ratios for the 3 treatment arms (hazard ratios, C=1.21, amlodipine=1.60, lisinopril=3.82). Hyperkalemia was associated with increased risk of combined cardiovascular disease (hazard ratio, 1.58 [95% CI, 1.15-2.18]) without significant treatment interactions. In conventional practice settings, the uncommon appearance of hyperkalemia was associated with increased cardiovascular disease risk. Hypokalemia was associated with increased mortality; however, the statistically significant heterogeneity in hazard ratios across treatment groups strongly suggests that the observed increase in mortality is unrelated to the specific effects of C. Thus, for most patients, concerns about potassium levels should not influence the clinician's decision about initiating hypertension treatment with low-moderate doses of thiazide diuretics (12.5-25.0 mg of C).

Long-term effects of incident diabetes mellitus on cardiovascular outcomes in people treated for hypertension: the ALLHAT Diabetes Extension Study

BACKGROUND

Thiazide-type diuretics are associated with an increased incidence of diabetes compared with other antihypertensive medications. In this study, we determined the long-term cardiovascular disease (CVD) consequences of incident diuretic-associated diabetes compared with the effects of incident diabetes associated with calcium channel blocker and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor use.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 22 418 participants from the ALLHAT (Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial) with baseline diabetes, incident diabetes (7.5% with chlorthalidone, 5.6% with amlodipine, and 4.3% with lisinopril), or no diabetes at 2 years of in-trial follow-up were followed for a mean total of 6.9 years (2.9 years in-trial and 4 additional years posttrial) through the use of national databases. The primary outcome was CVD mortality (death from coronary heart disease [CHD], stroke, heart failure, or other CVD). Among other outcomes were all-cause mortality, non-CVD mortality, and CHD (nonfatal myocardial infarction or fatal CHD). Participants on chlorthalidone with incident diabetes versus no diabetes had consistently lower, nonsignificant risk for CVD mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 1.04; 95% CI, 0.74-1.47), all-cause mortality (HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.82-1.30), and non-CVD mortality (HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.77-1.42) than participants on amlodipine or lisinopril with incident diabetes (HR range, 1.22-1.53). Participants with incident diabetes had elevated CHD risk compared with those with no diabetes (HR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.09-1.96), but those on chlorthalidone had significantly lower risk than those on lisinopril (HR, 1.18 versus 2.57; P=0.04 for interaction).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings suggest that thiazide-related incident diabetes has less adverse long-term CVD impact than incident diabetes that develops while on other antihypertensive medications.

Mortality and morbidity during and after the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial

A randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, multicenter trial assigned 32,804 participants aged 55 years and older with hypertension and ≥ 1 other coronary heart disease risk factors to receive chlorthalidone (n=15,002), amlodipine (n=8898), or lisinopril (n=8904) for 4 to 8 years, when double-blinded therapy was discontinued. Passive surveillance continued for a total follow-up of 8 to 13 years using national administrative databases to ascertain deaths and hospitalizations. During the post-trial period, fatal outcomes and nonfatal outcomes were available for 98% and 65% of participants, respectively, due to lack of access to administrative databases for the remainder. This paper assesses whether mortality and morbidity differences persisted or new differences developed during the extended follow-up. Primary outcome was cardiovascular mortality and secondary outcomes were mortality, stroke, coronary heart disease, heart failure, cardiovascular disease, and end-stage renal disease. For the post-trial period, data are not available on medications or blood pressure levels. No significant differences (P<.05) appeared in cardiovascular mortality for amlodipine (hazard ratio [HR], 1.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.93-1.06) or lisinopril (HR, 0.97; CI, 0.90-1.03), each compared with chlorthalidone. The only significant differences in secondary outcomes were for heart failure, which was higher with amlodipine (HR, 1.12; CI, 1.02-1.22), and stroke mortality, which was higher with lisinopril (HR, 1.20; CI, 1.01-1.41), each compared with chlorthalidone. Similar to the previously reported in-trial result, there was a significant treatment-by-race interaction for cardiovascular disease for lisinopril vs chlorthalidone. Black participants had higher risk than non-black participants taking lisinopril compared with chlorthalidone. After accounting for multiple comparisons, none of these results were significant. These findings suggest that neither calcium channel blockers nor angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors are superior to diuretics for the long-term prevention of major cardiovascular complications of hypertension.

Long-term follow-up of participants with heart failure in the antihypertensive and lipid-lowering treatment to prevent heart attack trial (ALLHAT)

BACKGROUND

In the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT), a randomized, double-blind, practice-based, active-control, comparative effectiveness trial in high-risk hypertensive participants, risk of new-onset heart failure (HF) was higher in the amlodipine (2.5-10 mg/d) and lisinopril (10-40 mg/d) arms compared with the chlorthalidone (12.5-25 mg/d) arm. Similar to other studies, mortality rates following new-onset HF were very high (≥50% at 5 years), and were similar across randomized treatment arms. After the randomized phase of the trial ended in 2002, outcomes were determined from administrative databases.

METHODS AND RESULTS

With the use of national databases, posttrial follow-up mortality through 2006 was obtained on participants who developed new-onset HF during the randomized (in-trial) phase of ALLHAT. Mean follow-up for the entire period was 8.9 years. Of 1761 participants with incident HF in-trial, 1348 died. Post-HF all-cause mortality was similar across treatment groups, with adjusted hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) of 0.95 (0.81-1.12) and 1.05 (0.89-1.25), respectively, for amlodipine and lisinopril compared with chlorthalidone, and 10-year adjusted rates of 86%, 87%, and 83%, respectively. All-cause mortality rates were also similar among those with reduced ejection fractions (84%) and preserved ejection fractions (81%), with no significant differences by randomized treatment arm.

CONCLUSIONS

Once HF develops, risk of death is high and consistent across randomized treatment groups. Measures to prevent the development of HF, especially blood pressure control, must be a priority if mortality associated with the development of HF is to be addressed. Clinical Trial Registration- http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00000542.

Impact of the ALLHAT/JNC7 Dissemination Project on thiazide-type diuretic use

BACKGROUND

Strategies are needed to improve the translation of clinical trial results into practice. We assessed the impact of the ALLHAT/JNC7 Dissemination Project's academic detailing component on thiazide-type diuretic prescribing (ALLHAT indicates Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial; JNC7 indicates the Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure).

METHODS

We used 2 national databases available from IMS Health: a physician survey of medications reported for hypertension and a pharmacy dispensing database on antihypertensive medications. At a county level, we correlated medication data with Dissemination Project intensity. Practices before the Dissemination Project in 2004 were compared with those after its completion in 2007. We also examined 2000-2008 national trends.

RESULTS

Academic detailing reached 18 524 physicians in 1698 venues via 147 investigator-educators. We noted an association between ALLHAT/JNC7 academic detailing activities and increased prescribing of thiazide-type diuretics. Physician survey data showed that the percentage of hypertension visits where the physician recorded a thiazide-type diuretic increased the most in counties where academic detailing activity was the highest (an increase of 8.6%, from 37.9% to 46.5%) compared with counties where activity was moderate (an increase of 2%) or low (a decrease of 2%), or where there was none (an increase of 2%; P value for trend, <.05). Pharmacy dispensing data showed that thiazide-type diuretic prescribing increased by 8.7% in counties with Dissemination Project activities compared with 3.9% in those without activities (P < .001). Nationally, thiazide-type diuretic use did not increase between 2004 and 2008.

CONCLUSIONS

The ALLHAT/JNC7 Dissemination Project was associated with a small effect on thiazide-type diuretic use consistent with its small dose and the potential of external factors to diminish its impact. Academic detailing may increase physicians' implementation of clinical trial results, thereby making prescribing more consistent with evidence.

Getting clinical trial results into practice: design, implementation, and process evaluation of the ALLHAT Dissemination Project

BACKGROUND

Conventional dissemination of clinical trial results has inconsistent impact on physician practices. A more comprehensive plan to influence determinants of prescribing practices is warranted.

PURPOSE

To report the response from the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial to the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute's requirement for dissemination and evaluation of trials with potential immediate public health applicability.

METHODS

ALLHAT's dissemination plan had two-components: (1) a traditional approach of media coverage, scientific presentation, and publication; and (2) a theory-based approach targeting determinants of clinician behavior. Strategies included: (1) academic detailing, in which physicians approach colleagues regarding blood pressure management, (2) direct patient messages to stimulate communication with physicians regarding blood pressure control, (3) approaches to formulary systems to use educational and economic incentives for evidence-based prescription, and (4) direct professional organization appeals to clinicians.

RESULTS

One hundred and forty-seven Investigator Educators reported 1698 presentations to 18,524 clinicians in 41 states and the District of Columbia. The pre- and post-test responses of 1709 clinicians in the face-to-face meetings indicated significant changes in expectations for positive patient outcomes and intention to prescribe diuretics. Information was mailed to 55 individuals representing 20 professional organizations and to eight formulary systems. Direct-to-patient messages were provided to 14 sites that host patient newsletters and Web sites such as health plans and insurance companies, 62 print mass media outlets, and 12 broadcast media sites.

LIMITATIONS

It was not within the scope of the project to conduct a randomized trial of the impact of the dissemination. However, impact evaluation using quasi-experimental designs is ongoing.

CONCLUSION

A large multi-method dissemination of clinical trial results is feasible. Planning for dissemination efforts, including evaluation research, should be considered as a part of the funding and design of the clinical trial and should begin early in trial planning.

ALLHAT findings revisited in the context of subsequent analyses, other trials, and meta-analyses

The Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT) is reevaluated considering information from new clinical trials, meta-analyses, and recent subgroup and explanatory analyses from ALLHAT, especially those regarding heart failure (HF) and the association of drug treatment with new-onset diabetes mellitus (DM) and its cardiovascular disease (CVD) consequences. Chlorthalidone was superior to (1) doxazosin mesylate in preventing combined CVD (CCVD) (risk ratio [RR], 1.20; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.13-1.27), especially HF (RR, 1.80; 95% CI, 1.40-2.22) and stroke (RR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.10-1.46); (2) lisinopril in preventing CCVD (RR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.05-1.16), including stroke (in black persons only) and HF (RR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.09-1.34); and (3) amlodipine besylate in preventing HF, overall (by 28%) and in hospitalized or fatal cases (by 26%). Central independent blinded reassessment of HF hospitalizations confirmed each comparison. Results were consistent by age, sex, race (except for stroke and CCVD), DM status, metabolic syndrome status, and renal function level. Neither amlodipine nor lisinopril was superior to chlorthalidone in preventing end-stage renal disease overall, by DM status, or by renal function level. In the chlorthalidone arm, new-onset DM was not significantly associated with CCVD (RR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.88-2.42). Evidence from subsequent analyses of ALLHAT and other clinical outcome trials confirm that neither alpha-blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, nor calcium channel blockers surpass thiazide-type diuretics (at appropriate dosage) as initial therapy for reduction of cardiovascular or renal risk. Thiazides are superior in preventing HF, and new-onset DM associated with thiazides does not increase CVD outcomes.

Blood pressure control by drug group in the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT)

Blood pressure (BP) control rates and number of antihypertensive medications were compared (average follow-up, 4.9 years) by randomized groups: chlorthalidone, 12.5-25 mg/d (n=15,255), amlodipine 2.5-10 mg/d (n=9048), or lisinopril 10-40 mg/d (n=9054) in a randomized double-blind hypertension trial. Participants were hypertensives aged 55 or older with additional cardiovascular risk factor(s), recruited from 623 centers. Additional agents from other classes were added as needed to achieve BP control. BP was reduced from 145/83 mm Hg (27% control) to 134/76 mm Hg (chlorthalidone, 68% control), 135/75 mm Hg (amlodipine, 66% control), and 136/76 mm Hg (lisinopril, 61% control) by 5 years; the mean number of drugs prescribed was 1.9, 2.0, and 2.1, respectively. Only 28% (chlorthalidone), 24% (amlodipine), and 24% (lisinopril) were controlled on monotherapy. BP control was achieved in the majority of each randomized group-a greater proportion with chlorthalidone. Over time, providers and patients should expect multidrug therapy to achieve BP <140/90 mm Hg in a majority of patients.

Clinical outcomes by race in hypertensive patients with and without the metabolic syndrome: Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT)

BACKGROUND

Antihypertensive drugs with favorable metabolic effects are advocated for first-line therapy in hypertensive patients with metabolic/cardiometabolic syndrome (MetS). We compared outcomes by race in hypertensive individuals with and without MetS treated with a thiazide-type diuretic (chlorthalidone), a calcium channel blocker (amlodipine besylate), an alpha-blocker (doxazosin mesylate), or an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (lisinopril).

METHODS

A subgroup analysis of the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT), a randomized, double-blind hypertension treatment trial of 42 418 participants. We defined MetS as hypertension plus at least 2 of the following: fasting serum glucose level of at least 100 mg/dL, body mass index (calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared) of at least 30, fasting triglyceride levels of at least 150 mg/dL, and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels of less than 40 mg/dL in men or less than 50 mg/dL in women.

RESULTS

Significantly higher rates of heart failure were consistent across all treatment comparisons in those with MetS. Relative risks (RRs) were 1.50 (95% confidence interval, 1.18-1.90), 1.49 (1.17-1.90), and 1.88 (1.42-2.47) in black participants and 1.25 (1.06-1.47), 1.20 (1.01-1.41), and 1.82 (1.51-2.19) in nonblack participants for amlodipine, lisinopril, and doxazosin comparisons with chlorthalidone, respectively. Higher rates for combined cardiovascular disease were observed with lisinopril-chlorthalidone (RRs, 1.24 [1.09-1.40] and 1.10 [1.02-1.19], respectively) and doxazosin-chlorthalidone comparisons (RRs, 1.37 [1.19-1.58] and 1.18 [1.08-1.30], respectively) in black and nonblack participants with MetS. Higher rates of stroke were seen in black participants only (RR, 1.37 [1.07-1.76] for the lisinopril-chlorthalidone comparison, and RR, 1.49 [1.09-2.03] for the doxazosin-chlorthalidone comparison). Black patients with MetS also had higher rates of end-stage renal disease (RR, 1.70 [1.13-2.55]) with lisinopril compared with chlorthalidone.

CONCLUSIONS

The ALLHAT findings fail to support the preference for calcium channel blockers, alpha-blockers, or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors compared with thiazide-type diuretics in patients with the MetS, despite their more favorable metabolic profiles. This was particularly true for black participants.

Blood Pressure Control in Hispanics in the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial

Historically, blood pressure control in Hispanics has been considerably less than that of non-Hispanic whites and blacks. We compared determinants of blood pressure control among Hispanic white, Hispanic black, non-Hispanic white, and non-Hispanic black participants (N=32 642) during follow-up in a randomized, practice-based, active-controlled trial. Hispanic blacks and whites represented 3% and 16% of the cohort, respectively; 33% were non-Hispanic black and 48% were non-Hispanic white. Hispanics were less likely to be controlled (<140/90 mm Hg) at enrollment, but within 6 to 12 months of follow-up, Hispanics had a greater proportion <140/90 mm Hg compared with non-Hispanics. At 4 years of follow-up, blood pressure was controlled in 72% of Hispanic whites, 69% of Hispanic blacks, 67% of non-Hispanic whites, and 59% of non-Hispanic blacks. Compared with non-Hispanic whites, Hispanic whites had a 20% greater odds of achieving BP control by 2 years of follow-up (odds ratio: 1.20; 95% CI: 1.10 to 1.31) after controlling for demographic variables and comorbidities, Hispanic blacks had a similar odds of achieving BP control (odds ratio: 1.04; 95% CI: 0.86 to 1.25), and non-Hispanic blacks had a 27% lower odds (odds ratio: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.69 to 0.78). We conclude that in all patients high levels of blood pressure control can be achieved with commonly available medications and that Hispanic ethnicity is not associated with inferior control in the setting of a clinical trial in which hypertensive patients had equal access to medical care, and medication was provided at no cost.

The Antihypertensive and Lipid Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT) Heart Failure Validation Study: diagnosis and prognosis

BACKGROUND

ALLHAT, a randomized, double-blind, active-controlled hypertension treatment trial in 42,418 patients, reported that a thiazide-type diuretic (chlorthalidone) was superior to a calcium channel blocker (amlodipine), an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (lisinopril), and an alpha1-blocker (doxazosin) in preventing the new onset of heart failure (HF). However, questions have been raised regarding the validity of the HF diagnosis.

METHODS

The ALLHAT HF Validation Study was designed to validate and elucidate the significance of HF events in ALLHAT. Records for 2778 HF hospitalizations in 1935 patients were centrally reviewed using several prespecified algorithms (based on ALLHAT and Framingham criteria) and reviewers' global clinical judgment. Percent agreement with diagnoses assigned by ALLHAT site physicians, relative risks across randomized comparisons, incidence rates, and mortality after HF hospitalization were evaluated for first events validated by each of the criteria sets.

RESULTS

Percent agreements with site physician diagnoses were 71%, 80%, and 84% for ALLHAT, Framingham, and reviewers' judgment, respectively. Using these 3 criteria, relative risks (95% CI) for new-onset HF compared with chlorthalidone were, respectively, 1.46 (1.27-1.68), 1.42 (1.25-1.62), and 1.45 (1.28-1.64) for amlodipine; 1.18 (1.02-1.28), 1.13 (0.99-1.30), and 1.15 (1.01-1.32) for lisinopril; and 1.79 (1.51-2.11), 1.71 (1.46-2.00), and 1.80 (1.55-2.10) for doxazosin.

CONCLUSIONS

An independent review of source documentation showed a high degree of agreement with the HF diagnoses assigned by site physicians and confirmed the higher risk of HF associated with first-step therapy using amlodipine, lisinopril, or doxazosin compared with chlorthalidone. Thiazide-type diuretics should be the preferred first-step therapy for prevention of HF in high-risk patients with hypertension.

Validation of Heart Failure Events in the Antihypertensive and Lipid Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT) Participants Assigned to Doxazosin and Chlorthalidone

BACKGROUND: The Antihypertensive and Lipid Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT) is a randomized, double-blind, active-controlled trial designed to compare the rate of coronary heart disease events in high-risk hypertensive participants initially randomized to a diuretic (chlorthalidone) versus each of three alternative antihypertensive drugs: alpha-adrenergic blocker (doxazosin), ACE-inhibitor (lisinopril), and calcium-channel blocker (amlodipine). Combined cardiovascular disease risk was significantly increased in the doxazosin arm compared to the chlorthalidone arm (RR 1.25; 95% CI, 1.17-1.33; P <.001), with a doubling of heart failure (fatal, hospitalized, or non-hospitalized but treated) (RR 2.04; 95% CI, 1.79-2.32; P <.001). Questions about heart failure diagnostic criteria led to steps to validate these events further. METHODS AND RESULTS: Baseline characteristics (age, race, sex, blood pressure) did not differ significantly between treatment groups (P <.05) for participants with heart failure events. Post-event pharmacologic management was similar in both groups and generally conformed to accepted heart failure therapy. Central review of a small sample of cases showed high adherence to ALLHAT heart failure criteria. Of 105 participants with quantitative ejection fraction measurements provided, (67% by echocardiogram, 31% by catheterization), 29/46 (63%) from the chlorthalidone group and 41/59 (70%) from the doxazosin group were at or below 40%. Two-year heart failure case-fatalities (22% and 19% in the doxazosin and chlorthalidone groups, respectively) were as expected and did not differ significantly (RR 0.96; 95% CI, 0.67-1.38; P = 0.83). CONCLUSION: Results of the validation process supported findings of increased heart failure in the ALLHAT doxazosin treatment arm compared to the chlorthalidone treatment arm.