Dataset Information

Cardiovascular disease risk and comparison of different strategies for blood pressure management in rural India.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Non-optimal blood pressure (BP) levels are a major cause of disease burden globally. We describe current BP and treatment patterns in rural India and compare different approaches to BP lowering in this setting.

Methods

All individuals aged ?40 years from 54 villages in a South Indian district were invited and 62,194 individuals (84%) participated in a cross-sectional study. Individual 10-year absolute cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk was estimated using WHO/ISH charts. Using known effects of treatment, proportions of events that would be averted under different paradigms of BP lowering therapy were estimated.

Results

After imputation of pre-treatment BP levels for participants on existing treatment, 76·9% (95% confidence interval, 75.7-78.0%), 5·3% (4.9-5.6%), and 17·8% (16.9-18.8%) of individuals had a 10-year CVD risk defined as low (?160/100 mmHg), respectively. Compared to the 19.6% (18.4-20.9%) of adults treated with current practice, a slightly higher or similar proportion would be treated using an intermediate (23·2% (22.0-24.3%)) or high (17·9% (16.9-18.8%) risk threshold for instituting BP lowering therapy and this would avert 87·2% (85.8-88.5%) and 62·7% (60.7-64.6%) more CVD events over ten years, respectively. These strategies were highly cost-effective relative to the current practice.

Conclusion

In a rural Indian community, a substantial proportion of the population has elevated CVD risk. The more efficient and cost-effective clinical approach to BP lowering is to base treatment decisions on an estimate of an individual's short-term absolute CVD risk rather than with BP based strategy.

Clinical trial registration

Clinical Trials Registry of India CTRI/2013/06/003753 , 14 June 2013.

SUBMITTER: Praveen D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6238360 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Cardiovascular disease risk and comparison of different strategies for blood pressure management in rural India.

Praveen Devarsetty D Peiris David D MacMahon Stephen S Mogulluru Kishor K Raghu Arvind A Rodgers Anthony A Chilappagari Shailaja S Prabhakaran Dorairaj D Clifford Gari D GD Maulik Pallab K PK Atkins Emily E Joshi Rohina R Heritier Stephane S Jan Stephen S Patel Anushka A

BMC public health 20181115 1

<h4>Background</h4>Non-optimal blood pressure (BP) levels are a major cause of disease burden globally. We describe current BP and treatment patterns in rural India and compare different approaches to BP lowering in this setting.<h4>Methods</h4>All individuals aged ≥40 years from 54 villages in a South Indian district were invited and 62,194 individuals (84%) participated in a cross-sectional study. Individual 10-year absolute cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk was estimated using WHO/ISH charts. ...[more]

PMID: 30442122

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundClinical practice guidelines have traditionally recommended blood pressure treatment based primarily on blood pressure thresholds. In contrast, using predicted cardiovascular risk has been advocated as a more effective strategy to guide treatment decisions for cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention. We aimed to compare outcomes from a blood pressure-lowering treatment strategy based on predicted cardiovascular risk with one based on systolic blood pressure (SBP) level.Methods and findingsWe used individual participant data from the Blood Pressure Lowering Treatment Trialists' Collaboration (BPLTTC) from 1995 to 2013. Trials randomly assigned participants to either blood pressure-lowering drugs versus placebo or more intensive versus less intensive blood pressure-lowering regimens. We estimated 5-y risk of CVD events using a multivariable Weibull model previously developed in this dataset. We compared the two strategies at specific SBP thresholds and across the spectrum of risk and blood pressure levels studied in BPLTTC trials. The primary outcome was number of CVD events avoided per persons treated. We included data from 11 trials (47,872 participants). During a median of 4.0 y of follow-up, 3,566 participants (7.5%) experienced a major cardiovascular event. Areas under the curve comparing the two treatment strategies throughout the range of possible thresholds for CVD risk and SBP demonstrated that, on average, a greater number of CVD events would be avoided for a given number of persons treated with the CVD risk strategy compared with the SBP strategy (area under the curve 0.71 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70-0.72] for the CVD risk strategy versus 0.54 [95% CI 0.53-0.55] for the SBP strategy). Compared with treating everyone with SBP ≥ 150 mmHg, a CVD risk strategy would require treatment of 29% (95% CI 26%-31%) fewer persons to prevent the same number of events or would prevent 16% (95% CI 14%-18%) more events for the same number of persons treated. Compared with treating everyone with SBP ≥ 140 mmHg, a CVD risk strategy would require treatment of 3.8% (95% CI 12.5% fewer to 7.2% more) fewer persons to prevent the same number of events or would prevent 3.1% (95% CI 1.5%-5.0%) more events for the same number of persons treated, although the former estimate was not statistically significant. In subgroup analyses, the CVD risk strategy did not appear to be more beneficial than the SBP strategy in patients with diabetes mellitus or established CVD.ConclusionsA blood pressure-lowering treatment strategy based on predicted cardiovascular risk is more effective than one based on blood pressure levels alone across a range of thresholds. These results support using cardiovascular risk assessment to guide blood pressure treatment decision-making in moderate- to high-risk individuals, particularly for primary prevention.

Project description:ImportanceHypertension remains the major cardiovascular disease risk factor globally, but variability in measured blood pressure may result in suboptimal management. Whether genetic contributors to elevated blood pressure may complementarily inform cardiovascular disease risk assessment is unknown.ObjectiveTo examine incident cardiovascular disease by blood pressure polygenic risk score independent of measured blood pressures and antihypertensive medication prescriptions.Design, setting, and participantsThe cohort study (UK Biobank) recruited UK residents aged 40 to 69 years between March 2006 and August 2010. Participants without a prior physician diagnosis of cardiovascular disease, including myocardial infarction, stroke, or heart failure, were included. Excluded were individuals with mismatch between self-reported and genotypically inferred sex, sex aneuploidy, missing genotype rates of 1% or greater, and excess genotypic heterozygosity. Data analyses were performed from September 25, 2021, to July 21, 2022.ExposuresMeasured blood pressure and externally derived blood pressure polygenic risk score stratified by hypertension diagnosis and management, which included normal blood pressure (<130/80 mm Hg without antihypertensives), untreated hypertension (systolic blood pressure ≥130 mm Hg or diastolic blood pressure ≥80 mm Hg without antihypertensives), and treated hypertension (current antihypertensives prescriptions).Main outcomes and measuresComposite of first incident myocardial infarction, stroke, heart failure, or cardiovascular-related death.ResultsOf the 331 078 study participants included (mean [SD] age at enrollment, 56.9 [8.1] years; 178 824 female [54.0%]), 83 094 (25.1%) had normal blood pressure, 197 597 (59.7%) had untreated hypertension, and 50 387 (15.2%) had treated hypertension. Over a median (IQR) follow-up of 11.1 (10.4-11.8) years, the primary outcome occurred in 15 293 participants. Among those with normal blood pressure, untreated hypertension, and treated hypertension, each SD increase in measured systolic blood pressure was associated with hazard ratios of 1.08 (95% CI, 0.93-1.25), 1.20 (95% CI, 1.16-1.23), and 1.16 (95% CI, 1.11-1.20), respectively, for the primary outcome. Among these same categories, each SD increase in genetically predicted systolic blood pressure was associated with increased hazard ratios of 1.13 (95% CI, 1.05-1.20), 1.04 (95% CI, 1.01-1.07), and 1.06 (95% CI, 1.02-1.10), respectively, for the primary outcome independent of measured blood pressures and other covariates. Findings were similar for measured and genetically predicted diastolic blood pressure.Conclusions and relevanceBlood pressure polygenic risk score may augment identification of individuals at heightened cardiovascular risk, including those with both normal blood pressure and hypertension. Whether it may also guide antihypertensive initiation or intensification requires further study.

Dataset Information

Cardiovascular disease risk and comparison of different strategies for blood pressure management in rural India.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Clinical trial registration

Publications

Cardiovascular disease risk and comparison of different strategies for blood pressure management in rural India.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets