Effect of additional antihypertensive medications in patients with high-risk hypertension: a post hoc analysis of the SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial) database.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Nguyen LS
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8030858 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:We evaluated the association between orthostatic hypertension and cardiovascular outcomes and the effect of intensive blood pressure (BP) control on cardiovascular outcomes in patients with orthostatic hypertension. Post hoc analyses of the SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial) data were conducted; orthostatic hypertension was defined as increase in systolic BP≥20 mm Hg or increase in diastolic BP≥10 mm Hg with standing. Of 9329 participants, 1986 (21.2%) had orthostatic hypertension at baseline. Within the intensive treatment group, participants with orthostatic hypertension were at higher risk of developing the composite cardiovascular outcome (hazard ratio, 1.44 [95% CI, 1.1-1.87], P=0.007) compared with participants without orthostatic hypertension. Within the standard treatment group, there were no significant differences in cardiovascular outcome between participants with and without orthostatic hypertension. In participants with orthostatic hypertension, there was no statistically significant difference in risk of the composite cardiovascular outcome between the intensive and the standard BP treatment group (hazard ratio, 1.07 [95% CI, 0.78-1.47], P=0.68). In participants without orthostatic hypertension at baseline, the intensive treatment group was associated with a lower risk of the composite cardiovascular outcome (hazard ratio, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.56-0.79], P<0.0001). Orthostatic hypertension was associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular outcomes in the intensive and not in the standard treatment group; intensive treatment of BP did not reduce the risk of cardiovascular outcomes compared with standard treatment in patients with orthostatic hypertension. These post hoc analyses are hypothesis generating and will need to be confirmed in future studies.
| S-EPMC8830850 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Recent publications have stated that the blood pressure (BP) measurement technique used in SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial) was unattended. However, the SPRINT protocol does not address the issue of attendance. A survey was conducted immediately after SPRINT closeout visits were completed to inquire whether BP measurements were usually attended or unattended by staff. There were 4082 participants at 38 sites that measured BP after leaving the participant alone the entire time (always alone), 2247 at 25 sites that had personnel in the room the entire time (never alone), 1746 at 19 sites that left the participant alone only during the rest period (alone for rest), and 570 at 6 sites that left the participant alone only during the BP readings (alone for BP measurement). Similar systolic and diastolic BPs within randomized groups were noted during follow-up at the majority of visits in all 4 measurement categories. In the always alone and never alone categories, the intensive group had a similarly reduced risk for the primary outcome compared with the standard group (hazard ratio, 0.62; 95% confidence interval, 0.51-0.76 and hazard ratio, 0.64; 95% confidence interval, 0.46-0.91, respectively; pairwise interaction P value, 0.88); risk was not significantly reduced for the intensive group in the smaller alone-for-rest and the alone-for-BP-measurement categories. Similar BP levels and cardiovascular disease risk reduction were observed in the intensive group in SPRINT participants whether the measurement technique used was primarily attended or unattended.Clinical trial registrationURL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01206062.
| S-EPMC5967644 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT-BioLINCC)
| PRJNA1047941 | ENA
Project description:Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT-BioLINCC)
| PRJNA1047942 | ENA
Project description:Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT-Imaging)
| PRJNA1079434 | ENA
Project description:BACKGROUND:It is currently unknown whether intensive blood pressure (BP) lowering beyond that recommended would lead to more lowering of the risk of left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) in patients with hypertension and whether reducing the risk of LVH explains the reported cardiovascular disease (CVD) benefits of intensive BP lowering in this population. METHODS:This analysis included 8164 participants (mean age, 67.9 years; 35.3% women; 31.2% blacks) with hypertension but no diabetes mellitus from the SPRINT trial (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial): 4086 randomly assigned to intensive BP lowering (target SBP <120 mm Hg) and 4078 assigned to standard BP lowering (target SBP <140 mm Hg). Progression and regression of LVH as defined by Cornell voltage criteria derived from standard 12-lead ECGs recorded at baseline and biannually were compared between treatment arms during a median follow-up of 3.81 years. The effect of intensive (versus standard) BP lowering on the SPRINT primary CVD outcome (a composite of myocardial infarction, acute coronary syndrome, stroke, heart failure, and CVD death) was compared before and after adjustment for LVH as a time-varying covariate. RESULTS:Among SPRINT participants without baseline LVH (n=7559), intensive (versus standard) BP lowering was associated with a 46% lower risk of developing LVH (hazard ratio=0.54; 95% confidence interval, 0.43-0.68). Similarly, among SPRINT participants with baseline LVH (n=605, 7.4%), those assigned to the intensive (versus standard) BP lowering were 66% more likely to regress/improve their LVH (hazard ratio=1.66; 95% confidence interval, 1.31-2.11). Adjustment for LVH as a time-varying covariate did not substantially attenuate the effect of intensive BP therapy on CVD events (hazard ratio of intensive versus standard BP lowering on CVD, 0.76 [95% confidence interval, 0.64-0.90] and 0.77 [95% confidence interval, 0.65-0.91] before and after adjustment for LVH as a time-varying covariate, respectively). CONCLUSIONS:Among patients with hypertension but no diabetes mellitus, intensive BP lowering (target systolic BP <120 mm Hg) compared with standard BP lowering (target systolic BP <140 mm Hg) resulted in lower rates of developing new LVH in those without LVH and higher rates of regression of LVH in those with existing LVH. This favorable effect on LVH did not explain most of the reduction in CVD events associated with intensive BP lowering in the SPRINT trial. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION:URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01206062.
| S-EPMC5538944 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionSexual function, an important component of quality of life, is gaining increased research and clinical attention in older women with hypertension.AimTo assess the association between systolic blood pressure (SBP) and other variables, and sexual activity and sexual dysfunction in hypertensive women.MethodsBaseline analysis of 635 women participants of a larger randomized clinical trial of 9361 men and women.Main outcome measuresSelf-reported sexual activity (yes/no), and sexual function using the Female Sexual Function Inventory (FSFI).Results452 participants (71.2%) reported having no sexual activity during the previous 4 weeks. The mean (SD) FSFI score for sexually active participants was 25.3 (6.0), and 52.6% of the sample reported a FSFI score ≤26.55 designating sexual dysfunction. In logistic regression models, SBP was not significantly associated with sexual activity (AOR = 1.002; P > .05). Older age (AOR = 0.95, P < .05), and lower education (AOR for < high school vs college degree = 0.29, P < .05) were associated with lower odds of being sexually active, as was living alone versus living with others (AOR = 0.56, P < .05). Higher weekly alcohol consumption was associated with increased odds of being sexually active (AOR = 1.39; P < .05). In logistic regression models among sexually active participants, SBP was not associated with sexual dysfunction (AOR = 1.01; P > .05). Higher depressive symptoms from the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) was associated with higher odds of sexual dysfunction (AOR = 1.24, P < .05), as was increased number of physical comorbidities (AOR = 1.25, P < .05). Diuretic use was associated with lower odds of being sexually active in participants with chronic kidney disease (AOR = 0.33, P < .05).ConclusionYounger age, higher education, living with others, and higher weekly alcohol consumption were significantly associated with higher odds of being sexually active in a sample of middle-aged and older women with hypertension. Increased depressive symptoms and increased physical comorbidities were significantly associated with increased odds of sexual dysfunction. SBP was not significantly associated with sexual activity or sexual dysfunction.
| S-EPMC5030072 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveEngaging in physical activity (PA) is recommended to reduce the risk of morbidity and mortality in patients with hypertension. However, the association between PA and clinical outcomes in individuals with high-risk hypertension is understudied. We examined the relationship between PA and clinical outcomes in the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT). SPRINT investigated the benefit of intensive (vs. standard) blood pressure treatment in patients with high-risk hypertension.MethodsBaseline data on PA was self-reported. Vigorous-intensity PA (VPA) was categorized into 2 groups based on frequency of "Rarely or Never" and 1 or more sessions/month. Moderate-intensity PA (MPA) was also categorized into 2 groups based on average duration/day of <15 min and 15 or more minutes. Using multivariable Cox regression, we estimated the associations between PA the primary outcome which was a composite of cardiovascular events, and all-cause mortality.ResultsA total of 8,320 (age 67.8 ± 9.3, 34.9% women) of SPRINT participants with data on PA were included. During a median follow-up of 3.8 years, 619 primary outcome, and 419 all-cause mortality events occurred. Compared to not engaging in VPA, the risk of the primary outcome, myocardial infarction, and all-cause mortality (HR 95% CIs) associated with VPA of ≥1sessions/month was 0.79(0.65-0.94; p=0.009), 0.70(0.52-0.93; p=0.014) and 0.75(0.60-0.94; p=0.011), respectively. Similarly, the risk of the primary outcome and all-cause mortality (HR 95% CI) associated with engaging in MPA for ≥15 min/day, relative to <15 min/day was 0.76(0.63-0.93; p=0.008) and 0.80(0.62-1.02; p=0.066), respectively.ConclusionAmong individuals with hypertension from the SPRINT study, VPA and MPA at a threshold of ≥1sessions/month and MPA of ≥15 min/day respectively, were both associated with a lower risk for cardiovascular events, and VPA was also associated with a reduced risk for all-cause mortality. Further studies are required to identify the optimal volume and intensity of PA in high-risk hypertension.
| S-EPMC10415631 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundUncontrolled blood pressure (BP) increases the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events. In SPRINT an intensive versus standard BP lowering strategy resulted in a lower rate of cardiovascular events and death. Whether BP reduction only or also the choice of anti-hypertensive drugs is associated with outcomes remains to be elucidated.AimsWe aim to study the association of BP and different anti-hypertensive drugs with several cardiovascular outcomes.MethodsTime-updated Cox and mixed-effects models. The primary outcome was a composite of first myocardial infarction, acute coronary syndrome, stroke, heart failure, or cardiovascular death.ResultsA total of 9361 patients were included. The anti-hypertensive agents most frequently used were ACEi/ARBs, with an almost 20% higher prescription rate in the intensive arm (80% vs. 61%), followed by thiazide-type diuretics (65% vs. 42%), calcium-channel blockers (57% vs. 39%), and beta-blockers (52% vs. 26%). Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists were rarely used (≤7% of the observations). In multivariate analysis, the use of ACEi/ARBs, especially in combination with thiazides, were independently associated with a lower primary outcome event-rate (HR [95%CI] 0.75 [0.61-0.92], p = .006), whereas a DBP <60 mmHg was independently associated with a higher event-rate (HR [95%CI] 1.36 [1.07-1.71], p = .011). SBP <120 mmHg was associated with lower rate of cardiovascular and all-cause death on intensive treatment but not on the standard arm (interaction p < .05 for both).ConclusionsIn SPRINT, an intensive therapy strategy achieving SBP <120 mmHg with a DBP ≥60 mmHg, and using ACEi/ARBs plus thiazides was associated with a lower event-rate.
| S-EPMC8119807 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe cardiovascular benefits of intensive systolic blood pressure control vary across clinical populations tested in large randomised clinical trials. We aimed to evaluate the application of machine learning to clinical trials of patients without and with type 2 diabetes to define the personalised cardiovascular benefit of intensive control of systolic blood pressure.MethodsIn SPRINT, a trial of intensive (systolic blood pressure <120 mm Hg) versus standard (systolic blood pressure <140 mm Hg) systolic blood pressure control in patients without type 2 diabetes, we defined a phenotypic representation of the study population using 59 baseline variables. We extracted personalised treatment effect estimates for the primary outcome, time-to-first major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE; cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction or acute coronary syndrome, stroke, and acute decompensated heart failure), through iterative Cox regression analyses providing average hazard ratio (HR) estimates weighted for the phenotypic distance of each participant from the index patient of each iteration. Next, we trained an extreme gradient boosting algorithm (known as XGBoost) to predict the personalised effect of intensive systolic blood pressure control using features most consistently linked to increased personalised benefit, before evaluating its performance in the ACCORD BP trial of patients with type 2 diabetes randomly assigned to receive intensive versus standard systolic blood pressure control. We stratified patients based on their predicted treatment effect, and key demographic groups (age, sex, cardiovascular disease, and smoking). We assessed the presence of heterogeneity with an interaction test, and assessed the performance of the algorithm in a simulation analysis of SPRINT in the presence or absence of an artificially introduced heterogeneous treatment effect.FindingsFrom SPRINT, we included all 9361 study participants (mean age 67·9 years [SD 9·4], 3332 [35·6%] female) who underwent randomisation to either intensive (n=4678) or standard (n=4683) treatment. The median individualised HR for MACE was 0·63 (IQR 0·53-0·78). An eight-feature tool built for this analysis to predict personalised benefit in SPRINT was externally tested in ACCORD BP (4733 participants (mean age 62·7 years [SD 6·7], 2258 [47·7%] female), wherein it successfully identified individuals with differential benefit from intensive versus standard systolic blood pressure control (adjusted HR for MACE of 0·70 [95% CI 0·55-0·90] in individuals with above-median MACE benefit versus 1·05 [95% CI 0·84-1·32] for below-median predicted benefit; pinteraction=0·0184). Subgroup analysis based on age (<65 years: HR 0·89 [95% CI 0·71-1·12]; ≥65 years: 0·85 [0·67-1·09]), sex (male: 0·89 [0·72-1·10]; female: 0·85 [0·65-1·10]), established cardiovascular disease (no: 0·89 [0·70-1·14]; yes: 0·84 [0·67-1·06]), or active smoking (no: 0·85 [0·71-1·02]; yes: 1·01 [0·64-1·60]) did not identify groups with heterogeneity of treatment effect. In a simulation analysis of SPRINT, the proposed algorithm detected groups with heterogeneous treatment effects in the presence, but not absence, of simulated subgroup differences.InterpretationBy use of machine learning to define an individual's personalised benefit through phenotypic representations of clinical trials, we created a practical tool for individualising the selection of intensive versus standard systolic blood pressure control in patients without and with type 2 diabetes.FundingNational Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute of the US National Institutes of Health.
| S-EPMC9768739 | biostudies-literature