Risks and benefits of intensive blood pressure lowering in patients with type 2 diabetes.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Rabi DM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC3735744 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Aug
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Risks and benefits of intensive blood pressure lowering in patients with type 2 diabetes.
Rabi Doreen M DM Padwal Raj R Tobe Sheldon W SW Gilbert Richard E RE Leiter Lawrence A LA Quinn Robert R RR Khan Nadia N
CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne 20130603 11
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundLimited data are available to guide the choice of a target for the systolic blood-pressure level when treating acute hypertensive response in patients with intracerebral hemorrhage.MethodsWe randomly assigned eligible participants with intracerebral hemorrhage (volume, <60 cm(3)) and a Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score of 5 or more (on a scale from 3 to 15, with lower scores indicating worse condition) to a systolic blood-pressure target of 110 to 139 mm Hg (intensive treatment) or a target of 140 to 179 mm Hg (standard treatment) in order to test the superiority of intensive reduction of systolic blood pressure to standard reduction; intravenous nicardipine to lower blood pressure was administered within 4.5 hours after symptom onset. The primary outcome was death or disability (modified Rankin scale score of 4 to 6, on a scale ranging from 0 [no symptoms] to 6 [death]) at 3 months after randomization, as ascertained by an investigator who was unaware of the treatment assignments.ResultsAmong 1000 participants with a mean (±SD) systolic blood pressure of 200.6±27.0 mm Hg at baseline, 500 were assigned to intensive treatment and 500 to standard treatment. The mean age of the patients was 61.9 years, and 56.2% were Asian. Enrollment was stopped because of futility after a prespecified interim analysis. The primary outcome of death or disability was observed in 38.7% of the participants (186 of 481) in the intensive-treatment group and in 37.7% (181 of 480) in the standard-treatment group (relative risk, 1.04; 95% confidence interval, 0.85 to 1.27; analysis was adjusted for age, initial GCS score, and presence or absence of intraventricular hemorrhage). Serious adverse events occurring within 72 hours after randomization that were considered by the site investigator to be related to treatment were reported in 1.6% of the patients in the intensive-treatment group and in 1.2% of those in the standard-treatment group. The rate of renal adverse events within 7 days after randomization was significantly higher in the intensive-treatment group than in the standard-treatment group (9.0% vs. 4.0%, P=0.002).ConclusionsThe treatment of participants with intracerebral hemorrhage to achieve a target systolic blood pressure of 110 to 139 mm Hg did not result in a lower rate of death or disability than standard reduction to a target of 140 to 179 mm Hg. (Funded by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke and the National Cerebral and Cardiovascular Center; ATACH-2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01176565 .).
| S-EPMC5345109 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This study pooled data from SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial) and ACCORD-BP (Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes Blood Pressure) trial to estimate the treatment effect of intensive BP on stroke prevention, and investigate whether stroke risk score impacted treatment effect. Of all the potential manifestations of the hypertension, the most severe outcomes were stroke or death. A composite endpoint of time to death or stroke (stroke-free survival [SFS]), whichever occurred first, was defined as the outcome of interest. Participants without prevalent stroke were stratified into stroke risk tertiles based on the predicted revised Framingham Stroke Risk Score. The stratified Cox model was used to calculate the hazard ratio (HR) for the intensive BP treatment. 834 (5.92%) patients had SFS events over a median follow-up of 3.68 years. A reduction in the risk for SFS was observed among the intensive BP group as compared with the standard BP group (HR: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.65, 0.89; risk difference: 0.98([0.20, 1.76]). Further analyses demonstrated the significant benefit of intensive BP treatment on SFS only among participants having a high stroke risk (risk tertile 1: 0.76 [0.52, 1.11], number needed to treat [NNT] = 861; risk tertile 2: 0.87[0.65, 1.16], NNT = 91; risk tertile 3: 0.69[0.56, 0.86], NNT = 50). Intensive BP treatment lowered the risk of SFS, particularly for those at high risk of stroke.
| S-EPMC11405663 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BP is an important determinant of kidney disease among patients with diabetes. The recommended thresholds to initiate treatment to lower BP are 130/80 and 125/75 mmHg for people with diabetes and nephropathy, respectively. We sought to determine the effects of lowering BP below these currently recommended thresholds on renal outcomes among 11,140 patients who had type 2 diabetes and participated in the Action in Diabetes and Vascular disease: preterAx and diamicroN-MR Controlled Evaluation (ADVANCE) study. Patients were randomly assigned to fixed combination perindopril-indapamide or placebo, regardless of their BP at entry. During a mean follow-up of 4.3 yr, active treatment reduced the risk for renal events by 21% (P < 0.0001), which was driven by reduced risks for developing microalbuminuria and macroalbuminuria (both P < 0.003). Effects of active treatment were consistent across subgroups defined by baseline systolic or diastolic BP. Lower systolic BP levels during follow-up, even to <110 mmHg, was associated with progressively lower rates of renal events. In conclusion, BP-lowering treatment with perindopril-indapamide administered routinely to individuals with type 2 diabetes provides important renoprotection, even among those with initial BP <120/70 mmHg. We could not identify a BP threshold below which renal benefit is lost.
| S-EPMC2663832 | biostudies-literature
Project description:UnlabelledLeft ventricular hypertrophy (LVH), a marker of cardiac end-organ damage, is a common complication of hypertension. Regression of LVH is achievable by sustained lowering of systolic blood pressure (BP). However, it is unknown whether a strategy aimed at lowering BP beyond that recommended would lower the risk of LVH. We examined the effect of intensive (systolic BP<120 mm Hg), compared with standard (systolic BP<140 mm Hg), BP lowering on the risk of LVH in 4331 patients with diabetes mellitus from the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) BP trial, a randomized controlled trial. The outcome measures were electrocardiographic LVH defined by Cornell voltage (binary variable) and mean Cornell index (continuous variable). The baseline prevalence of LVH (5.3% versus 5.4%; P=0.91) and the mean Cornell index (1456 versus 1470 µV; P=0.45) were similar in the intensive (n=2154) and standard (n=2177) BP-lowering arms, respectively. However, after median follow-up of 4.4 years, intensive, compared with standard, BP lowering was associated with a 39% lower risk of LVH (odds ratio [95% confidence interval], 0.61[0.43, 0.88]; P=0.008) and a significantly lower adjusted mean Cornell index (1352 versus 1447 µV; P<0.001). The lower risk of LVH associated with intensive BP lowering during follow-up was because of more regression of baseline LVH and lower rate of developing new LVH, compared with standard BP lowering. No interactions by age, sex, or race were observed. These results provide evidence that targeting a systolic BP of <120 mm Hg when compared with <140 mm Hg in patients with hypertension and diabetes mellitus produces a greater reduction in LVH.Clinical trial registrationURL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00000620.
| S-EPMC4644090 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundLeft ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) combined with elevations in cardiac biomarkers reflecting myocardial injury and neurohormonal stress (malignant LVH) is associated with a high risk for heart failure and death.ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to determine the impact of intensive systolic blood pressure (SBP) control on the prevention of malignant LVH and its consequences.MethodsA total of 8,820 participants in SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial) were classified into groups based on the presence or absence of LVH assessed by 12-lead ECG, and elevations in biomarker levels (high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T ≥14 ng/L or N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide ≥125 pg/mL) at baseline. The effects of intensive vs standard SBP lowering on rates of acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) events and death and on the incidence and regression of malignant LVH were determined.ResultsRandomization to intensive SBP lowering led to similar relative reductions in ADHF events and death across the combined LVH/biomarker groups (P for interaction = 0.68). The absolute risk reduction over 4 years in ADHF events and death was 4.4% (95% CI: -5.2% to 13.9%) among participants with baseline malignant LVH (n = 449) and 1.2% (95% CI: 0.0%-2.5%) for those without LVH and nonelevated biomarkers (n = 4,361). Intensive SBP lowering also reduced the incidence of malignant LVH over 2 years (2.5% vs 1.1%; OR: 0.44; 95% CI: 0.30-0.63).ConclusionsIntensive SBP lowering prevented malignant LVH and may provide substantial absolute risk reduction in the composite of ADHF events and death among SPRINT participants with baseline malignant LVH.
| S-EPMC9982833 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThere is no evidence from randomized trials to support a strategy of lowering systolic blood pressure below 135 to 140 mm Hg in persons with type 2 diabetes mellitus. We investigated whether therapy targeting normal systolic pressure (i.e., <120 mm Hg) reduces major cardiovascular events in participants with type 2 diabetes at high risk for cardiovascular events.MethodsA total of 4733 participants with type 2 diabetes were randomly assigned to intensive therapy, targeting a systolic pressure of less than 120 mm Hg, or standard therapy, targeting a systolic pressure of less than 140 mm Hg. The primary composite outcome was nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or death from cardiovascular causes. The mean follow-up was 4.7 years.ResultsAfter 1 year, the mean systolic blood pressure was 119.3 mm Hg in the intensive-therapy group and 133.5 mm Hg in the standard-therapy group. The annual rate of the primary outcome was 1.87% in the intensive-therapy group and 2.09% in the standard-therapy group (hazard ratio with intensive therapy, 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73 to 1.06; P=0.20). The annual rates of death from any cause were 1.28% and 1.19% in the two groups, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.35; P=0.55). The annual rates of stroke, a prespecified secondary outcome, were 0.32% and 0.53% in the two groups, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.39 to 0.89; P=0.01). Serious adverse events attributed to antihypertensive treatment occurred in 77 of the 2362 participants in the intensive-therapy group (3.3%) and 30 of the 2371 participants in the standard-therapy group (1.3%) (P<0.001).ConclusionsIn patients with type 2 diabetes at high risk for cardiovascular events, targeting a systolic blood pressure of less than 120 mm Hg, as compared with less than 140 mm Hg, did not reduce the rate of a composite outcome of fatal and nonfatal major cardiovascular events. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00000620.)
| S-EPMC4123215 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The optimal blood pressure (BP) goal in patients with diabetes mellitus remains controversial. We examined whether benefits and risks of intensified antihypertensive therapy in diabetes mellitus are influenced by either baseline BP or cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. We studied 10 948 people with diabetes mellitus, at moderate-to-high risk, in the ADVANCE trial (Action in Diabetes and Vascular Disease: Preterax and Diamicron Modified Release Controlled Evaluation). Cox models were used to determine whether baseline BP category or CVD risk modified the outcomes of combination perindopril-indapamide treatment, compared with placebo. During 4.3 years of follow-up, treatment with perindopril-indapamide versus placebo reduced mortality and major vascular (macrovascular or microvascular) events. There was no evidence of differences in these effects, regardless of baseline systolic BP (evaluated down to <120 mm Hg; P for heterogeneity, 0.85), diastolic BP (evaluated down to <70 mm Hg; P=0.49), or whether 10-year CVD risk was ≥20% or <20% ( P=0.08). The effects of randomized treatment on discontinuation of treatment because of cough or hypotension/dizziness were also statistically consistent across subgroups defined by baseline BP and CVD risk (all P ≥0.08). Adults with diabetes mellitus appear to benefit from more intensive BP treatment even at levels of BP and CVD risk that some guidelines do not currently recommend for intervention. Clinical Trial Registration- URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00751972.
| S-EPMC6506385 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIt 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.MethodsThis 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.ResultsAmong 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).ConclusionsAmong 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 registrationURL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01206062.
| S-EPMC5538944 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimsThe 2018 ESC/ESH guidelines for hypertension recommend differential management of patients who are <65, 65-79, and ≥80 years of age. However, it is unclear whether intensive blood pressure lowering is well-tolerated and modifies risk uniformly across the age spectrum.Methods and resultsSPRINT randomized 9361 high-risk adults without diabetes and age ≥50 years with systolic blood pressure 130-180 mmHg to either intensive or standard antihypertensive treatment. The primary efficacy endpoint was the composite of acute coronary syndromes, stroke, heart failure, or death from cardiovascular causes. The primary safety endpoint was composite serious adverse events. We assessed whether age modified the efficacy and safety of intensive vs. standard blood pressure lowering using Cox proportional-hazards regression and restricted cubic splines. In all, 3805 (41%), 4390 (47%), and 1166 (12%) were <65, 65-79, and ≥80 years. Mean age was similar between the two study groups (intensive group 67.9 ± 9.4 years vs. standard group 67.9 ± 9.5 years; P = 0.94). Median follow-up was 3.3 years. In multivariable models, age was linearly associated with the risk of stroke (P < 0.001) and non-linearly associated with the risk of primary efficacy events, death from cardiovascular causes, death from any cause, heart failure, and serious adverse events (P < 0.001). The safety and efficacy of intensive blood pressure lowering were not modified by age, whether tested continuously or categorically (P > 0.05).ConclusionIn SPRINT, the benefits and risks of intensive blood pressure lowering did not differ according to the age categories proposed by the ESC/ESH guidelines for hypertension.Trial registrationSPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial); ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01206062, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01206062.
| S-EPMC7669324 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThere are few rigorous studies to confirm or refute the commonly cited concern that control of blood pressure to lower thresholds may result in an increased risk of falls and fractures.ObjectiveTo compare falls and fractures in participants with type 2 diabetes in the intensive (targeting a systolic blood pressure of < 120 mmHg) and standard (targeting a systolic blood pressure of < 140 mmHg) blood pressure control arms of the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) randomized trial (N = 4,733).ParticipantsA subset of 3,099 participants self-reported annually on the occurrence of falls and non-spine fractures. Fractures were centrally adjudicated.Main measuresThe incidence of falls in the two treatment groups was compared using a random-effects negative binomial model, and fracture risk was compared using Cox proportional hazards models.Key resultsAt enrollment in both groups, the mean age was 62 years, 44% were women, 25% were Black, and mean blood pressure was 138/75 mmHg. During follow-up, all classes of medications, particularly thiazide diuretics, were more commonly prescribed in the intensive group. After 1 year of follow-up, the mean systolic blood pressure was 133 ± 15 mmHg in the standard group and 119 ± 14 mmHg in the intensive group. The adjusted rate of falls did not differ in the intensive and standard groups (62.2/100 person-years vs. 74.1/100 person-years, RR = 0.84, 95% CI 0.54-1.29, p = 0.43). The risk of non-spine fractures was nonsignificantly lower in the intensive than in the standard blood pressure group (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.62-1.01, p = 0.06).ConclusionsWe conclude that intensive antihypertensive treatment that lowered mean systolic blood pressure to below 120 mmHg was not associated with an increased risk of falls or non-spine fractures in patients age 40 to 79 years with type 2 diabetes.
| S-EPMC4242873 | biostudies-literature