Generalizability of Clinical Trials Supporting the 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Blood Pressure Guideline.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Anderson TS
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7076539 | biostudies-literature | 2020 May
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Generalizability of Clinical Trials Supporting the 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Blood Pressure Guideline.
Anderson Timothy S TS Odden Michelle M Penko Joanne J Kazi Dhruv S DS Bellows Brandon K BK Bibbins-Domingo Kirsten K
JAMA internal medicine 20200501 5
Similar Datasets
Project description:IntroductionThe 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association blood pressure guideline redefined hypertension and lowered the blood pressure treatment target. Empirical data on the guideline's impact are needed.MethodsData were analyzed from Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities study participants who attended baseline pre-guideline (2016-2017) and post-guideline (2018-2019) visits with baseline systolic blood pressure between 120 and 159 mmHg. Participants were grouped according to baseline systolic blood pressure by change in classification under the new guideline as follows: not reclassified (120-129 mmHg), reclassified to Stage 1 hypertension (130-139 mmHg), and reclassified to Stage 2 hypertension (140-159 mmHg). Means and 95% CIs for systolic blood pressure changes between baseline and follow-up, changes in antihypertensive use, and percentages that achieved the post-guideline recommendation (systolic blood pressure <130 mmHg) were calculated. Analyses were performed in 2021-2022.ResultsAmong 2,193 community-dwelling Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities participants aged 71-95 years at baseline, systolic blood pressure changes between baseline and follow-up visits differed among participants not reclassified (+4.1 mmHg, 95% CI=3.0, 5.3 mmHg), reclassified to Stage 1 hypertension (-1.1 mmHg, 95% CI= -2.2, 0.1 mmHg), and reclassified to Stage 2 hypertension (-5.7 mmHg, 95% CI= -6.8, -4.7 mmHg). Antihypertensive use changed from 77.3% to 78.4% (p=0.25) among participants reclassified to Stage 1 hypertension and from 78.3% to 81.4% (p<0.01) among participants reclassified to Stage 2 hypertension. At follow-up, 41.8% of the Stage 1 and 22.4% of the Stage 2 hypertension groups reached the systolic blood pressure <130 mmHg goal.ConclusionsThere were small decreases in systolic blood pressure and increases in antihypertensive therapy among older adults reclassified to Stage 2 hypertension but not among those reclassified to Stage 1 hypertension by the 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guideline.
| S-EPMC10524146 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6392041 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundOver 10 years, achieving and maintaining 2017 ACC/AHA guideline goals could prevent 3.0 million (UR, 1.1-5.1 million), 0.5 million (UR, 0.2-0.7 million), and 1.4 million (UR, 0.6-2.0 million) cardiovascular disease (CVD) events compared with maintaining current blood pressure (BP) levels, achieving 2003 Seventh Joint National Committee Report goals, and achieving 2014 Eighth Joint National Committee goals, respectively. We estimated the number of cardiovascular disease events prevented and treatment-related serious adverse events incurred over 10 years among US adults with hypertension by achieving 2017 ACC/AHA guideline-recommended BP goals compared with (1) current BP levels, (2) achieving 2003 Seventh Joint National Committee Report BP goals, and (3) achieving 2014 Eighth Joint National Committee panel member report BP goals.MethodsUS adults aged ≥45 years with an indication for BP treatment were grouped according to recommendations for antihypertensive drug therapy in the 2017 ACC/AHA guideline, 2003 Seventh Joint National Committee Report, and 2014 Eighth Joint National Committee. Population sizes were estimated from the 2011 to 2014 National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys. Rates for fatal and nonfatal CVD events (stroke, coronary heart disease, or heart failure) were estimated from the REGARDS (REasons for Geographic And Racial Differences in Stroke) study, weighted to the US population. CVD risk reductions with treatment to BP goals and risk for serious adverse events were obtained from meta-analyses of BP-lowering trials. CVD events prevented and treatment-related nonfatal serious adverse events over 10 years were calculated. Uncertainty surrounding main data inputs was expressed in uncertainty ranges (UR).ResultsOver ten years, achieving and maintaining 2017 ACC/AHA guideline goals compared with current BP levels, achieving 2003 Seventh Joint National Committee Report goals, or achieving 2014 Eighth Joint National Committee goals could prevent 3.0 million (UR, 1.1-5.1 million), 0.5 million (UR, 0.2-0.7 million), or 1.4 million (UR, 0.6-2.0 million) CVD events, respectively. Compared with current BP levels, achieving and maintaining 2017 goals could prevent 71.9 (UR, 26.6-122.3) CVD events per 1000 treated. Achieving 2017 guideline BP goals compared with current BP levels could also lead to nearly 3.3 million more serious adverse events over 10 years (UR, 2.2-4.4 million).ConclusionsAchieving and maintaining 2017 ACC/AHA BP goals could prevent a greater number of CVD events than achieving 2003 Seventh Joint National Committee Report or 2014 Eighth Joint National Committee BP goals but could also lead to more serious adverse events.
| S-EPMC6311714 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThe AHA/ACC-2017 hypertension guideline recommends an age-independent target blood pressure (BP) of less than 130/80 mmHg. In an elderly cohort without established cardiovascular disease (CVD) at baseline, we determined the impact of this guideline on the prevalence of hypertension and associated CVD risk.MethodsNineteen thousand, one hundred and fourteen participants aged at least 65 years from the ASPirin in Reducing Events in the Elderly (ASPREE) study were grouped by baseline BP: 'pre-2017 hypertensive' (BP ≥140/90 mmHg and/or on antihypertensive drugs); 'reclassified hypertensive' (normotensive by pre-2017 guidelines; hypertensive by AHA/ACC-2017 guideline), and 'normotensive' (BP <130 and <80 mmHg). For each group, we evaluated CVD risk factors, predicted 10-year CVD risk using the Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease (ASCVD) risk equation, and reported observed CVD event rates during a median 4.7-year follow-up.ResultsOverall, 74.4% (14 213/19 114) were 'pre-2017 hypertensive'; an additional 12.3% (2354/19 114) were 'reclassified hypertensive' by the AHA/ACC-2017 guideline. Of those 'reclassified hypertensive', the majority (94.5%) met criteria for antihypertensive treatment although 29% had no other traditional CVD risk factors other than age. Further, a relatively lower mean 10-year predicted CVD risk (18% versus 26%, P < 0.001) and lower CVD rates (8.9 versus 12.1/1000 person-years, P = 0.01) were observed in 'reclassified hypertensive' compared with 'pre-2017 hypertensive'. Compared with 'normotensive', a hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) for CVD events of 1.60 (1.26-2.02) for 'pre-2017 hypertensive' and 1.26 (0.93-1.71) for 'reclassified hypertensive' was observed.ConclusionApplying current CVD risk calculators in the elderly 'reclassified hypertensive', as a result of shifting the BP threshold lower, increases eligibility for antihypertensive treatment but documented CVD rates remain lower than hypertensive patients defined by pre2017 BP thresholds.
| S-EPMC8218338 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceLittle is known regarding the association between level of blood pressure (BP) in young adulthood and cardiovascular disease (CVD) events by middle age.ObjectiveTo assess whether young adults who developed hypertension, defined by the 2017 American College of Cardiology (ACC)/American Heart Association (AHA) BP guideline, before age 40 years have higher risk for CVD events compared with those who maintained normal BP.Design, setting, and participantsAnalyses were conducted in the prospective cohort Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults (CARDIA) study, started in March 1985. CARDIA enrolled 5115 African American and white participants aged 18 to 30 years from 4 US field centers (Birmingham, Alabama; Chicago, Illinois; Minneapolis, Minnesota; and Oakland, California). Outcomes were available through August 2015.ExposuresUsing the highest BP measured from the first examination to the examination closest to, but not after, age 40 years, each participant was categorized as having normal BP (untreated systolic BP [SBP] <120 mm Hg and diastolic BP [DBP] <80 mm Hg; n = 2574); elevated BP (untreated SBP 120-129 mm Hg and DBP <80 mm Hg; n = 445); stage 1 hypertension (untreated SBP 130-139 mm Hg or DBP 80-89 mm Hg; n = 1194); or stage 2 hypertension (SBP ≥140 mm Hg, DBP ≥90 mm Hg, or taking antihypertensive medication; n = 638).Main outcomes and measuresCVD events: fatal and nonfatal coronary heart disease (CHD), heart failure, stroke, transient ischemic attack, or intervention for peripheral artery disease (PAD).ResultsThe final cohort included 4851 adults (mean age when follow-up for outcomes began, 35.7 years [SD, 3.6]; 2657 women [55%]; 2441 African American [50%]; 206 taking antihypertensive medication [4%]). Over a median follow-up of 18.8 years, 228 incident CVD events occurred (CHD, 109; stroke, 63; heart failure, 48; PAD, 8). CVD incidence rates for normal BP, elevated BP, stage 1 hypertension, and stage 2 hypertension were 1.37 (95% CI, 1.07-1.75), 2.74 (95% CI, 1.78-4.20), 3.15 (95% CI, 2.47-4.02), and 8.04 (95% CI, 6.45-10.03) per 1000 person-years, respectively. After multivariable adjustment, hazard ratios for CVD events for elevated BP, stage 1 hypertension, and stage 2 hypertension vs normal BP were 1.67 (95% CI, 1.01-2.77), 1.75 (95% CI, 1.22-2.53), and 3.49 (95% CI, 2.42-5.05), respectively.Conclusions and relevanceAmong young adults, those with elevated blood pressure, stage 1 hypertension, and stage 2 hypertension before age 40 years, as defined by the blood pressure classification in the 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guidelines, had significantly higher risk for subsequent cardiovascular disease events compared with those with normal blood pressure before age 40 years. The ACC/AHA blood pressure classification system may help identify young adults at higher risk for cardiovascular disease events.
| S-EPMC6248102 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo determine the concordance in the prevalence of hypertension and pharmacological antihypertensive treatment recommendations for U.S. adults with diabetes using definitions from the 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) blood pressure (BP) guideline and the 2017 American Diabetes Association (ADA) diabetes and hypertension position statement.Research design and methodsWe analyzed data for U.S. adults with diabetes in the U.S. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), 2011-2016 (n = 2,266). Diabetes was defined by treatment with glucose-lowering medication, glycosylated hemoglobin ≥6.5%, fasting serum glucose ≥126 mg/dL, or nonfasting serum glucose ≥200 mg/dL. BP was measured three times and antihypertensive medication use was self-reported.ResultsThe prevalence (95% CI) of hypertension among U.S. adults with diabetes was 77.1% (73.9, 80.0) and 66.3% (63.4, 69.1) according to the ACC/AHA and ADA definitions, respectively. Also, 22.9% (20.0, 26.1) did not have hypertension according to either definition, and the concordance in hypertension status was 89.2% (87.2, 91.0). Among U.S. adults with diabetes not taking antihypertensive medication, 52.8% (47.7, 57.8) were not recommended to initiate antihypertensive medication by either the ACC/AHA or the ADA document and 22.4% (19.2, 25.9) were recommended to initiate it by both documents (overall concordance 75.2% [70.4, 79.4]). Among those taking antihypertensive medication, 45.3% (41.3, 49.4) and 50.4% (46.5, 54.2) had BP above the goal in neither and both documents, respectively (overall concordance 95.7% [93.4, 97.2]).ConclusionsA high percentage of U.S. adults with diabetes are provided identical antihypertensive treatment recommendations by the ACC/AHA BP guideline and the ADA diabetes and hypertension position statement.
| S-EPMC6196827 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceThe 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) Cholesterol Management Guideline recommends moderate-intensity to high-intensity statin therapy in eligible patients.ObjectiveTo examine adoption of the 2013 ACC/AHA guideline in US cardiology practices.Design, setting, and participantsAmong 161 cardiology practices, trends in the use of moderate-intensity to high-intensity statin and nonstatin lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) were analyzed before (September 1, 2012, to November 1, 2013) and after (February 1, 2014, to April 1, 2015) publication of the 2013 ACC/AHA guideline among 4 mutually exclusive risk groups within the ACC Practice Innovation and Clinical Excellence Registry. Interrupted time series analysis was used to evaluate for differences in trend in use of moderate-intensity to high-intensity statin and nonstatin LLT use in hierarchical logistic regression models. Participants were a population-based sample of 1 105 356 preguideline patients (2 431 192 patient encounters) and 1 116 472 postguideline patients (2 377 219 patient encounters). Approximately 97% of patients had atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD).ExposuresModerate-intensity to high-intensity statin and nonstatin LLT use before and after publication of the 2013 ACC/AHA guideline.Main outcomes and measuresTime trend in the use of moderate-intensity to high-intensity statin and nonstatin LLT.ResultsIn the study cohort, the mean (SD) age was 69.6 (12.1) years among 1 105 356 patients (40.2% female) before publication of the guideline and 70.0 (11.9) years among 1 116 472 patients (39.8% female) after publication of the guideline. Although there was a trend toward increasing use of moderate-intensity to high-intensity statins overall and in the ASCVD cohort, such a trend was already present before publication of the guideline. No significant difference in trend in the use of moderate-intensity to high-intensity statins was observed in other groups. The use of moderate-intensity to high-intensity statin therapy was 62.1% (before publication of the guideline) and 66.6% (after publication of the guideline) in the overall cohort, 62.7% (before publication) and 67.0% (after publication) in the ASCVD cohort, 50.6% (before publication) and 52.3% (after publication) in the cohort with elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels (ie, ≥190 mg/dL), 52.4% (before publication) and 55.2% (after publication) in the diabetes cohort, and 41.9% (before publication) and 46.9% (after publication) in the remaining group with 10-year ASCVD risk of 7.5% or higher. In hierarchical logistic regression models, there was a significant increase in the use of moderate-intensity to high-intensity statins in the overall cohort (4.8%) and in the ASCVD cohort (4.3%) (P < .01 for slope for both). There was no significant change for other risk cohorts. Nonstatin LLT use remained unchanged in the preguideline and postguideline periods in the hierarchical logistic regression models for all of the risk groups.Conclusions and relevanceAdoption of the 2013 ACC/AHA Cholesterol Management Guideline in cardiology practices was modest. Timely interventions are needed to improve guideline-concordant practice to reduce the burden of ASCVD.
| S-EPMC5470413 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) blood pressure (BP) guideline lowered the BP thresholds for defining hypertension compared with the Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee (JNC7) guideline.MethodsWe analyzed clinic and ambulatory BP monitoring data from 717 Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults study participants and compared the prevalence of clinic and out-of-clinic BP phenotypes using thresholds from the 2017 ACC/AHA and JNC7 guidelines.ResultsAmong participants not taking antihypertensive medication and according to the JNC7 and 2017 ACC/AHA guidelines, 11.1 and 30.1% of participants had clinic hypertension, 37.5 and 57.9% had awake hypertension, 35.7 and 58.1% had asleep hypertension, and 35.7 and 58.6% had 24-h hypertension, respectively. According to the JNC7 and 2017 ACC/AHA guideline definitions, 1.9 and 3.2% had white-coat hypertension, 28.2 and 31.0% had masked hypertension and 9.3 and 26.9% had sustained hypertension, respectively. Among participants taking antihypertensive medication and when defined using the JNC7 and 2017 ACC/AHA guideline BP thresholds, 18.6 and 45.3% had uncontrolled clinic BP, 48.1 and 62.5% had uncontrolled awake BP, 48.1 and 70.2% had uncontrolled asleep BP and, 47.7 and 65.3% had uncontrolled 24-h BP, respectively. Using JNC7 and 2017 ACC/AHA guideline BP thresholds, the prevalence was 1.4 and 5.2% for white-coat effect, 30.9 and 22.5% for masked uncontrolled hypertension, and 17.2 and 40.0% for sustained uncontrolled BP, respectively.ConclusionThe 2017 ACC/AHA guideline results in a substantially higher prevalence of awake, asleep, 24-h, and sustained hypertension.
| S-EPMC10761214 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceLittle is known regarding the durability of clinical practice guideline recommendations over time.ObjectiveTo characterize variations in the durability of class I ("procedure/treatment should be performed/administered") American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guideline recommendations.Design, setting, and participantsTextual analysis by 4 independent reviewers of 11 guidelines published between 1998 and 2007 and revised between 2006 and 2013.Main outcomes and measuresWe abstracted all class I recommendations from the first of the 2 most recent versions of each guideline and identified corresponding recommendations in the subsequent version. We classified recommendations replaced by less determinate or contrary recommendations as having been downgraded or reversed; we classified recommendations for which no corresponding item could be identified as having been omitted. We tested for differences in the durability of recommendations according to guideline topic and underlying level of evidence using bivariable hypothesis tests and conditional logistic regression.ResultsOf 619 index recommendations, 495 (80.0%; 95% CI, 76.6%-83.1%) were retained in the subsequent guideline version, 57 (9.2%; 95% CI, 7.0%-11.8%) were downgraded or reversed, and 67 (10.8%; 95% CI, 8.4%-13.3%) were omitted. The percentage of recommendations retained varied across guidelines from 15.4% (95% CI, 1.9%-45.4%) to 94.1% (95% CI, 80.3%-99.3%; P < .001). Among recommendations with available information on level of evidence, 90.5% (95% CI, 83.2%-95.3%) of recommendations supported by multiple randomized studies were retained, vs 81.0% (95% CI, 74.8%-86.3%) of recommendations supported by 1 randomized trial or observational data and 73.7% (95% CI, 65.8%-80.5%) of recommendations supported by opinion (P = .001). After accounting for guideline-level factors, the probability of being downgraded, reversed, or omitted was greater for recommendations based on opinion (odds ratio, 3.14; 95% CI, 1.69-5.85; P < .001) or on 1 trial or observational data (odds ratio, 3.49; 95% CI, 1.45-8.41; P = .005) vs recommendations based on multiple trials.Conclusions and relevanceThe durability of class I cardiology guideline recommendations for procedures and treatments promulgated by the ACC/AHA varied across individual guidelines and levels of evidence. Downgrades, reversals, and omissions were most common among recommendations not supported by multiple randomized studies.
| S-EPMC4346183 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceClinical decisions are ideally based on evidence generated from multiple randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating clinical outcomes, but historically, few clinical guideline recommendations have been based entirely on this type of evidence.ObjectiveTo determine the class and level of evidence (LOE) supporting current major cardiovascular society guideline recommendations, and changes in LOE over time.Data sourcesCurrent American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) and European Society of Cardiology (ESC) clinical guideline documents (2008-2018), as identified on cardiovascular society websites, and immediate predecessors to these guideline documents (1999-2014), as referenced in current guideline documents.Study selectionComprehensive guideline documents including recommendations organized by class and LOE.Data extraction and synthesisThe number of recommendations and the distribution of LOE (A [supported by data from multiple RCTs or a single, large RCT], B [supported by data from observational studies or a single RCT], and C [supported by expert opinion only]) were determined for each guideline document.Main outcomes and measuresThe proportion of guideline recommendations supported by evidence from multiple RCTs (LOE A).ResultsAcross 26 current ACC/AHA guidelines (2930 recommendations; median, 121 recommendations per guideline [25th-75th percentiles, 76-155]), 248 recommendations (8.5%) were classified as LOE A, 1465 (50.0%) as LOE B, and 1217 (41.5%) as LOE C. The median proportion of LOE A recommendations was 7.9% (25th-75th percentiles, 0.9%-15.2%). Across 25 current ESC guideline documents (3399 recommendations; median, 130 recommendations per guideline [25th-75th percentiles, 111-154]), 484 recommendations (14.2%) were classified as LOE A, 1053 (31.0%) as LOE B, and 1862 (54.8%) as LOE C. When comparing current guidelines with prior versions, the proportion of recommendations that were LOE A did not increase in either ACC/AHA (median, 9.0% [current] vs 11.7% [prior]) or ESC guidelines (median, 15.1% [current] vs 17.6% [prior]).Conclusions and relevanceAmong recommendations in major cardiovascular society guidelines, only a small percentage were supported by evidence from multiple RCTs or a single, large RCT. This pattern does not appear to have meaningfully improved from 2008 to 2018.
| S-EPMC6439920 | biostudies-literature