Risk factor identification and assessment in hypertension and diabetes (RIAHD) study.

The RIAHD (Risk factor Identification and Assessment in Hypertension and Diabetes) study was conducted as a non-interventional study in 699 patients with hypertension without additional risk factors (low-risk) or with additional risk factors (high-risk), primarily diabetes and/or micro/macroalbuminuria (MA/A). The RIAHD study aimed to assess novel cardiovascular risk factors (RFs) such as blood viscosity, inflammatory markers and selected genetic polymorphisms. In addition, the RIAHD study also aimed to examine home versus office blood pressures (BPs), objective cardiovascular risk according to ESH/ESC Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation systems (SCORE) and subjectively expressed risk (clinical judgment) by physicians and patients. The health economic impact of other RFs, associated clinical conditions and target organ damage was also studied by evaluating healthcare utilization and sick leave in high-risk patients. In terms of circulating RFs, measured and calculated whole blood viscosity did not differ between the high and low-risk patient groups. Fibrinogen was significantly increased in the high-risk group, while hsCRP did not differ between the two groups. Self-measured BPs at home differed from BPs measured in the office. The average systolic home BPs was 11.8 mmHg lower in the low-risk group and 6.7 mmHg lower in the high-risk group. The diastolic home BPs averages differed 7.1 mm Hg and 4.1 mmHg from office BPs in the low-risk and high-risk groups, respectively. A higher home BP compared with the office BP, i.e. masked high BP values, was found in 21% of patients in the low-risk group and 32% of patients in the high-risk group. Global CV risk assessment (high-risk or low-risk) by the physicians corresponded well to objective risk evaluation (ESH/ESC) in the high-risk hypertensive patients, while physicians tended to underestimate the patients CV risk in the low-risk group (without diabetes and/or MA/A). Proper global risk assessment by judgement is often difficult in cardiovascular patients. The RIAHD study emphasizes the importance of performing a more extended RF assessment in hypertensive patients with as well as without diabetes and/or micro/macroalbuminuria in order to expose the full RF profile.

Reduced cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in hypertensive diabetic patients on first-line therapy with an ACE inhibitor compared with a diuretic/beta-blocker-based treatment regimen: a subanalysis of the Captopril Prevention Project.

OBJECTIVE: The Captopril Prevention Project (CAPPP) evaluated the effects of an ACE inhibitor-based therapeutic regimen on cardiovascular mortality and morbidity in hypertension. One planned subanalysis of the CAPPP was to evaluate the outcome in the diabetic patient group. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In the CAPPP, 572 (4.9% of 10,985 hypertensive patients) had diabetes at baseline and were studied according to a prospective, randomized, open, blinded, end point trial design. Patients aged 25-66 years with diastolic blood pressure > or =100 mmHg were included and randomized to receive either captopril or conventional antihypertensive treatment (diuretics and/or beta-blockers). RESULTS: The primary end point, fatal and nonfatal myocardial infarction and stroke as well as other cardiovascular deaths, was markedly lower in the captopril than in the conventional therapy group (relative risk [RR] = 0.59; P = 0.018). Specifically, cardiovascular mortality, defined as fatal stroke and myocardial infarction, sudden death, and other cardiovascular death, tended to be lower in the captopril group (RR = 0.48; P = 0.084), and no difference was observed between the study groups for stroke (RR = 1.02; P = 0.96). Myocardial infarctions were less frequent in the captopril group than in the conventional therapy group (RR = 0.34; P = 0.002). Furthermore, total mortality was lower in the captopril as compared with the conventional therapy group (RR = 0.54; P = 0.034). Patients with impaired metabolic control seemed to benefit the most from ACE inhibitor-based therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Captopril is superior to a diuretic/beta-blocker antihypertensive treatment regimen in preventing cardiovascular events in hypertensive diabetic patients, especially in those with metabolic decompensation.

Effect of angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibition compared with conventional therapy on cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in hypertension: the Captopril Prevention Project (CAPPP) randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Angiotensin-converting-enzyme (ACE) inhibitors have been used for more than a decade to treat high blood pressure, despite the lack of data from randomised intervention trials to show that such treatment affects cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. The Captopril Prevention Project (CAPPP) is a randomised intervention trial to compare the effects of ACE inhibition and conventional therapy on cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in patients with hypertension. METHODS: CAPPP was a prospective, randomised, open trial with blinded endpoint evaluation. 10,985 patients were enrolled at 536 health centres in Sweden and Finland. Patients aged 25-66 years with a measured diastolic blood pressure of 100 mm Hg or more on two occasions were randomly assigned captopril or conventional antihypertensive treatment (diuretics, beta-blockers). Analysis was by intention-to-treat. The primary endpoint was a composite of fatal and non-fatal myocardial infarction, stroke, and other cardiovascular deaths. FINDINGS: Of 5492 patients assigned captopril and 5493 assigned conventional therapy, 14 and 13, respectively, were lost to follow-up. Primary endpoint events occurred in 363 patients in the captopril group (11.1 per 1000 patient-years) and 335 in the conventional-treatment group (10.2 per 1000 patient-years; relative risk 1.05 [95% CI 0.90-1.22], p=0-52). Cardiovascular mortality was lower with captopril than with conventional treatment (76 vs 95 events; relative risk 0.77 [0.57-1-04], p=0.092), the rate of fatal and non-fatal myocardial infarction was similar (162 vs 161), but fatal and non-fatal stroke was more common with captopril (189 vs 148; 1.25 [1-01-1-55]. p=0.044). INTERPRETATION: Captopril and conventional treatment did not differ in efficacy in preventing cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. The difference in stroke risk is probably due to the lower levels of blood pressure obtained initially in previously treated patients randomised to conventional therapy.

The Captopril Prevention Project (CAPPP) in hypertension--baseline data and current status.

The Captopril Prevention Project (CAPPP) is an ongoing intervention study conducted in 11,019 hypertensive patients in Sweden and Finland. Patients have been randomized to receive either conventional antihypertensive therapy (diuretics and/or beta-blockers) or captopril-based treatment. A prospective, randomized, open, blinded-endpoint evaluation (PROBE) study design is used to compare these two therapeutic regimens as regards cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. The rationale for the CAPPP Study are the many observations of beneficial effects of ACE inhibition, as compared to diuretics and beta-blockers, on intermediary endpoints such as insulin sensitivity, serum lipoproteins, left ventricular hypertrophy and renal function. Captopril has also been shown to be markedly effective in the treatment of left ventricular dysfunction as well as congestive heart failure. The hypothesis is that these differences might result in improved risk reduction when ACE inhibitors are used in the treatment of hypertension. The present paper describes the baseline data and the changes in blood pressure during the first year in the total cohort. During the first year the average blood pressure was reduced by 11/8 mm Hg. A number of substudies have been conducted in the CAPPP Study. In one of these insulin sensitivity was compared in a subgroup of the patients using the euglycemic insulin clamp technique. In another substudy the ACE gene was sequenced and some new polymorphisms were discovered. Several other substudies are in progress or in the planning phase. The main results of the CAPPP Study should be available by mid-1998. Some of the intended anayses of the final results as well as other planned substudies are briefly described here.