Efficacy of decentralised home-based antihypertensive treatment in older adults with multimorbidity and polypharmacy (ATEMPT): an open-label randomised controlled pilot trial.

BACKGROUND: Older patients with multimorbidity and polypharmacy have been under-represented in clinical trials. We aimed to assess the effect of different intensities of antihypertensive treatment on changes in blood pressure, major safety outcomes, and patient-reported outcomes in this population. METHODS: ATEMPT was a decentralised, two-armed, parallel-group, open-label randomised controlled pilot trial conducted in the Thames Valley area, South East England. Individuals aged 65 years or older with multimorbidity (three or more chronic conditions) or polypharmacy (five or more types of medications) and a systolic blood pressure of 115-165 mm Hg were eligible for inclusion. Participants were identified through a search of national hospital discharge databases, identification of patients registered with an online pharmacy, and via targeted advertising on social media platforms. Participants were randomly assigned to receive up to two more classes versus up to two fewer classes of antihypertensive medications. Apart from routine home visits for conducting the baseline assessment, all communication, monitoring, and management of participants by the trial team was conducted remotely. The primary outcome was change in home-measured blood pressure. FINDINGS: Between Dec 15, 2020, and Aug 31, 2022, 230 participants were randomly assigned (n=126 to more vs n=104 to fewer antihypertensive medications). The frequency of serious adverse events was similar across both groups; no cardiovascular events occurred in the more antihypertensive drugs group, compared with six in the fewer antihypertensive drugs group, of which two were fatal. Over a 13-month follow-up period, the mean systolic blood pressure in the group allocated to receive more antihypertensive medications decreased from 134·5 mm Hg (SD 10·7) at baseline to 122·1 mm Hg (10·5). By contrast, in the group allocated to receive fewer antihypertensive medications, it remained relatively unchanged, moving from 134·8 mm Hg (SD 11·2) at baseline to 132·9 mm Hg (15·3); this corresponded to a mean difference of -10·7 mm Hg (95% CI -17·5 to -4·0). INTERPRETATION: Remotely delivered antihypertensive treatment substantially reduced systolic blood pressure in older adults who are often less represented in trials, with no increase in the risk of serious adverse events. The results of this trial will inform a larger clinical trial focusing on assessing major cardiovascular events, safety, physical functioning, and cognitive function that is currently in the planning stages. These results also underscore the efficiency of decentralised trial designs, which might be of broader interest in other settings. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research Oxford Biomedical Research Centre and the Oxford Martin School.

Stratification of diabetes in the context of comorbidities, using representation learning and topological data analysis.

Diabetes is a heterogenous, multimorbid disorder with a large variation in manifestations, trajectories, and outcomes. The aim of this study is to validate a novel machine learning method for the phenotyping of diabetes in the context of comorbidities. Data from 9967 multimorbid patients with a new diagnosis of diabetes were extracted from Clinical Practice Research Datalink. First, using BEHRT (a transformer-based deep learning architecture), the embeddings corresponding to diabetes were learned. Next, topological data analysis (TDA) was carried out to test how different areas in high-dimensional manifold correspond to different risk profiles. The following endpoints were considered when profiling risk trajectories: major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), coronary artery disease (CAD), stroke (CVA), heart failure (HF), renal failure (RF), diabetic neuropathy, peripheral arterial disease, reduced visual acuity and all-cause mortality. Kaplan Meier curves were plotted for each derived phenotype. Finally, we tested the performance of an established risk prediction model (QRISK) by adding TDA-derived features. We identified four subgroups of patients with diabetes and divergent comorbidity patterns differing in their risk of future cardiovascular, renal, and other microvascular outcomes. Phenotype 1 (young with chronic inflammatory conditions) and phenotype 2 (young with CAD) included relatively younger patients with diabetes compared to phenotypes 3 (older with hypertension and renal disease) and 4 (older with previous CVA), and those subgroups had a higher frequency of pre-existing cardio-renal diseases. Within ten years of follow-up, 2592 patients (26%) experienced MACE, 2515 patients (25%) died, and 2020 patients (20%) suffered RF. QRISK3 model's AUC was augmented from 67.26% (CI 67.25-67.28%) to 67.67% (CI 67.66-67.69%) by adding specific TDA-derived phenotype and the distances to both extremities of the TDA graph improving its performance in the prediction of CV outcomes. We confirmed the importance of accounting for multimorbidity when risk stratifying heterogenous cohort of patients with new diagnosis of diabetes. Our unsupervised machine learning method improved the prediction of clinical outcomes.

Sex-Specific Effects of Blood Pressure Lowering Pharmacotherapy for the Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease: An Individual Participant-Level Data Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Whether the relative effects of blood pressure (BP)-lowering treatment on cardiovascular outcomes differ by sex, particularly when BP is not substantially elevated, has been uncertain. METHODS: We conducted an individual participant-level data meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of pharmacological BP lowering. We pooled the data and categorized participants by sex, systolic BP categories in 10-mm Hg increments from <120 to ≥170 mm Hg, and age categories spanning from <55 to ≥85 years. We used fixed-effect one-stage individual participant-level data meta-analyses and applied Cox proportional hazard models, stratified by trial, to analyze the data. RESULTS: We included data from 51 randomized controlled trials involving 358 636 (42% women) participants. Over 4.2 years of median follow-up, a 5-mm Hg reduction in systolic BP decreased the risk of major cardiovascular events both in women and men (hazard ratio [95% CI], 0.92 [0.89-0.95] for women and 0.90 [0.88-0.93] for men; P for interaction, 1). There was no evidence for heterogeneity of relative treatment effects by sex for the major cardiovascular disease, its components, or across the different baseline BP categories (all P for interaction, ≥0.57). The effects in women and men were consistent across age categories and the types of antihypertensive medications (all P for interaction, ≥0.14). CONCLUSIONS: The effects of BP reduction were similar in women and men across all BP and age categories at randomization and with no evidence to suggest that drug classes had differing effects by sex. This study does not substantiate sex-based differences in BP-lowering treatment.

Blood pressure and risk of venous thromboembolism: a cohort analysis of 5.5 million UK adults and Mendelian randomization studies.

AIMS: Evidence for the effect of elevated blood pressure (BP) on the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) has been conflicting. We sought to assess the association between systolic BP and the risk of VTE. METHODS AND RESULTS: Three complementary studies comprising an observational cohort analysis, a one-sample and two-sample Mendelian randomization were conducted using data from 5 588 280 patients registered in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) dataset and 432 173 UK Biobank participants with valid genetic data. Summary statistics of International Network on Venous Thrombosis genome-wide association meta-analysis was used for two-sample Mendelian randomization. The primary outcome was the first occurrence of VTE event, identified from hospital discharge reports, death registers, and/or primary care records. In the CPRD cohort, 104 017(1.9%) patients had a first diagnosis of VTE during the 9.6-year follow-up. Each 20 mmHg increase in systolic BP was associated with a 7% lower risk of VTE [hazard ratio: 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI): (0.92-0.94)]. Statistically significant interactions were found for sex and body mass index, but not for age and subtype of VTE (pulmonary embolism and deep venous thrombosis). Mendelian randomization studies provided strong evidence for the association between systolic BP and VTE, both in the one-sample [odds ratio (OR): 0.69, (95% CI: 0.57-0.83)] and two-sample analyses [OR: 0.80, 95% CI: (0.70-0.92)]. CONCLUSION: We found an increased risk of VTE with lower BP, and this association was independently confirmed in two Mendelian randomization analyses. The benefits of BP reduction are likely to outweigh the harms in most patient groups, but in people with predisposing factors for VTE, further BP reduction should be made cautiously.

Blood pressure-lowering treatment for prevention of major cardiovascular diseases in people with and without type 2 diabetes: an individual participant-level data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Controversy exists as to whether the threshold for blood pressure-lowering treatment should differ between people with and without type 2 diabetes. We aimed to investigate the effects of blood pressure-lowering treatment on the risk of major cardiovascular events by type 2 diabetes status, as well as by baseline levels of systolic blood pressure. METHODS: We conducted a one-stage individual participant-level data meta-analysis of major randomised controlled trials using the Blood Pressure Lowering Treatment Trialists' Collaboration dataset. Trials with information on type 2 diabetes status at baseline were eligible if they compared blood pressure-lowering medications versus placebo or other classes of blood pressure-lowering medications, or an intensive versus a standard blood pressure-lowering strategy, and reported at least 1000 persons-years of follow-up in each group. Trials exclusively on participants with heart failure or with short-term therapies and acute myocardial infarction or other acute settings were excluded. We expressed treatment effect per 5 mm Hg reduction in systolic blood pressure on the risk of developing a major cardiovascular event as the primary outcome, defined as the first occurrence of fatal or non-fatal stroke or cerebrovascular disease, fatal or non-fatal ischaemic heart disease, or heart failure causing death or requiring hospitalisation. Cox proportional hazard models, stratified by trial, were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) separately by type 2 diabetes status at baseline, with further stratification by baseline categories of systolic blood pressure (in 10 mm Hg increments from <120 mm Hg to ≥170 mm Hg). To estimate absolute risk reductions, we used a Poisson regression model over the follow-up duration. The effect of each of the five major blood pressure-lowering drug classes, including angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin II receptor blockers, ß blockers, calcium channel blockers, and thiazide diuretics, was estimated using a network meta-analysis framework. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42018099283. FINDINGS: We included data from 51 randomised clinical trials published between 1981 and 2014 involving 358 533 participants (58% men), among whom 103 325 (29%) had known type 2 diabetes at baseline. The baseline mean systolic/diastolic blood pressure of those with and without type 2 diabetes was 149/84 mm Hg (SD 19/11) and 153/88 mm Hg (SD 21/12), respectively. Over 4·2 years median follow-up (IQR 3·0-5·0), a 5 mm Hg reduction in systolic blood pressure decreased the risk of major cardiovascular events in both groups, but with a weaker relative treatment effect in participants with type 2 diabetes (HR 0·94 [95% CI 0·91-0·98]) compared with those without type 2 diabetes (0·89 [0·87-0·92]; pinteraction=0·0013). However, absolute risk reductions did not differ substantially between people with and without type 2 diabetes because of the higher absolute cardiovascular risk among participants with type 2 diabetes. We found no reliable evidence for heterogeneity of treatment effects by baseline systolic blood pressure in either group. In keeping with the primary findings, analysis using stratified network meta-analysis showed no evidence that relative treatment effects differed substantially between participants with type 2 diabetes and those without for any of the drug classes investigated. INTERPRETATION: Although the relative beneficial effects of blood pressure reduction on major cardiovascular events were weaker in participants with type 2 diabetes than in those without, absolute effects were similar. The difference in relative risk reduction was not related to the baseline blood pressure or allocation to different drug classes. Therefore, the adoption of differential blood pressure thresholds, intensities of blood pressure lowering, or drug classes used in people with and without type 2 diabetes is not warranted. FUNDING: British Heart Foundation, UK National Institute for Health Research, and Oxford Martin School.

How Much Lowering of Blood Pressure Is Required to Prevent Cardiovascular Disease in Patients With and Without Previous Cardiovascular Disease?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To review the recent large-scale randomised evidence on pharmacologic reduction in blood pressure for the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease. RECENT FINDINGS: Based on findings of the meta-analysis of individual participant-level data from 48 randomised clinical trials and involving 344,716 participants with mean age of 65 years, the relative reduction in the risk of developing major cardiovascular events was proportional to the magnitude of achieved reduction in blood pressure. For each 5-mmHg reduction in systolic blood pressure, the risk of developing cardiovascular events fell by 10% (hazard ratio [HR] (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.90 [0.88 to 0.92]). When participants were stratified by their history of cardiovascular disease, the HRs (95% CI) in those with and without previous cardiovascular disease were 0.89 (0.86 to 0.92) and 0.91 (0.89 to 0.94), respectively, with no significant heterogeneity in these effects (adjusted P for interaction = 1.0). When these patient groups were further stratified by their baseline systolic blood pressure in increments of 10 mmHg from < 120 to ≥ 170 mmHg, there was no significant heterogeneity in the relative risk reduction across these categories in people with or without previous cardiovascular disease (adjusted P for interaction were 1.00 and 0.28, respectively). Pharmacologic lowering of blood pressure was effective in preventing major cardiovascular disease events both in people with or without previous cardiovascular disease, which was not modified by their baseline blood pressure level. Treatment effects were shown to be proportional to the intensity of blood pressure reduction, but even modest blood pressure reduction, on average, can lead to meaningful gains in the prevention of incident or recurrent cardiovascular disease.

The Blood Pressure Lowering Treatment Trialists' Collaboration: methodological clarifications of recent reports.

Epidemiological evidence has consistently shown that people with higher systolic or diastolic blood pressure are at greater risk of cardiovascular diseases. However, there has been limited randomized evidence to determine the role of blood pressure level at treatment initiation in the reduction of cardiovascular diseases risk. The extent to which other characteristics of individuals, such as prior disease history, age or sex, should be taken into account has also been controversial. Furthermore, effects on less commonly reported efficacy and safety outcomes remain underexplored. The Blood Pressure Lowering Treatment Trialists' Collaboration has collected individual-level participant data from 52 randomized clinical trials, with more than 360 000 participants, and is now the largest source of individual-level data from randomized clinical trials of blood pressure-lowering treatment. This resource provides an unprecedented opportunity to address major areas of uncertainty relating to stratified efficacy and safety of antihypertensive therapy. Recent reports have demonstrated the power of pooled analyses of the Blood Pressure Lowering Treatment Trialists' Collaboration dataset in filling long-standing gaps in our knowledge. However, there have been some misconceptions regarding the methods underpinning the recent reports, which we clarify in this article.

Blood pressure lowering and risk of new-onset type 2 diabetes: an individual participant data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Blood pressure lowering is an established strategy for preventing microvascular and macrovascular complications of diabetes, but its role in the prevention of diabetes itself is unclear. We aimed to examine this question using individual participant data from major randomised controlled trials. METHODS: We performed a one-stage individual participant data meta-analysis, in which data were pooled to investigate the effect of blood pressure lowering per se on the risk of new-onset type 2 diabetes. An individual participant data network meta-analysis was used to investigate the differential effects of five major classes of antihypertensive drugs on the risk of new-onset type 2 diabetes. Overall, data from 22 studies conducted between 1973 and 2008, were obtained by the Blood Pressure Lowering Treatment Trialists' Collaboration (Oxford University, Oxford, UK). We included all primary and secondary prevention trials that used a specific class or classes of antihypertensive drugs versus placebo or other classes of blood pressure lowering medications that had at least 1000 persons-years of follow-up in each randomly allocated arm. Participants with a known diagnosis of diabetes at baseline and trials conducted in patients with prevalent diabetes were excluded. For the one-stage individual participant data meta-analysis we used stratified Cox proportional hazards model and for the individual participant data network meta-analysis we used logistic regression models to calculate the relative risk (RR) for drug class comparisons. FINDINGS: 145 939 participants (88 500 [60·6%] men and 57 429 [39·4%] women) from 19 randomised controlled trials were included in the one-stage individual participant data meta-analysis. 22 trials were included in the individual participant data network meta-analysis. After a median follow-up of 4·5 years (IQR 2·0), 9883 participants were diagnosed with new-onset type 2 diabetes. Systolic blood pressure reduction by 5 mm Hg reduced the risk of type 2 diabetes across all trials by 11% (hazard ratio 0·89 [95% CI 0·84-0·95]). Investigation of the effects of five major classes of antihypertensive drugs showed that in comparison to placebo, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (RR 0·84 [95% 0·76-0·93]) and angiotensin II receptor blockers (RR 0·84 [0·76-0·92]) reduced the risk of new-onset type 2 diabetes; however, the use of ß blockers (RR 1·48 [1·27-1·72]) and thiazide diuretics (RR 1·20 [1·07-1·35]) increased this risk, and no material effect was found for calcium channel blockers (RR 1·02 [0·92-1·13]). INTERPRETATION: Blood pressure lowering is an effective strategy for the prevention of new-onset type 2 diabetes. Established pharmacological interventions, however, have qualitatively and quantitively different effects on diabetes, likely due to their differing off-target effects, with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers having the most favourable outcomes. This evidence supports the indication for selected classes of antihypertensive drugs for the prevention of diabetes, which could further refine the selection of drug choice according to an individual's clinical risk of diabetes. FUNDING: British Heart Foundation, National Institute for Health Research, and Oxford Martin School.

Antihypertensive treatment and risk of cancer: an individual participant data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Some studies have suggested a link between antihypertensive medication and cancer, but the evidence is so far inconclusive. Thus, we aimed to investigate this association in a large individual patient data meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials. METHODS: We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov from Jan 1, 1966, to Sept 1, 2019, to identify potentially eligible randomised controlled trials. Eligible studies were randomised controlled trials comparing one blood pressure lowering drug class with a placebo, inactive control, or other blood pressure lowering drug. We also required that trials had at least 1000 participant years of follow-up in each treatment group. Trials without cancer event information were excluded. We requested individual participant data from the authors of eligible trials. We pooled individual participant-level data from eligible trials and assessed the effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs), angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs), ß blockers, calcium channel blockers, and thiazide diuretics on cancer risk in one-stage individual participant data and network meta-analyses. Cause-specific fixed-effects Cox regression models, stratified by trial, were used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs). The primary outcome was any cancer event, defined as the first occurrence of any cancer diagnosed after randomisation. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42018099283). FINDINGS: 33 trials met the inclusion criteria, and included 260 447 participants with 15 012 cancer events. Median follow-up of included participants was 4·2 years (IQR 3·0-5·0). In the individual participant data meta-analysis comparing each drug class with all other comparators, no associations were identified between any antihypertensive drug class and risk of any cancer (HR 0·99 [95% CI 0·95-1·04] for ACEIs; 0·96 [0·92-1·01] for ARBs; 0·98 [0·89-1·07] for ß blockers; 1·01 [0·95-1·07] for thiazides), with the exception of calcium channel blockers (1·06 [1·01-1·11]). In the network meta-analysis comparing drug classes against placebo, we found no excess cancer risk with any drug class (HR 1·00 [95% CI 0·93-1·09] for ACEIs; 0·99 [0·92-1·06] for ARBs; 0·99 [0·89-1·11] for ß blockers; 1·04 [0·96-1·13] for calcium channel blockers; 1·00 [0·90-1·10] for thiazides). INTERPRETATION: We found no consistent evidence that antihypertensive medication use had any effect on cancer risk. Although such findings are reassuring, evidence for some comparisons was insufficient to entirely rule out excess risk, in particular for calcium channel blockers. FUNDING: British Heart Foundation, National Institute for Health Research, Oxford Martin School.

Genetic susceptibility, elevated blood pressure, and risk of atrial fibrillation: a Mendelian randomization study.

BACKGROUND: Whether elevated blood pressure (BP) is a modifiable risk factor for atrial fibrillation (AF) is not established. We tested (1) whether the association between BP and risk of AF is causal, (2) whether it varies according to individual's genetic susceptibility for AF, and (3) the extent to which specific BP-lowering drugs are expected to reduce this risk. METHODS: First, causality of association was assessed through two-sample Mendelian randomization, using data from two independent genome-wide association studies that included a population of one million Europeans in total. Second, the UK Biobank data of 329,237 participants at baseline was used to study the effect of BP on AF according to genetic susceptibility of developing AF. Third, a possible treatment effect with major BP-lowering drug classes on AF risk was predicted through genetic variants in genes encode the therapeutic targets of each drug class. Estimated drug effects were compared with effects on incident coronary heart disease, for which direct trial evidence exists. RESULTS: The two-sample Mendelian randomization analysis indicated that, on average, exposure to a higher systolic BP increased the risk of AF by 19% (odds ratio per each 10-mmHg [OR] 1.19 [1.12 to 1.27]). This association was replicated in the UK biobank using individual participant data. However, in a further genetic risk-stratified analysis, there was evidence for a linear gradient in the relative effects of systolic BP on AF; while there was no conclusive evidence of an effect in those with low genetic risk, a strong effect was observed among those with high genetic susceptibility for AF. The comparison of predicted treatment effects using genetic proxies for three main drug classes (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, beta-blockers, and calcium channel blockers) suggested similar average effects for the prevention of atrial fibrillation and coronary heart disease. CONCLUSIONS: The effect of elevated BP on the risk of AF is likely to be causal, suggesting that BP-lowering treatment may be effective in AF prevention. However, average effects masked clinically important variations, with a more pronounced effect in individuals with high genetic susceptibility risk for AF.

Copper concentration in multiple sclerosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: A wide range of risk factors, from genetic to environmental, have been identified to play role in the etiology of multiple sclerosis. However, the role of trace element remains mostly unknown. We sought to combine all available evidence to assess the association between copper concentration and multiple sclerosis. METHODS: This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted based on PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science were searched since inception till July 2020. Observational studies that assessed copper as exposure in serum, plasma, whole blood, and cerebrospinal fluid were included. Standardized mean differences (SMD), comparing the mean of copper concentration in multiple sclerosis patients versus healthy controls, were considered as the measure of association. The fixed-effect model with inverse variance weighting was used to combine the findings. RESULTS: Twenty studies inclusive of 797 multiple sclerosis cases and 875 healthy controls were included in the meta-analysis (all case-control studies). The combined SMDs were 1.25 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.95 to 1.55, number of included studies [n]=4) in plasma, 0.45 (CI 0.22 to 0.68, n=4) in whole blood, 0.19 (CI 0.06 to 0.33, n=12) in blood serum and 1.23 (CI 0.83 to 1.64, n=4) in cerebrospinal fluid. CONCLUSIONS: We found a higher concentration of copper in multiple sclerosis patients than healthy controls. The possible causal nature of the observed associations warrants further investigation with prospective data.

Plasma lipids and risk of aortic valve stenosis: a Mendelian randomization study.

AIMS: Aortic valve stenosis is commonly considered a degenerative disorder with no recommended preventive intervention, with only valve replacement surgery or catheter intervention as treatment options. We sought to assess the causal association between exposure to lipid levels and risk of aortic stenosis. METHODS AND RESULTS: Causality of association was assessed using two-sample Mendelian randomization framework through different statistical methods. We retrieved summary estimations of 157 genetic variants that have been shown to be associated with plasma lipid levels in the Global Lipids Genetics Consortium that included 188 577 participants, mostly European ancestry, and genetic association with aortic stenosis as the main outcome from a total of 432 173 participants in the UK Biobank. Secondary negative control outcomes included aortic regurgitation and mitral regurgitation. The odds ratio for developing aortic stenosis per unit increase in lipid parameter was 1.52 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.22-1.90; per 0.98 mmol/L] for low density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol, 1.03 (95% CI 0.80-1.31; per 0.41 mmol/L) for high density lipoprotein (HDL)-cholesterol, and 1.38 (95% CI 0.92-2.07; per 1 mmol/L) for triglycerides. There was no evidence of a causal association between any of the lipid parameters and aortic or mitral regurgitation. CONCLUSION: Lifelong exposure to high LDL-cholesterol increases the risk of symptomatic aortic stenosis, suggesting that LDL-lowering treatment may be effective in its prevention.

Effects of blood pressure-lowering drugs in heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

: We aimed to combine evidence from all heart failure trials that have investigated the effects of drugs with blood pressure (BP)-lowering properties to assess the extent to which such drugs reduce BP in heart failure, the association between the net change in BP between treatment arms and cause-specific outcomes and whether treatment effects (efficacy and safety) vary according to baseline BP. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis including randomized clinical trials of drugs with BP-lowering properties in patients with chronic heart failure with at least 300 patient-years follow-up. We included a total of 37 trials (91 950 patients) and showed that treatment with drugs with BP-lowering properties resulted in a small but significant decrease in SBP in patients with heart failure with no evidence that the efficacy and safety of those drugs varied according to baseline BP.

Religion, Spirituality and Risk of Coronary Heart Disease: A Matched Case-Control Study and Meta-Analysis.

Although the association between religion/spirituality (R/S) and psychological outcomes is well established, current understanding of the association with cardiovascular disease remains limited. We sought to investigate the association between Islamic R/S and coronary heart disease (CHD), and place these findings in light of a meta-analysis. In this case-control study, 190 cases with non-fatal CHD were identified and individually matched with 383 hospital-based controls. R/S was measured by self-administered 102 items questionnaire. A tabular meta-analysis was performed of observational studies on R/S (high level versus low level) and CHD. In addition, a dose-response meta-analysis was conducted using generalized least-squares regression. Participants in the top quartile had decreased odds of CHD comparing to participants in the lowest quartile of religious belief (OR 0.20, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06-0.59), religious commitment (OR 0.36, CI 95% 0.13-0.99), religious emotions (OR 0.39, CI 95% 0.18-0.87), and total R/S score (OR 0.30, CI 95% 0.13-0.67). The meta-analysis study showed a significant relative risk of 0.88 (CI 95% 0.77-1.00) comparing individuals in high level versus low level of R/S. In dose-response meta-analysis, comparing people with no religious services attendance, the relative risks of CHD were 0.77 (CI 95% 0.65-0.91) for one times attendance and 0.27 (CI 95% 0.11-0.65) for five times attendance per month. R/S was associated with a significantly decreased risk of CHD. The possible causal nature of the observed associations warrants randomized clinical trial with large sample size.

Meta-analysis of GABRB3 Gene Polymorphisms and Susceptibility to Autism Spectrum Disorder.

Several lines of evidence have suggested that the GABA receptor subunit ß3 (GABRB3) gene is a genetic contributor in the autism spectrum disorder (ASD). The aberrant expression of GABRB3 is reported in ASD patients which may be a consequence of the presence of certain genetic variants in the promoter region of the gene. The associations between single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) within this gene and ASD have been analyzed in previous studies. However, the results are conflicting. In the present study, we performed a meta-analysis on association between two SNPs located in the promoter region of GABRB3 gene (rs4906902 and rs20317) and ASD. The literature search was performed based on criteria provided by the meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology (MOOSE). The association between mentioned SNPs and ASD was calculated using pooled odd ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals. The result of the present meta-analysis indicates that neither rs4906902 nor rs20317 are significantly associated with the risk of ASD. The underlying mechanism of the aberrant expression of GABRB3 gene in ASD patients should be investigated in other biological levels.

Potato consumption and risk of type 2 diabetes: A dose-response meta-analysis of cohort studies.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: High potato intake has been suggested as a risk factor for the development of type 2 diabetes. We aimed to investigate the association between potato consumption and risk of type 2 diabetes. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted on PubMed and Embase from the database commencement until September 2017 (updated by June 2018) following the MOOSE guidelines. The random effect model dose-response meta-analysis method of Greenland and Longneck was used to estimate the maximally adjusted log hazard ratio (HR) for a unit (serving per day) increment of potato consumption. A restricted cubic spline model with three knots was used to evaluate the potential non-linear relationship. RESULTS: A total of 3544 citations were retrieved from the databases, of which six prospective cohort studies including 4545230 person-year of follow-up and 17,758 diabetes cases met the inclusion criteria. The pooled dose-response HR per an increment of 1 serving/day of total potato consumption was 1.20 (95% CI 1.13 to 1.127, P < 0.001, I2 = 27.1%, P for heterogeneity = 0.23) both in men and women. The larger risk were observed for 2 serving/day (HR 1.44, 95% CI 1.28 to 1.63) and 3 serving/day (HR 1.74, 95% CI 1.45 to 2.09). We found significant evidence of a non-linear association between total potato consumption and risk of type 2 diabetes (X2 = 17.5, P for linearity < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Long-term high consumption of potato (each serving a day increase) may be strongly associated with increased risk of diabetes. These findings suggest that diet-health policy may be of importance in the prevention of diabetes.

hOGG1 gene polymorphism and breast cancer risk: A systematic review and meta-analysis study.

To address the effect of hGGO1 (rs1052133) gene polymorphism on the risk of breast cancer, a meta-analysis was performed. We pooled adjusted odds ratios (OR) as overall and three subgroups (menopausal status, ethnicity, and study setting). In overall analysis, we found a significant association when the model of inheritance was homozygote (pooled OR 1.14; 95% CI 1.01, 1.29). Subgroup analysis showed significant association for homozygote genetic models among postmenopause women (OR 1.23; 95% CI 1.01, 1.49) and Asian population (OR 1.17; 95% CI 1.01, 1.35). This study suggested that the carrier of Ser326Cys polymorphism of hOGG1, Cys/Cys vs Ser/Ser, are at higher risk for breast cancer, independent of other hormonal and environmental risk factors.