Long-term cardiovascular risks and the impact of statin treatment on socioeconomic inequalities: a microsimulation model.

BACKGROUND: UK cardiovascular disease (CVD) incidence and mortality have declined in recent decades but socioeconomic inequalities persist. AIM: To present a new CVD model, and project health outcomes and the impact of guideline-recommended statin treatment across quintiles of socioeconomic deprivation in the UK. DESIGN AND SETTING: A lifetime microsimulation model was developed using 117 896 participants in 16 statin trials, 501 854 UK Biobank (UKB) participants, and quality-of-life data from national health surveys. METHOD: A CVD microsimulation model was developed using risk equations for myocardial infarction, stroke, coronary revascularisation, cancer, and vascular and non-vascular death, estimated using trial data. The authors calibrated and further developed this model in the UKB cohort, including further characteristics and a diabetes risk equation, and validated the model in UKB and Whitehall II cohorts. The model was used to predict CVD incidence, life expectancy, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and the impact of UK guideline-recommended statin treatment across socioeconomic deprivation quintiles. RESULTS: Age, sex, socioeconomic deprivation, smoking, hypertension, diabetes, and cardiovascular events were key CVD risk determinants. Model-predicted event rates corresponded well to observed rates across participant categories. The model projected strong gradients in remaining life expectancy, with 4-5-year (5-8 QALYs) gaps between the least and most socioeconomically deprived quintiles. Guideline-recommended statin treatment was projected to increase QALYs, with larger gains in quintiles of higher deprivation. CONCLUSION: The study demonstrated the potential of guideline-recommended statin treatment to reduce socioeconomic inequalities. This CVD model is a novel resource for individualised long-term projections of health outcomes of CVD treatments.

The 18-year risk of cancer, angioedema, insomnia, depression, and erectile dysfunction in association with antihypertensive drugs: post-trial analyses from ALLHAT-Medicare linked data.

Purpose: This study aimed to determine the 18-year risk of cancer, angioedema, insomnia, depression, and erectile dysfunction in association with antihypertensive drug use. Methods: This is a post-trial passive follow-up study of Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT) participants between 1994 and 1998 that was conducted by linking their follow-up data with Medicare claims data until 2017 of subjects who were free of outcomes at baseline on 1 January 1999. The main outcomes were the occurrence of cancer (among n = 17,332), angioedema (among n = 17,340), insomnia (among n = 17,340), depression (among n = 17,330), and erectile dysfunction (among n = 7,444 men) over 18 years of follow-up. Results: The 18-year cumulative incidence rate of cancer other than non-melanoma skin cancer from Medicare inpatient claims was 23.9% for chlorthalidone, 23.4% for amlodipine, and 25.3% for lisinopril. There were no statistically significant differences in the 18-year risk of cancer, depression, and erectile dysfunction among the three drugs based on the adjusted hazard ratios. The adjusted 18-year risk of angioedema was elevated in those receiving lisinopril than in those receiving amlodipine (hazard ratio: 1.63, 95% CI: 1.14-2.33) or in those receiving chlorthalidone (1.33, 1.00-1.79), whereas the adjusted 18-year risk of insomnia was statistically significantly decreased in those receiving lisinopril than in those receiving amlodipine (0.90, 0.81-1.00). Conclusions: The 18-year risk of angioedema was significantly higher in patients receiving lisinopril than in those receiving amlodipine or chlorthalidone; the risk of insomnia was significantly lower in patients receiving lisinopril than in those receiving amlodipine; and the risk of cancer, depression, and erectile dysfunction (in men) was not statistically significantly different among the three drug groups.

Mortality and Morbidity Among Individuals With Hypertension Receiving a Diuretic, ACE Inhibitor, or Calcium Channel Blocker: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The long-term relative risk of antihypertensive treatments with regard to mortality and morbidity is not well understood. Objective: To determine the long-term posttrial risk of primary and secondary outcomes among trial participants who were randomized to either a thiazide-type diuretic, calcium channel blocker (CCB), or angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor with up to 23 years of follow-up. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prespecified secondary analysis of the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT), a multicenter randomized, double-blind, active-controlled clinical trial, followed up with participants aged 55 years or older with a diagnosis of hypertension and at least 1 other coronary heart disease risk factor for up to 23 years, from February 23, 1994, to December 31, 2017. Trial participants were linked with administrative databases for posttrial mortality (N = 32 804) and morbidity outcomes (n = 22 754). Statistical analysis was performed from January 2022 to October 2023. Interventions: Participants were randomly assigned to receive a thiazide-type diuretic (n = 15 002), a CCB (n = 8898), or an ACE inhibitor (n = 8904) for planned in-trial follow-up of approximately 4 to 8 years and posttrial passive follow-up for up to 23 years. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was mortality due to cardiovascular disease (CVD). Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality, combined fatal and nonfatal (morbidity) CVD, and both mortality and morbidity for coronary heart disease, stroke, heart failure, end-stage renal disease, and cancer. Results: A total of 32 804 participants (mean [SD] age, 66.9 [7.7] years; 17 411 men [53.1%]; and 11 772 Black participants [35.9%]) were followed up for all-cause mortality and a subgroup of 22 754 participants (mean [SD] age, 68.7 [7.2] years; 12 772 women [56.1%]; and 8199 Black participants [36.0%]) were followed up for fatal or nonfatal CVD through 2017 (mean [SD] follow-up, 13.7 [6.7] years; maximum follow-up, 23.9 years). Cardiovascular disease mortality rates per 100 persons were 23.7, 21.6, and 23.8 in the diuretic, CCB, and ACE inhibitor groups, respectively, at 23 years after randomization (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 0.97 [95% CI, 0.89-1.05] for CCB vs diuretic; AHR, 1.06 [95% CI, 0.97-1.15] for ACE inhibitor vs diuretic). The long-term risks of most secondary outcomes were similar among the 3 groups. Compared with the diuretic group, the ACE inhibitor group had a 19% increased risk of stroke mortality (AHR, 1.19 [95% CI, 1.03-1.37]) and an 11% increased risk of combined fatal and nonfatal hospitalized stroke (AHR, 1.11 [95% CI, 1.03-1.20]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial in an adult population with hypertension and coronary heart disease risk factors, CVD mortality was similar between all 3 groups. ACE inhibitors increased the risk of stroke outcomes by 11% compared with diuretics, and this effect persisted well beyond the trial period. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00000542.

Orthostatic Hypotension, Hypertension Treatment, and Cardiovascular Disease: An Individual Participant Meta-Analysis.

Importance: There are ongoing concerns about the benefits of intensive vs standard blood pressure (BP) treatment among adults with orthostatic hypotension or standing hypotension. Objective: To determine the effect of a lower BP treatment goal or active therapy vs a standard BP treatment goal or placebo on cardiovascular disease (CVD) or all-cause mortality in strata of baseline orthostatic hypotension or baseline standing hypotension. Data Sources: Individual participant data meta-analysis based on a systematic review of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases through May 13, 2022. Study Selection: Randomized trials of BP pharmacologic treatment (more intensive BP goal or active agent) with orthostatic hypotension assessments. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Individual participant data meta-analysis extracted following PRISMA guidelines. Effects were determined using Cox proportional hazard models using a single-stage approach. Main Outcomes and Measures: Main outcomes were CVD or all-cause mortality. Orthostatic hypotension was defined as a decrease in systolic BP of at least 20 mm Hg and/or diastolic BP of at least 10 mm Hg after changing position from sitting to standing. Standing hypotension was defined as a standing systolic BP of 110 mm Hg or less or standing diastolic BP of 60 mm Hg or less. Results: The 9 trials included 29 235 participants followed up for a median of 4 years (mean age, 69.0 [SD, 10.9] years; 48% women). There were 9% with orthostatic hypotension and 5% with standing hypotension at baseline. More intensive BP treatment or active therapy lowered risk of CVD or all-cause mortality among those without baseline orthostatic hypotension (hazard ratio [HR], 0.81; 95% CI, 0.76-0.86) similarly to those with baseline orthostatic hypotension (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.70-1.00; P = .68 for interaction of treatment with baseline orthostatic hypotension). More intensive BP treatment or active therapy lowered risk of CVD or all-cause mortality among those without baseline standing hypotension (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.75-0.85), and nonsignificantly among those with baseline standing hypotension (HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.75-1.18). Effects did not differ by baseline standing hypotension (P = .16 for interaction of treatment with baseline standing hypotension). Conclusions and Relevance: In this population of hypertension trial participants, intensive therapy reduced risk of CVD or all-cause mortality regardless of orthostatic hypotension without evidence for different effects among those with standing hypotension.

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.

A Dynamic Risk Model for Multitype Recurrent Events.

Recurrent events can occur more than once in the same individual; such events may be of different types, known as multitype recurrent events. They are very common in longitudinal studies. Often there is a terminating event, after which no further events can occur. The risk of any event, including terminating events such as death or cure, is typically affected by prior events. We propose a flexible joint multitype recurrent-events model that explicitly provides estimates of the change in risk for each event due to subject characteristics, including number and type of prior events and the absolute risk for every event type (terminating and nonterminating), and predicts event-free survival probability over a desired time period. The model is fully parametric, and therefore a standard likelihood function and robust standard errors can be constructed. We illustrate the model with applications to the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (1994-2002) and provide discussion of the results and model features.

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.

Risk of Developing Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementias in ALLHAT Trial Participants Receiving Diuretic, ACE-Inhibitor, or Calcium-Channel Blocker with 18 Years of Follow-Up.

Background: There is no any large randomized clinical trial of antihypertensive drug treatment with 18-year passive follow-up to examine the risk of Alzheimer's Disease (AD) or Related Dementias (ADRD). Methods: Post-trial passive follow-up study of Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT) participants in 1994-1998 by linking with their Medicare claims data through 2017 among 17,158 subjects in 567 U.S. centers who were free of ADRD at baseline on January 1, 1999. Main outcome was the occurrence of ADRD over 18 years of follow-up. Results: The 18-year cumulative incidence rates were 30.9% for AD, 59.2% for non-AD dementias, and 60.9% for any ADRD. The 18-year cumulative incidence of AD was almost identical for the 3 drug groups (30.5% for chlorthalidone, 31.1% for amlodipine, and 31.4% for lisinopril). The hazard ratios of AD, non-AD dementias and total ADRD were not statistically significantly different among the 3 drug groups. The adjusted hazard ratio of AD was 1.04 (95% CI: 0.94-1.14) for chlorthalidone versus amlodipine, 1.02 (0.92-1.13) for lisinopril versus amlodipine, and 0.98 (0.89-1.08) for lisinopril versus chlorthalidone, which were not significantly different. The risk of AD and non-AD dementias was significantly higher in older subjects, females, blacks, non-Hispanics, subjects with lower education, and subjects with vascular diseases. Conclusion: The risk of ADRD did not vary significantly by 3 antihypertensive drugs in ALLHAT trial participants with 18-years of follow-up. The risk of ADRD was significantly associated with age, gender, race/ethnicity, education, and history of vascular diseases.

Autologous Cardiac Stem Cell Injection in Patients with Hypoplastic Left Heart Syndrome (CHILD Study).

Mortality in infants with hypoplastic left heart syndrome (HLHS) is strongly correlated with right ventricle (RV) dysfunction. Cell therapy has demonstrated potential improvements of RV dysfunction in animal models related to HLHS, and neonatal human derived c-kit+ cardiac-derived progenitor cells (CPCs) show superior efficacy when compared to adult human cardiac-derived CPCs (aCPCs). Neonatal CPCs (nCPCs) have yet to be investigated in humans. The CHILD trial (Autologous Cardiac Stem Cell Injection in Patients with Hypoplastic Left Heart Syndrome) is a Phase I/II trial aimed at investigating intramyocardial administration of autologous nCPCs in HLHS infants by assessing the feasibility, safety, and potential efficacy of CPC therapy. Using an open-label, multicenter design, CHILD investigates nCPC safety and feasibility in the first enrollment group (Group A/Phase I). In the second enrollment group, CHILD uses a randomized, double-blinded, multicenter design (Group B/Phase II), to assess nCPC efficacy based on RV functional and structural characteristics. The study plans to enroll 32 patients across 4 institutions: Group A will enroll 10 patients, and Group B will enroll 22 patients. CHILD will provide important insights into the therapeutic potential of nCPCs in patients with HLHS.Clinical Trial Registration https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/home NCT03406884, First posted January 23, 2018.

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.

Antihypertensive drug effects on long-term blood pressure: an individual-level data meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials.

OBJECTIVE: Evidence from randomised trials of pharmacological treatments on long-term blood pressure (BP) reduction is limited. We investigated the antihypertensive drug effects on BP over time and across different participant characteristics. METHODS: We conducted an individual patient-level data meta-analysis of 52 large-scale randomised clinical trials in the Blood Pressure Lowering Treatment Trialists' Collaboration using mixed models to examine treatment effects on BP over 4 years of mean follow-up. RESULTS: There were 363 684 participants (42% women), with baseline mean age=65 years and mean systolic/diastolic BP=152/87 mm Hg, and among whom 19% were current smokers, 49% had cardiovascular disease, 28% had diabetes and 69% were taking antihypertensive treatment at baseline. Drugs were effective in lowering BP showing maximal effect after 12 months and gradually attenuating towards later years. Based on measures taken ≥12 months postrandomisation, mean systolic/diastolic BP difference (95% CI) between more and less intense BP-lowering treatment was -11.1 (-11.3 to -10.8)/-5.6 (-5.7 to -5.4) mm Hg; between active treatment and placebo was -5.1 (-5.3 to -5.0)/-2.3 (-2.4 to -2.2) mm Hg; and between active and control arms for drug comparison trials was -1.4 (-1.5 to -1.3)/-0.6 (-0.7 to -0.6) mm Hg. BP reductions were observed across different baseline BP values and ages, and by sex, history of cardiovascular disease and diabetes and prior antihypertensive treatment use. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that BP-lowering pharmacotherapy is effective in lowering BP, up to 4 years on average, in people with different characteristics. Appropriate treatment strategies are needed to sustain substantive long-term BP reductions.

Applications of Covariate Adjusted Nonparametric Methods to CCTRN Clinical Trials.

CCTRN is a Cardiovascular Cell Therapy Research Network. There were three randomized double blinded controlled stem cell clinical trials conducted in its first phase. The main results of these three clinical trials were published with conventional parametric models such as T test and nonparametric test such as Wilcoxon rank sum test without adjusting covariates. In this article, we conducted further analysis of the primary outcomes of these studies using a class of covariate adjusted nonparametric methods.

Primary Peritoneal Mesothelioma: Diagnostic Challenges of This Lethal Imposter.

Primary Peritoneal Mesothelioma is a rapidly aggressive and rare neoplasm that arises from the lining of mesothelial cells of the peritoneum and spreads extensively within the confines of the abdominal cavity. The pathogenesis of all forms of mesothelioma is strongly associated with industrial pollutants, of which asbestos is the principal carcinogen. Characteristically, asbestos exposure has a strong relationship with mesothelioma of the pleura, but the peritoneal cavity is the second most commonly affected site. Additionally, in contrast to pleural mesothelioma, which has a male predominance (male-female ratio of between four and five to one), women comprise approximately one-half of all cases of malignant peritoneal mesothelioma. A thorough history of occupational/paraoccupational exposure along with histopathology is the key to timely diagnosis and treatment.

Effects of Posttrial Antihypertensive Drugs on Morbidity and Mortality: Findings from 15-Year Passive Follow-Up after ALLHAT Ended.

BACKGROUND: Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT) ended in 2002, but it is important to study its long-term outcomes during the posttrial period by incorporating posttrial antihypertensive medication uses in the analysis. PURPOSES: The primary aim is to explore the patterns of antihypertensive medication use during the posttrial period from Medicare Part-D data over the 11-year period from 2007 to 2017. The secondary aim is to examine the potential effects of these posttrial antihypertensive medications on the observed mortality and morbidity benefits. METHODS: This is a posttrial passive follow-up study of ALLHAT participants in 567 US centers in 1994-1998 with the last date of active in-trial follow-up on March 31, 2002, by linking with their Medicare and National Death Index data through 2017 among 8,007 subjects receiving antihypertensive drugs (3,637 for chlorthalidone, 2,189 for amlodipine, and 2,181 for lisinopril). Outcomes included posttrial antihypertensive drug use, all-cause mortality, and cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality. RESULTS: Of 8007 subjects, 3,637 participants were initially randomized to diuretic (chlorthalidone). The majority (67.9%) of them still received diuretics in 2007, and 52.7%, 47.2%, and 44.0% received ß-blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, and calcium channel blockers (CCBs), respectively. Compared to participants who received diuretic-based antihypertensives, those who received CCB had a nonsignificantly higher risk of all-cause mortality (1.17, 0.99-1.37), whereas those who received ACE/ARB (angiotensin receptor blockers) had a significantly higher risk of all-cause mortality (1.26, 1.09-1.45). For the combined fatal or nonfatal hospitalized events, the risk of CVD was significantly higher in patients receiving CCB (1.30, 1.04-1.61) and ACE/ARB (1.49, 1.22-1.81) as compared to patients receiving diuretics. CONCLUSION: After the conclusion of the ALLHAT, almost all patients switched to combination antihypertensive therapies, independently by the original drug class, and the combination therapies (mostly based on diuretics) reduced the incidence of major cardiovascular outcomes and mortality.

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.

Risk of hospitalized and non-hospitalized gastrointestinal bleeding in ALLHAT trial participants receiving diuretic, ACE-inhibitor, or calcium-channel blocker.

OBJECTIVES: This post-trial data linkage analysis was to utilize the data of Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT) participants linked with their Medicare data to examine the risk of hospitalized and non-hospitalized gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding associated with antihypertensives. SETTINGS: ALLHAT was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled trial conducted in a total of 42,418 participants aged ≥55 years with hypertension in 623 North American centers. Data for ALLHAT participants who were aged at ≥65 have been linked with their Medicare claims data. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 16,676 patients (4,480 for lisinopril, 4,537 for amlodipine, and 7,659 for chlorthalidone) with complete Medicare claims data were available for the final analysis. RESULTS: The cumulative incidences through March 31, 2002 of hospitalized GI bleeding were 5.4%, 5.8% and 5.4% for amlodipine, lisinopril, and chlorthalidone arms, respectively, but were not statistically significant among the 3 arms after adjusting for confounders in Cox regression models. The cumulative incidences of non-hospitalized GI bleeding were also similar across the 3 arms (12.0%, 12.2% and 12.0% for amlodipine, lisinopril, and chlorthalidone, respectively). The increased risk of GI bleeding by age was statistically significant after adjusting for confounders (HR = 1.04 per year, 95% CI: 1.03-1.05). Smokers also had a significantly higher risk of having hospitalized GI bleeding (1.45, 1.19-1.76). Hispanics, those who used aspirin or atenolol in-trial, had diabetes, more education, and a history of stroke had a significantly lower risk of having GI bleeding than their counterparts. Other factors such as gender, history of CHD, prior antihypertensive use, use of estrogen in women, and obesity did not have significant effects on the risk of GI bleeding. CONCLUSION: There were no statistically significant differences on the risk of hospitalized or non-hospitalized GI bleeding among the 3 ALLHAT trial arms (amlodipine, lisinopril, and chlorthalidone) during the entire in-trial follow-up.

Statistical reanalysis of vascular event outcomes in primary and secondary vascular prevention trials.

BACKGROUND: Vascular prevention trials typically use dichotomous event outcomes although this may be inefficient statistically and gives no indication of event severity. We assessed whether ordinal outcomes would be more efficient and how to best analyse them. METHODS: Chief investigators of vascular prevention randomised controlled trials that showed evidence of either benefit or harm, or were included in a systematic review that overall showed benefit or harm, shared individual participant data from their trials. Ordered categorical versions of vascular event outcomes (such as stroke and myocardial infarction) were analysed using 15 statistical techniques and their results then ranked, with the result with the smallest p-value given the smallest rank. Friedman and Duncan's multiple range tests were performed to assess differences between tests by comparing the average ranks for each statistical test. RESULTS: Data from 35 trials (254,223 participants) were shared with the collaboration. 13 trials had more than two treatment arms, resulting in 59 comparisons. Analysis approaches (Mann Whitney U, ordinal logistic regression, multiple regression, bootstrapping) that used ordinal outcome data had a smaller average rank and therefore appeared to be more efficient statistically than those that analysed the original binary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Ordinal vascular outcome measures appear to be more efficient statistically than binary outcomes and provide information on the severity of event. We suggest a potential role for using ordinal outcomes in vascular prevention trials.

Sustained SBP control and long-term nursing home admission among Medicare beneficiaries.

OBJECTIVES: Sustaining SBP control reduces the risk for cardiovascular events that impair function but its association with nursing home admission has not been well studied. METHODS: We conducted an analysis of sustained SBP control and long-term nursing home admissions using data from the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT) linked to Medicare claims restricted to participants with fee-for-service coverage, at least eight study visits with SBP measurements, who were not living in a nursing home during a 48-month baseline BP assessment period (n = 6557). Sustained SBP control was defined as less than 140 mmHg at less than 50%, 50% to less than 75%, 75% to less than 100%, and 100% of visits. Nursing home admissions were identified using the Medicare Long Term Care Minimum Data Set. RESULTS: The mean age of participants was 73.8 years and 44.3% were men. Over a median follow-up of 9.2 years, 844 participants (12.8%) had a nursing home admission. Rates of nursing home admission per 100 person-years were 16.3 for participants with SBP control at less than 50%, 14.1 at 50% to less than 75%, 7.8 at 75% to less than 100%, and 5.3 at 100% of visits. Compared with those with sustained SBP control at less than 50% of visits, hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) for nursing home admission were 0.79 (0.66-0.93), 0.70 (0.58-0.84), and 0.57 (0.44-0.74) among participants with SBP control at 50% to less than 75%, 75% to less than 100%, and 100% of visits, respectively. CONCLUSION: Among Medicare beneficiaries in ALLHAT, sustained SBP control was associated with a lower risk of long-term nursing home admission.

Blood pressure-lowering treatment for the prevention of cardiovascular events in patients with atrial fibrillation: An individual participant data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Randomised evidence on the efficacy of blood pressure (BP)-lowering treatment to reduce cardiovascular risk in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) is limited. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the effects of BP-lowering drugs in patients with and without AF at baseline. METHODS AND FINDINGS: The study was based on the resource provided by the Blood Pressure Lowering Treatment Trialists' Collaboration (BPLTTC), in which individual participant data (IPD) were extracted from trials with over 1,000 patient-years of follow-up in each arm, and that had randomly assigned patients to different classes of BP-lowering drugs, BP-lowering drugs versus placebo, or more versus less intensive BP-lowering regimens. For this study, only trials that had collected information on AF status at baseline were included. The effects of BP-lowering treatment on a composite endpoint of major cardiovascular events (stroke, ischaemic heart disease or heart failure) according to AF status at baseline were estimated using fixed-effect one-stage IPD meta-analyses based on Cox proportional hazards models stratified by trial. Furthermore, to assess whether the associations between the intensity of BP reduction and cardiovascular outcomes are similar in those with and without AF at baseline, we used a meta-regression. From the full BPLTTC database, 28 trials (145,653 participants) were excluded because AF status at baseline was uncertain or unavailable. A total of 22 trials were included with 188,570 patients, of whom 13,266 (7%) had AF at baseline. Risk of bias assessment showed that 20 trials were at low risk of bias and 2 trials at moderate risk. Meta-regression showed that relative risk reductions were proportional to trial-level intensity of BP lowering in patients with and without AF at baseline. Over 4.5 years of median follow-up, a 5-mm Hg systolic BP (SBP) reduction lowered the risk of major cardiovascular events both in patients with AF (hazard ratio [HR] 0.91, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.83 to 1.00) and in patients without AF at baseline (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.88 to 0.93), with no difference between subgroups. There was no evidence for heterogeneity of treatment effects by baseline SBP or drug class in patients with AF at baseline. The findings of this study need to be interpreted in light of its potential limitations, such as the limited number of trials, limitation in ascertaining AF cases due to the nature of the arrhythmia and measuring BP in patients with AF. CONCLUSIONS: In this meta-analysis, we found that BP-lowering treatment reduces the risk of major cardiovascular events similarly in individuals with and without AF. Pharmacological BP lowering for prevention of cardiovascular events should be recommended in patients with AF.