Search

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., Author(s): Ana-Catarina Pinho-Gomes 1, Luis Azevedo 2, Emma Copland 3, Dexter Canoy 3,4, Milad Nazarzadeh 3, Rema Ramakrishnan 3, Eivind Berge 5,6, Johan Sundström 7, Dipak Kotecha 8, Mark Woodward [...]

Background Clinical practice guidelines have traditionally recommended blood pressure treatment based primarily on blood pressure thresholds. In contrast, using predicted cardiovascular risk has been advocated as a more effective strategy to guide treatment decisions for cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention. We aimed to compare outcomes from a blood pressure-lowering treatment strategy based on predicted cardiovascular risk with one based on systolic blood pressure (SBP) level. Methods and findings We used individual participant data from the Blood Pressure Lowering Treatment Trialists' Collaboration (BPLTTC) from 1995 to 2013. Trials randomly assigned participants to either blood pressure-lowering drugs versus placebo or more intensive versus less intensive blood pressure-lowering regimens. We estimated 5-y risk of CVD events using a multivariable Weibull model previously developed in this dataset. We compared the two strategies at specific SBP thresholds and across the spectrum of risk and blood pressure levels studied in BPLTTC trials. The primary outcome was number of CVD events avoided per persons treated. We included data from 11 trials (47,872 participants). During a median of 4.0 y of follow-up, 3,566 participants (7.5%) experienced a major cardiovascular event. Areas under the curve comparing the two treatment strategies throughout the range of possible thresholds for CVD risk and SBP demonstrated that, on average, a greater number of CVD events would be avoided for a given number of persons treated with the CVD risk strategy compared with the SBP strategy (area under the curve 0.71 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70-0.72] for the CVD risk strategy versus 0.54 [95% CI 0.53-0.55] for the SBP strategy). Compared with treating everyone with SBP [greater than or equal to] 150 mmHg, a CVD risk strategy would require treatment of 29% (95% CI 26%-31%) fewer persons to prevent the same number of events or would prevent 16% (95% CI 14%-18%) more events for the same number of persons treated. Compared with treating everyone with SBP [greater than or equal to] 140 mmHg, a CVD risk strategy would require treatment of 3.8% (95% CI 12.5% fewer to 7.2% more) fewer persons to prevent the same number of events or would prevent 3.1% (95% CI 1.5%-5.0%) more events for the same number of persons treated, although the former estimate was not statistically significant. In subgroup analyses, the CVD risk strategy did not appear to be more beneficial than the SBP strategy in patients with diabetes mellitus or established CVD. Conclusions A blood pressure-lowering treatment strategy based on predicted cardiovascular risk is more effective than one based on blood pressure levels alone across a range of thresholds. These results support using cardiovascular risk assessment to guide blood pressure treatment decision-making in moderate- to high-risk individuals, particularly for primary prevention., Author(s): Kunal N. Karmali 1, Donald M. Lloyd-Jones 1, Joep van der Leeuw 2, David C. Goff 3, Salim Yusuf 4, Alberto Zanchetti 5, Paul Glasziou 6, Rodney Jackson 7, [...]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Medications aimed at inhibiting the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) have been used extensively for preventing cardiovascular and renal complications in patients with diabetes, but data that compare their clinical effectiveness are limited. We aimed to compare the effects of classes of RAS blockers on cardiovascular and renal outcomes in adults with diabetes. Methods and Findings Eligible trials were identified by electronic searches in PubMed/MEDLINE and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (1 January 2004 to 17 July 2014). Interventions of interest were angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), and direct renin (DR) inhibitors. The primary endpoints were cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, and stroke-singly and as a composite endpoint, major cardiovascular outcome-and end-stage renal disease [ESRD], doubling of serum creatinine, and all-cause mortality-singly and as a composite endpoint, progression of renal disease. Secondary endpoints were angina pectoris and hospitalization for heart failure. In all, 71 trials (103,120 participants), with a total of 14 different regimens, were pooled using network meta-analyses. When compared with ACE inhibitor, no other RAS blocker used in monotherapy and/or combination was associated with a significant reduction in major cardiovascular outcomes: ARB (odds ratio [OR] 1.02; 95% credible interval [CrI] 0.90-1.18), ACE inhibitor plus ARB (0.97; 95% CrI 0.79-1.19), DR inhibitor plus ACE inhibitor (1.32; 95% CrI 0.96-1.81), and DR inhibitor plus ARB (1.00; 95% CrI 0.73-1.38). For the risk of progression of renal disease, no significant differences were detected between ACE inhibitor and each of the remaining therapies: ARB (OR 1.10; 95% CrI 0.90-1.40), ACE inhibitor plus ARB (0.97; 95% CrI 0.72-1.29), DR inhibitor plus ACE inhibitor (0.99; 95% CrI 0.65-1.57), and DR inhibitor plus ARB (1.18; 95% CrI 0.78-1.84). No significant differences were showed between ACE inhibitors and ARBs with respect to all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, angina pectoris, hospitalization for heart failure, ESRD, or doubling serum creatinine. Findings were limited by the clinical and methodological heterogeneity of the included studies. Potential inconsistency was identified in network meta-analyses of stroke and angina pectoris, limiting the conclusiveness of findings for these single endpoints. Conclusions In adults with diabetes, comparisons of different RAS blockers showed similar effects of ACE inhibitors and ARBs on major cardiovascular and renal outcomes. Compared with monotherapies, the combination of an ACE inhibitor and an ARB failed to provide significant benefits on major outcomes. Clinicians should discuss the balance between benefits, costs, and potential harms with individual diabetes patients before starting treatment. Review registration PROSPERO CRD42014014404, Author(s): Ferrán Catalá-López 1,2,3,4,*, Diego Macías Saint-Gerons 2, Diana González-Bermejo 2, Giuseppe M. Rosano 5, Barry R. Davis 6, Manuel Ridao 7,8, Abel Zaragoza 2, Dolores Montero-Corominas 2, Aurelio Tobías [...]

Discovery and validation of genetic variants that influence disease severity in children with sickle cell anemia (SCA) could lead to early identification of high-risk patients, better screening strategies, and intervention with targeted and preventive therapy. We hypothesized that newly identified genetic risk factors for the general African American population could also impact laboratory biomarkers known to contribute to the clinical disease expression of SCA, including variants influencing the white blood cell count and the development of albuminuria and abnormal glomerular filtration rate. We first investigated candidate genetic polymorphisms in well-characterized SCA pediatric cohorts from three prospective NHLBI-supported clinical trials: HUSTLE, SWiTCH, and TWiTCH. We also performed whole exome sequencing to identify novel genetic variants, using both a discovery and a validation cohort. Among candidate genes, DARC rs2814778 polymorphism regulating Duffy antigen expression had a clear influence with significantly increased WBC and neutrophil counts, but did not affect the maximum tolerated dose of hydroxyurea therapy. The APOL1 G1 polymorphism, an identified risk factor for non-diabetic renal disease, was associated with albuminuria. Whole exome sequencing discovered several novel variants that maintained significance in the validation cohorts, including ZFHX4 polymorphisms affecting both the leukocyte and neutrophil counts, as well as AGGF1, CYP4B1, CUBN, TOR2A, PKD1L2, and CD163 variants affecting the glomerular filtration rate. The identification of robust, reliable, and reproducible genetic markers for disease severity in SCA remains elusive, but new genetic variants provide avenues for further validation and investigation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Hypertension is a major risk factor for a spectrum of cardiovascular diseases (CVD), including myocardial infarction, sudden death, and stroke. In the US, over 65 million people have high blood pressure and a large proportion of these individuals are prescribed antihypertensive medications. Although large long-term clinical trials conducted in the last several decades have identified a number of effective antihypertensive treatments that reduce the risk of future clinical complications, responses to therapy and protection from cardiovascular events vary among individuals. Methods: Using a genome-wide association study among 21,267 participants with pharmaceutically treated hypertension, we explored the hypothesis that genetic variants might influence or modify the effectiveness of common antihypertensive therapies on the risk of major cardiovascular outcomes. The classes of drug treatments included angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers, and diuretics. In the setting of the Cohorts for Heart and Aging Research in Genomic Epidemiology (CHARGE) consortium, each study performed array-based genome-wide genotyping, imputed to HapMap Phase II reference panels, and used additive genetic models in proportional hazards or logistic regression models to evaluate drug-gene interactions for each of four therapeutic drug classes. We used meta-analysis to combine study-specific interaction estimates for approximately 2 million single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in a discovery analysis among 15,375 European Ancestry participants (3,527 CVD cases) with targeted follow-up in a case-only study of 1,751 European Ancestry GenHAT participants as well as among 4,141 African-Americans (1,267 CVD cases). Results: Although drug-SNP interactions were biologically plausible, exposures and outcomes were well measured, and power was sufficient to detect modest interactions, we did not identify any statistically significant interactions from the four antihypertensive therapy meta-analyses (Pinteraction > 5.0×10−8). Similarly, findings were null for meta-analyses restricted to 66 SNPs with significant main effects on coronary artery disease or blood pressure from large published genome-wide association studies (Pinteraction ≥ 0.01). Our results suggest that there are no major pharmacogenetic influences of common SNPs on the relationship between blood pressure medications and the risk of incident CVD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Nitric oxide synthase 3 (NOS3) catalyzes production of NO in the endothelium and may play a role in cardiovascular disease (CVD). We assessed the pharmacogenetic associations of three NOS3 polymorphisms and three antihypertensive drugs with CVD outcomes. Hypertensive subjects (n = 30,280) from a multi-center, double-blind clinical trial were randomized to chlorthalidone, amlodipine, or lisinopril treatment (mean follow up, 4.9 years). Outcomes included coronary heart disease (CHD: fatal CHD and nonfatal myocardial infarction); stroke; heart failure (fatal, requiring hospitalization, or outpatient treatment); all-cause mortality; and end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Main effects of NOS3 variants on outcome and genotype-treatment interactions were tested. For NOS3 -690 C>T (rs3918226), a higher hazard ratio (HR) was found in minor allele carriers for CHD (CC = 1.00, CT+TT = 1.12 (95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.00-1.26), P = 0.048). For NOS3 -922 A>G (rs1800779), a higher HR was found in minor allele carriers for heart failure (AA = 1.00, AG+GG = 1.10 (CI = 1.00-1.21), P = 0.046). Significant pharmacogenetic findings were observed for stroke and all-cause mortality. For -690 C>T, a lower HR was observed for stroke in minor allele carriers when treated with amlodipine versus lisinopril (CC = 0.85 (CI = 0.73-0.99), CT+TT = 0.49 (CI = 0.31-0.80), P = 0.04). For glu298asp G>T (rs1799983), a lower HR was observed for all-cause mortality in minor allele carriers when treated with amlodipine versus lisinopril (GG = 1.01 (CI = 0.91-1.13), GT+TT = 0.85 (CI = 0.75-0.97), P = 0.04). We observed significant associations with NOS3 variants and CHD and heart failure and significant pharmacogenetic effects for stroke and all cause mortality. This suggests that NOS3 variants may potentially provide useful clinical information with respect to treatment decisions in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: MMP-9 and -12 function in tissue remodeling and may play roles in cardiovascular disease (CVD). We assessed associations of four MMP polymorphisms and three antihypertensive drugs with cardiovascular outcomes. Methods: Hypertensives (n = 42,418) from a double-blind, randomized, clinical trial were randomized to chlorthalidone, amlodipine, lisinopril, or doxazosin treatment (mean follow up, 4.9 years). The primary outcome was coronary heart disease (CHD). Secondary outcomes included combined CHD, all CVD outcomes combined, stroke, heart failure (HF), and mortality. Genotype-treatment interactions were tested. Results: There were 38,698 participants genotyped for at least one of the polymorphisms included here. For MMP9 R668Q (rs2274756), lower hazard ratios (HRs) were found for AA subjects for most outcomes when treated with chlorthalidone versus amlodipine (eg., CCHD: GG = 1.00, GA = 1.01, AA = 0.64; P = 0.038). For MMP9 R279Q (rs17576), modest pharmacogenetic findings were observed for combined CHD and the composite CVD outcome. For MMP12 N122S (rs652438), lower HRs were observed for CHD in subjects carrying at least one G allele and being treated with chlorthalidone versus lisinopril (CHD: AA = 1.07, AG = 0.80, GG = 0.49; P = 0.005). In the lisinopril-amlodipine comparison, higher HRs were observed for participants having at least one G allele at the MMP12 N122S locus (CHD: AA = 0.94, AG = 1.19, GG = 1.93; P = 0.041). For MMP12 282A.G (rs2276109), no pharmacogenetic effect was found for the primary outcome, although lower HRs were observed for AA homozygotes in the chlorthalidone-amlodipine comparison for HF (P = 0.015). Conclusions: We observed interactions between antihypertensive drugs and MMP9 and MMP12 for CHD and composite CVD. The data suggest that these genes may provide useful clinical information with respect to treatment decisions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Nitric oxide synthase 3 (NOS3) catalyzes production of NO in the endothelium and may play a role in cardiovascular disease (CVD). We assessed the pharmacogenetic associations of three NOS3 polymorphisms and three antihypertensive drugs with CVD outcomes. Hypertensive subjects (n = 30,280) from a multi-center, double-blind clinical trial were randomized to chlorthalidone, amlodipine, or lisinopril treatment (mean follow up, 4.9 years). Outcomes included coronary heart disease (CHD: fatal CHD and nonfatal myocardial infarction); stroke; heart failure (fatal, requiring hospitalization, or outpatient treatment); all-cause mortality; and end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Main effects of NOS3 variants on outcome and genotype-treatment interactions were tested. For NOS3 -690 C>T (rs3918226), a higher hazard ratio (HR) was found in minor allele carriers for CHD (CC = 1.00, CT+TT = 1.12 (95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.00-1.26), P = 0.048). For NOS3 -922 A>G (rs1800779), a higher HR was found in minor allele carriers for heart failure (AA = 1.00, AG+GG = 1.10 (CI = 1.00-1.21), P = 0.046). Significant pharmacogenetic findings were observed for stroke and all-cause mortality. For -690 C>T, a lower HR was observed for stroke in minor allele carriers when treated with amlodipine versus lisinopril (CC = 0.85 (CI = 0.73-0.99), CT+TT = 0.49 (CI = 0.31-0.80), P = 0.04). For glu298asp G>T (rs1799983), a lower HR was observed for all-cause mortality in minor allele carriers when treated with amlodipine versus lisinopril (GG = 1.01 (CI = 0.91-1.13), GT+TT = 0.85 (CI = 0.75-0.97), P = 0.04). We observed significant associations with NOS3 variants and CHD and heart failure and significant pharmacogenetic effects for stroke and all cause mortality. This suggests that NOS3 variants may potentially provide useful clinical information with respect to treatment decisions in the future.