Search

BACKGROUND: Sinus of Valsalva aneurysms (SVAs) are rare. We assessed the role of multimodality imaging in guiding the contemporary management. METHODS: A single-center retrospective cohort study over a 20-year period was performed. RESULTS: Between January 1997 and June 2017, 103 patients were diagnosed with SVAs (median age: 58 years). Eighty patients presented with non-ruptured SVAs, and 23 with ruptured SVAs. Seventy-six patients underwent surgery, and 27 were conservatively managed. The median durations of follow-up were: 48 months (surgical group) vs. 37.5 months (conservative group). There was no mortality directly attributable to SVA surgery. There were no late complications in the conservative group. Transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) was the first-line imaging investigation (100.0% in surgical group vs. 92.6% in conservative group, P=0.019). Additional imaging studies included: (I) transesophageal echocardiography (TEE): 93.4% in surgical group vs. 22.2% in conservative group, P

OBJECTIVES: The AHA/ACC-2017 hypertension guideline recommends an age-independent target blood pressure (BP) of less than 130/80 mmHg. In an elderly cohort without established cardiovascular disease (CVD) at baseline, we determined the impact of this guideline on the prevalence of hypertension and associated CVD risk. METHODS: Nineteen thousand, one hundred and fourteen participants aged at least 65 years from the ASPirin in Reducing Events in the Elderly (ASPREE) study were grouped by baseline BP: ‘pre-2017 hypertensive’ (BP ≥140/90 mmHg and/or on antihypertensive drugs); ‘reclassified hypertensive’ (normotensive by pre-2017 guidelines; hypertensive by AHA/ACC-2017 guideline), and ‘normotensive’ (BP

BACKGROUND Despite readily available treatments, control of blood pressure (BP) with population aging remains suboptimal. Further, there are gaps in the understanding of the management of high BP in the aged. We explored antihypertensive treatment and control among elderly hypertensive participants free from overt cardiovascular disease (CVD), and identified factors related to both “untreated” and “treated but uncontrolled” high BP. METHODS We analyzed baseline data from 19,114 individuals aged ≥65 years enrolled from Australia and United States (US) in the ASPirin in Reducing Events in the Elderly study. Hypertension was defined as an average systolic/diastolic BP ≥140/90 mm Hg and/or the use of any BP lowering medication. “Controlled hypertension” was defined if participants were receiving antihypertensive medication and BP RESULTS Overall, 74% (14,213/19,114) of participants were hypertensive; and of these 29% (4,151/14,213) were untreated. Among those treated participants, 53% (5,330/10,062) had BP ≥140/90 mm Hg. Participants who were untreated were more likely to be men, have higher educational status, and be in good physical health, and less likely to have significant comorbidities. The factors related to “treated but uncontrolled” BP included older age, male, Black race (vs. White), using antihypertensive monotherapy (vs. multiple) and residing in Australia (vs. US). CONCLUSIONS High levels of “untreated” and “treated but uncontrolled” BP occur in healthy elderly people without CVD, suggesting there are opportunities for better BP control in the primary prevention of CVD in this population. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION NCT01038583.

OBJECTIVE In the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) trial, ∼4 years of intensive versus standard glycemic control in participants with type 2 diabetes and other cardiovascular risk factors had a neutral effect on the composite cardiovascular outcome, increased cardiovascular and total mortality, and reduced nonfatal myocardial infarction. Effects of the intervention during prolonged follow-up were analyzed. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS All surviving ACCORD participants were invited to participate in the ACCORD Follow-on (ACCORDION) study, during which participants were treated according to their health care provider’s judgment. Cardiovascular and other health-related outcomes were prospectively collected and analyzed using an intention-to-treat approach according to the group to which participants were originally allocated. RESULTS A total of 8,601 people, representing 98% of those who did not suffer a primary outcome or death during the ACCORD trial, were monitored for a median of 8.8 years and a mean of 7.7 years from randomization. Intensive glucose lowering for a mean of 3.7 years had a neutral long-term effect on the primary composite outcome (nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or cardiovascular death), death from any cause, and an expanded composite outcome that included all-cause death. Moreover, the risk of cardiovascular mortality noted during the active phase (hazard ratio 1.49; 95% CI 1.19, 1.87; P < 0.0001) decreased (HR 1.20; 95% CI 1.03, 1.39; P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS In high-risk people with type 2 diabetes monitored for 9 years, a mean of 3.7 years of intensive glycemic control had a neutral effect on death and nonfatal cardiovascular events but increased cardiovascular-related death.

BACKGROUND Aspirin is a well-established therapy for the secondary prevention of cardiovascular events. However, its role in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease is unclear, especially in older persons, who have an increased risk. METHODS From 2010 through 2014, we enrolled community-dwelling men and women in Australia and the United States who were 70 years of age or older (or ≥65 years of age among blacks and Hispanics in the United States) and did not have cardiovascular disease, dementia, or disability. Participants were randomly assigned to receive 100 mg of enteric-coated aspirin or placebo. The primary end point was a composite of death, dementia, or persistent physical disability; results for this end point are reported in another article in the Journal. Secondary end points included major hemorrhage and cardiovascular disease (defined as fatal coronary heart disease, nonfatal myocardial infarction, fatal or nonfatal stroke, or hospitalization for heart failure). RESULTS Of the 19,114 persons who were enrolled in the trial, 9525 were assigned to receive aspirin and 9589 to receive placebo. After a median of 4.7 years of follow-up, the rate of cardiovascular disease was 10.7 events per 1000 person-years in the aspirin group and 11.3 events per 1000 person-years in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83 to 1.08). The rate of major hemorrhage was 8.6 events per 1000 person-years and 6.2 events per 1000 person-years, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.18 to 1.62; P

Background: There are no primary prevention trials of aspirin with relevant geriatric outcomes in elderly people. ASPirin in Reducing Events in the Elderly (ASPREE) is a placebo-controlled trial of low-dose aspirin that will determine whether 5 years of daily 100-mg enteric-coated aspirin extends disability-free and dementia-free life in a healthy elderly population and whether these benefits outweigh the risks. Methods: Set in primary care, this randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial has a composite primary endpoint of death, incident dementia or persistent physical disability. Participants aged 70+ years (non-minorities) or 65+ years (U.S. minorities) were free of cardiovascular disease, dementia, or physical disability and without a contraindication to, or indication for, aspirin. Baseline data include physical and lifestyle, personal and family medical history, hemoglobin, fasting glucose, creatinine, lipid panel, urinary albumin:creatinine ratio, cognition (3MS, HVLT-R, COWAT, SDMT), mood (CES-D-10), physical function (gait speed, grip strength), Katz activities of daily living and quality of life (SF-12). Results: Recruitment ended in December 2014 with 16,703 Australian and 2,411 U.S. participants, a median age of 74 (range 65-98) years and 56% women. Approximately 55% of the U.S. cohort were from minority groups; 9% of the total cohort. Proportions with hypertension, overweight, and chronic kidney disease were similar to age-matched populations from both countries although lower percentages had diabetes, dyslipidemia, and osteoarthritis. Discussion: Findings from ASPREE will be generalizable to a healthier older population in both countries and will assess whether the broad benefits of daily low-dose aspirin in prolonging independent life outweigh the risks.

OBJECTIVE To compare effects of combinations of standard and intensive treatment of glycemia and either blood pressure (BP) or lipids in the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) trial. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS ACCORD enrolled 10,251 type 2 diabetes patients aged 40–79 years at high risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD) events. Participants were randomly assigned to hemoglobin A1c goals of RESULTS In the BP trial, risk of the primary outcome was lower in the groups intensively treated for glycemia (hazard ratio [HR] 0.67; 95% CI 0.50–0.91), BP (HR 0.74; 95% CI 0.55–1.00), or both (HR 0.71; 95% CI 0.52–0.96) compared with combined standard BP and glycemia treatment. For secondary outcomes, MI was significantly reduced by intensive glycemia treatment and stroke by intensive BP treatment; most other HRs were neutral or favored intensive treatment groups. In the lipid trial, the general pattern of results showed no evidence of benefit of intensive regimens (whether single or combined) compared with combined standard lipid and glycemia treatment. The mortality HR was 1.33 (95% CI 1.02–1.74) in the standard lipid/intensive glycemia group compared with the standard lipid/standard glycemia group. CONCLUSIONS In the ACCORD BP trial, compared with combined standard treatment, intensive BP or intensive glycemia treatment alone improved major CVD outcomes, without additional benefit from combining the two. In the ACCORD lipid trial, neither intensive lipid nor glycemia treatment produced an overall benefit, but intensive glycemia treatment increased mortality.

Calcium channel-blockers (CCB) are an important class of medication useful in the treatment of hypertension. Several observational studies have suggested an association between CCB therapy and gastrointestinal hemorrhage. Using administrative databases, we re-examined in a post-hoc analysis whether the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT) participants randomized to the calcium-channel blocker amlodipine had a greater risk of hospitalized gastrointestinal bleeding (a pre-specified outcome) compared to those randomized to the diuretic chlorthalidone or the ACE-inhibitor lisinopril. Participants randomized to chlorthalidone did not have a reduced risk for gastrointestinal bleeding hospitalizations compared to participants randomized to amlodipine (HR, 1.09, 95% CI 0.92-1.28). Those randomized to lisinopril were at increased risk of gastrointestinal bleeding compared those randomized to chlorthalidone (HR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.00-1.36). In a post-hoc comparison, participants assigned lisinopril therapy had a higher risk of hospitalized gastrointestinal hemorrhage (HR,1.27, 95% CI 1.06-1.51) versus those assigned to amlodipine. In-study use of atenolol prior to first gastrointestinal hemorrhage was related to a lower incidence of GI bleeding (HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.57-0.83). In conclusion, hypertensive patients on amlodipine do not have an increased risk of GI bleeding hospitalizations compared to those on either chlorthalidone or lisinopril.

Background:Not only is depression associated with increased inflammation but inflammation is a risk factor for the genesis of depression. Many of the environmental risk factors for depression are transduced through inflammatory signaling. Anti-inflammatory agents show promise for the management of depression in preclinical, epidemiological, and early clinical studies. This opens the door to the potential for anti-inflammatory agents to treat and prevent depression. There are no evidence-based pharmacotherapies for depression prevention.Method:ASPREE-D, aspirin in the prevention of depression in the elderly, is a sub study of ASPREE, which explores the potential of aspirin to prevent a range of inflammation related disorders in the elderly. With a sample size of 19,114, and a duration of 5 years, this placebo controlled study will be one of the largest randomized controlled trials in psychiatry and will provide definitive evidence on the ability of aspirin to prevent depression.Results:This paper presents the rationale for the study and presents a summary of the study design.Conclusions:ASPREE-D may not only define novel therapy but will provide mechanistic proof of concept of the role of inflammation in depression.

Orthostatic hypotension (OH) is associated with hypertension and diabetes mellitus. However, in populations with both hypertension and diabetes mellitus, its prevalence, the effect of intensive versus standard systolic blood pressure (BP) targets on incident OH, and its prognostic significance are unclear. In 4266 participants in the ACCORD (Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes) BP trial, seated BP was measured 3×, followed by readings every minute for 3 minutes after standing. Orthostatic BP change, calculated as the minimum standing minus the mean seated systolic BP and diastolic BP, was assessed at baseline, 12 months, and 48 months. The relationship between OH and clinical outcomes (total and cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, heart failure hospitalization or death and the primary composite outcome of nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, and cardiovascular death) was assessed using proportional hazards analysis. Consensus OH, defined by orthostatic decline in systolic BP ≥20 mm Hg or diastolic BP ≥10 mm Hg, occurred at ≥1 time point in 20% of participants. Neither age nor systolic BP treatment target (intensive

Summary Background and objectives CKD is common among older patients. This article assesses long-term renal and cardiovascular outcomes in older high-risk hypertensive patients, stratified by baseline estimated GFR (eGFR), and long-term outcome efficacy of 5-year first-step treatment with amlodipine or lisinopril, each compared with chlorthalidone. Design, setting, participants, & measurements This was a long-term post-trial follow-up of hypertensive participants (n=31,350), aged $55 years, randomized to receive chlorthalidone, amlodipine, or lisinopril for 4–8 years at 593 centers. Participants were stratified by baseline eGFR (ml/min per 1.73 m2) as follows: normal/ increased ($90; n=8027), mild reduction (60–89; n=17,778), and moderate/severe reduction (,60; n=5545). Outcomes were cardiovascular mortality (primary outcome), total mortality, coronary heart disease, cardiovascular disease, stroke, heart failure, and ESRD. Results After an average 8.8-year follow-up, total mortality was significantly higher in participants with moderate/severe eGFR reduction compared with those with normal and mildly reduced eGFR (P,0.001). In participants with an eGFR ,60, there was no significant difference in cardiovascular mortality between chlorthalidone and amlodipine (P=0.64), or chlorthalidone and lisinopril (P=0.56). Likewise, no significant differences were observed for total mortality, coronary heart disease, cardiovascular disease, stroke, or ESRD. ConclusionsCKD is associated with significantly higher long-term risk of cardiovascular events and mortality in older hypertensive patients. By eGFR stratum, 5-year treatment with amlodipine or lisinopril was not superior to chlorthalidoneinpreventingcardiovascularevents,mortality,orESRDduring9-yearfollow-up.Becausedataon proteinuria were not available, these findings may not be extrapolated to proteinuric CKD.

Randomized controlled trial using mixed methods.To evaluate the relative effectiveness of high-dose supervised exercise with and without spinal manipulation and low-dose home exercise for chronic neck pain.Neck pain is a common global health care complaint with considerable social and economic impact. Systematic reviews have found exercise therapy (ET) to be effective for neck pain, either alone or in combination with spinal manipulation. However, it is unclear to what extent spinal manipulation adds to supervised exercise or how supervised high-dose exercise compares with low-dose home exercise.Two hundred and seventy patients with chronic neck pain were studied at an outpatient clinic. Patients were randomly assigned one of the following interventions: (1) high-dose supervised strengthening exercise with spinal manipulation (exercise therapy combined with spinal manipulation therapy [ET + SMT]), (2) high-dose supervised strengthening exercise (ET) alone, or (3) low-dose home exercise and advice (HEA). The primary outcome was patient-rated pain at baseline and at 4, 12, 26, and 52 weeks. Secondary measures were disability, health status, global perceived effect, medication use, and satisfaction.At 12 weeks, there was a significant difference in patient-rated pain between ET + SMT and HEA (1.3 points, P0.001) and ET and HEA (1.1 points, P = 0.001). Although there were smaller group differences in patient-rated pain at 52 weeks (ET + SMT vs. HEA, 0.2 points, P0.05; ET vs. HEA, 0.3 points, P0.05), linear mixed model analyses incorporating all time points yielded a significant advantage for the 2 supervised exercise groups (ET + SMT vs. HEA, P = 0.03; ET vs. HEA, P = 0.02). Similar results were observed for global perceived effect and satisfaction.Supervised strengthening exercise with and without spinal manipulation performed similarly, yielding better outcomes than home exercise particularly in the short term. Various stakeholders' perspectives should be considered carefully when making recommendations regarding these therapies, taking into account side effects, preferences, and costs.

A randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, multicenter trial assigned 32,804 participants aged 55 years and older with hypertension and ≥ 1 other coronary heart disease risk factors to receive chlorthalidone (n=15,002), amlodipine (n=8898), or lisinopril (n=8904) for 4 to 8 years, when double-blinded therapy was discontinued. Passive surveillance continued for a total follow-up of 8 to 13 years using national administrative databases to ascertain deaths and hospitalizations. During the post-trial period, fatal outcomes and nonfatal outcomes were available for 98% and 65% of participants, respectively, due to lack of access to administrative databases for the remainder. This paper assesses whether mortality and morbidity differences persisted or new differences developed during the extended follow-up. Primary outcome was cardiovascular mortality and secondary outcomes were mortality, stroke, coronary heart disease, heart failure, cardiovascular disease, and end-stage renal disease. For the post-trial period, data are not available on medications or blood pressure levels. No significant differences (P

J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2011;13:654–657. ©2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Key Points and Practical Recommendations • α Antagonists lower blood pressure by selectively blocking post-synaptic α1-adrenoreceptors, which antagonizes catecholamine-induced constriction of the arterial and venous vascular beds. • α1-Adrenoreceptor antagonists are not indicated for initial, first-line antihypertensive therapy; however, they can be added to most other antihypertensive drug classes in—preferably diuretic-containing—drug regimens. • When used over time, these agents cause expansion of the extracellular fluid and plasma volumes that typically manifests as weight gain and an attenuation of the blood pressure–lowering efficacy in persons who are consuming usual amounts of dietary sodium. • Utilization of α1-adrenoreceptor antagonists with diuretics such as chlorthalidone or hydrochlorothiazide is beneficial because these agents minimize the α antagonist–induced expansion of the extracellular and plasma volumes while providing significant incremental reductions in blood pressure. • α1-Adrenoreceptor antagonists are especially useful in men with benign prostatic hypertrophy because they increase mean and peak urinary flow rates as well as reduce lower urinary tract symptoms. • α1-Adrenoreceptor antagonists are contraindicated in persons with heart failure because of their aforementioned ability to expand extracellular and plasma volumes.

Since the first International Society on Hypertension in Blacks consensus statement on the “Management of High Blood Pressure in African American” in 2003, data from additional clinical trials have become available. We reviewed hypertension and cardiovascular disease prevention and treatment guidelines, pharmacological hypertension clinical end point trials, and blood pressure–lowering trials in blacks. Selected trials without significant black representation were considered. In this update, blacks with hypertension are divided into 2 risk strata, primary prevention, where elevated blood pressure without target organ damage, preclinical cardiovascular disease, or overt cardiovascular disease for whom blood pressure consistently 15/10 mm Hg above target, 2-drug therapy is recommended, with either a calcium channel blocker plus a renin-angiotensin system blocker or, alternatively, in edematous and/or volume-overload states, with a thiazide diuretic plus a renin-angiotensin system blocker. Effective multidrug therapeutic combinations through 4 drugs are described. Comprehensive lifestyle modifications should be initiated in blacks when blood pressure is ≥115/75 mm Hg. The updated International Society on Hypertension in Blacks consensus statement on hypertension management in blacks lowers the minimum target blood pressure level for the lowest-risk blacks, emphasizes effective multidrug regimens, and de-emphasizes monotherapy.

There is no evidence from randomized trials to support a strategy of lowering systolic blood pressure below 135 to 140 mm Hg in persons with type 2 diabetes mellitus. We investigated whether therapy targeting normal systolic pressure (i.e.,120 mm Hg) reduces major cardiovascular events in participants with type 2 diabetes at high risk for cardiovascular events.A total of 4733 participants with type 2 diabetes were randomly assigned to intensive therapy, targeting a systolic pressure of less than 120 mm Hg, or standard therapy, targeting a systolic pressure of less than 140 mm Hg. The primary composite outcome was nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or death from cardiovascular causes. The mean follow-up was 4.7 years.After 1 year, the mean systolic blood pressure was 119.3 mm Hg in the intensive-therapy group and 133.5 mm Hg in the standard-therapy group. The annual rate of the primary outcome was 1.87% in the intensive-therapy group and 2.09% in the standard-therapy group (hazard ratio with intensive therapy, 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73 to 1.06; P=0.20). The annual rates of death from any cause were 1.28% and 1.19% in the two groups, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.35; P=0.55). The annual rates of stroke, a prespecified secondary outcome, were 0.32% and 0.53% in the two groups, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.39 to 0.89; P=0.01). Serious adverse events attributed to antihypertensive treatment occurred in 77 of the 2362 participants in the intensive-therapy group (3.3%) and 30 of the 2371 participants in the standard-therapy group (1.3%) (P0.001).In patients with type 2 diabetes at high risk for cardiovascular events, targeting a systolic blood pressure of less than 120 mm Hg, as compared with less than 140 mm Hg, did not reduce the rate of a composite outcome of fatal and nonfatal major cardiovascular events. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00000620.)

OBJECTIVE Intensive therapy targeting normal blood glucose increased mortality compared with standard treatment in a randomized clinical trial of 10,251 participants with type 2 diabetes at high-risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD) events. We evaluated whether the presence of cardiac autonomic neuropathy (CAN) at baseline modified the effect of intensive compared with standard glycemia treatment on mortality outcomes in the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) trial participants. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS CAN was assessed by measures of heart rate variability (HRV) and QT index (QTI) computed from 10-s resting electrocardiograms in 8,135 ACCORD trial participants with valid measurements (mean age 63.0 years, 40% women). Prespecified CAN definitions included a composite of the lowest quartile of HRV and highest QTI quartile in the presence or absence of peripheral neuropathy. Outcomes were all-cause and CVD mortality. Associations between CAN and mortality were evaluated by proportional hazards analysis, adjusting for treatment group allocation, CVD history, and multiple prespecified baseline covariates. RESULTS During a mean 3.5 years follow-up, there were 329 deaths from all causes. In fully adjusted analyses, participants with baseline CAN were 1.55–2.14 times as likely to die as participants without CAN, depending on the CAN definition used (P < 0.02 for all). The effect of allocation to the intensive group on all-cause and CVD mortality was similar in participants with or without CAN at baseline (Pinteraction > 0.7). CONCLUSIONS Whereas CAN was associated with increased mortality in this high-risk type 2 diabetes cohort, these analyses indicate that participants with CAN at baseline had similar mortality outcomes from intensive compared with standard glycemia treatment in the ACCORD cohort.

Experimental and epidemiological studies suggest that calcium and vitamin D supplements may lower blood pressure. We examined the effect of calcium plus vitamin D supplementation on blood pressure and the incidence of hypertension in postmenopausal women. The Women’s Health Initiative Calcium/Vitamin D Trial randomly assigned 36 282 postmenopausal women to receive 1000 mg of elemental calcium plus 400 IU of vitamin D3 daily or placebo in a double-blind fashion. Change in blood pressure and the incidence of hypertension were ascertained. Over a median follow-up time of 7 years, there was no significant difference in the mean change over time in systolic blood pressure (0.22 mm Hg; 95% CI: −0.05 to 0.49 mm Hg) and diastolic blood pressure (0.11 mm Hg; 95% CI: −0.04 to 0.27 mm Hg) between the active and placebo treatment groups. This null result was robust in analyses accounting for nonadherence to study pills and in baseline subgroups of interest, including black subjects and women with hypertension or high levels of blood pressure, with low intakes of calcium and vitamin D or low serum levels of vitamin D. In 17 122 nonhypertensive participants at baseline, the hazard ratio for incident hypertension associated with calcium/vitamin D treatment was 1.01 (95% CI: 0.96 to 1.06.) In postmenopausal women, calcium plus vitamin D3 supplementation did not reduce either blood pressure or the risk of developing hypertension over 7 years of follow-up.

Most patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus develop cardiovascular disease (CVD), with substantial loss of life expectancy. Nonfatal CVD contributes greatly to excess healthcare costs and decreased quality of life in patients with diabetes. The current epidemic of obesity has raised expectations that CVD associated with type 2 diabetes will become an even greater public health challenge. Despite the importance of this health problem, there is a lack of definitive data on the effects of the intensive control of glycemia and other CVD risk factors on CVD event rates in patients with type 2 diabetes. The Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) trial is a randomized, multicenter, double 2 x 2 factorial design study involving 10,251 middle-aged and older participants with type 2 diabetes who are at high risk for CVD events because of existing CVD or additional risk factors. ACCORD is testing the effects of 3 medical treatment strategies to reduce CVD morbidity and mortality. All participants are in the glycemia trial, which is testing the hypothesis that a therapeutic strategy that targets a glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) level of6.0% will reduce the rate of CVD events more than a strategy that targets an HbA1c level of 7.0%-7.9%. The lipid trial includes 5,518 of the participants, who receive either fenofibrate or placebo in a double-masked fashion to test the hypothesis of whether, in the context of good glycemic control, a therapeutic strategy that uses a fibrate to increase high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and lower triglyceride levels together with a 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitor (statin) to lower low-density lipoprotein cholesterol will reduce the rate of CVD events compared with a strategy that uses a statin plus a placebo. The blood pressure trial includes the remaining 4,733 participants and tests the hypothesis that a therapeutic strategy that targets a systolic blood pressure of120 mm Hg in the context of good glycemic control will reduce the rate of CVD events compared with a strategy that targets a systolic blood pressure of140 mm Hg. The primary outcome measure for all 3 research questions is the first occurrence of a major CVD event, specifically nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or cardiovascular death. Upon the expected completion of participant follow-up in 2009, the ACCORD trial should document for the first time the benefits and risks of intensive glucose control, intensive blood pressure control, and the combination of fibrate and statin drugs in managing blood lipids in high-risk patients with type 2 diabetes.

The Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering treatment to prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT) provides a unique opportunity to compare the long-term relative safety and efficacy of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and calcium channel blocker–initiated therapy in older hypertensive individuals. Patients were randomized to amlodipine (n=9048) or lisinopril (n=9054). The primary outcome was combined fatal coronary heart disease or nonfatal myocardial infarction, analyzed by intention-to-treat. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality, stroke, combined cardiovascular disease (CVD), end-stage renal disease (ESRD), cancer, and gastrointestinal bleeding. Mean follow-up was 4.9 years. Blood pressure control was similar in nonblacks, but not in blacks. No significant differences were found between treatment groups for the primary outcome, all-cause mortality, ESRD, or cancer. Stroke rates were higher on lisinopril in blacks (RR=1.51, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.86) but not in nonblacks (RR=1.07, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.28), and in women (RR=1.45, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.79), but not in men (RR=1.10, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.31). Rates of combined CVD were higher (RR=1.06, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.12) because of higher rates for strokes, peripheral arterial disease, and angina, which were partly offset by lower rates for heart failure (RR=0.87, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.96) on lisinopril compared with amlodipine. Gastrointestinal bleeds and angioedema were higher on lisinopril. Patients with and without baseline coronary heart disease showed similar outcome patterns. We conclude that in hypertensive patients, the risks for coronary events are similar, but for stroke, combined CVD, gastrointestinal bleeding, and angioedema are higher and for heart failure are lower for lisinopril-based compared with amlodipine-based therapy. Some, but not all, of these differences may be explained by less effective blood pressure control in the lisinopril arm.

Background Blood pressure (BP) is controlled to recommended goal in less than one-third of people with hypertension. There has been little recent research on physician beliefs and practices with regard to the treatment of hypertension. Methods In late 1999, we surveyed 104 primary care physicians in the 18 owned clinics of a large staff model, non-profit health maintenance organization. The survey included questions about demographics, BP treatment goals for patients with uncomplicated hypertension, and beliefs about hypertension. Results The reported systolic BP treatment goal was ≤140 mm Hg for 97% and the diastolic BP goal was ≤90 mm Hg for 100%. The systolic BP goal for patients with isolated systolic hypertension was ≤140 mm Hg for 82%, but 34% stated that they would treat to a different goal depending on the diastolic BP. The proportions of physicians who would intensify treatment for BP of 140/90 mm Hg, 150/95 mm Hg, 165/75 mm Hg, and 165/65 mm Hg were 64%, 97%, 89% and 77%, respectively. Although 93% believed that medication was necessary to control BP in most cases, a majority (55%) agreed with the statement that BP could be controlled in most patients with only one drug. Although 42% reported that they often had to change drugs because of side effects, only 16% believed that it was time-consuming to find a well-tolerated drug regimen. Conclusions In this setting, primary care physicians’ self-reported practices were in good agreement with national guidelines put forth in the late 1990s, and their beliefs were favorable to therapy. Our data point to a need for interventions to emphasize that combination drug therapy is frequently required to achieve BP control, and that more aggressive intervention is often warranted for isolated systolic hypertension.

Higher prevalence of anemia with diabetes mellitus in moderate kidney insufficiency: The Kidney Early Evaluation Program.BackgroundThe Kidney Early Evaluation Program (KEEP 2.0) cross-sectional, community-based study, targeted individuals at increased risk for kidney disease and measured blood glucose, creatinine, and hemoglobin.MethodsKEEP 2.0 screening data were used to determine the prevalence of anemia by level of kidney function and diabetes status. Estimated glomerular filtration rate (EGFR) was calculated using serum creatinine values, and categorized as ≥90, 60–89, 30–59 and 50 years, and 125 mg/dL, or nonfasting glucose >200 mg/dL.ResultsData were available on 5380 participants screened from August 2000 through December 2001. Diabetes was present in 26.9% of participants, and anemia in 7.7%; 15.9% of participants had at least moderately reduced kidney function (EGFR

The incidence of cardiovascular disease (CVD) is very high in patients with chronic kidney (CKD) disease and in kidney transplant recipients. Indeed, available evidence for these patients suggests that the 10-year cumulative risk of coronary heart disease is at least 20%, or roughly equivalent to the risk seen in patients with previous CVD. Recently, the National Kidney Foundation's Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (K/DOQI) published guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of dyslipidemias in patients with CKD, including transplant patients. It was the conclusion of this Work Group that the National Cholesterol Education Program Guidelines are generally applicable to patients with CKD, but that there are significant differences in the approach and treatment of dyslipidemias in patients with CKD compared with the general population. In the present document we present the guidelines generated by this workgroup as they apply to kidney transplant recipients. Evidence from the general population indicates that treatment of dyslipidemias reduces CVD, and evidence in kidney transplant patients suggests that judicious treatment can be safe and effective in improving dyslipidemias. Dyslipidemias are very common in CKD and in transplant patients. However, until recently there have been no adequately powered, randomized, controlled trials examining the effects of dyslipidemia treatment on CVD in patients with CKD. Since completion of the K/DOQI guidelines on dyslipidemia in CKD, the results of the Assessment of Lescol in Renal Transplantation (ALERT) Study have been presented and published. Based on information from randomized trials conducted in the general population and the single study conducted in kidney transplant patients, these guidelines, which are a modified version of the K/DOQI dyslipidemia guidelines, were developed to aid clinicians in the management of dyslipidemias in kidney transplant patients. These guidelines are divided into four sections. The first section (Introduction) provides the rationale for the guidelines, and describes the target population, scope, intended users, and methods. The second section presents guidelines on the assessment of dyslipidemias (guidelines 1-3), while the third section offers guidelines for the treatment of dyslipidemias (guidelines 4-5). The key guideline statements are supported mainly by data from studies in the general population, but there is an urgent need for additional studies in CKD and in transplant patients. Therefore, the last section outlines recommendations for research.

Context Blood pressure control ( Objective To determine the success and predictors of blood pressure control in a large hypertension trial involving a multiethnic population in diverse practice settings. Design The Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial is a randomized, double-blind, active-controlled clinical trial with a mean follow-up of 4.9 years. Participant enrollment began in February 1994 and follow-up was completed in March 2002. Setting A total of 623 centers in the United States, Canada, and the Caribbean. Participants A total of 33,357 participants (aged > or =55 years) with hypertension and at least one other coronary heart disease risk factor. Interventions Participants were randomly assigned to receive (double-blind) chlorthalidone, 12.5-25 mg/d (n=15,255), amlodipine 2.5-10 mg/d (n=9048), or lisinopril 10-40 mg/d (n=9054) after other medication was discontinued. Doses were increased within these ranges and additional drugs from other classes were added as needed to achieve blood pressure control ( Main outcome measures The outcome measures for this report are systolic and diastolic blood pressure, the proportion of participants achieving blood pressure control ( Results Mean age was 67 years, 47% were women, 35% black, 36% diabetic; 90% were on antihypertensive drug treatment at entry. At the first of two pre-randomization visits, blood pressure was or =2 drugs was 63%. Blood pressure control varied by geographic regions, practice settings, and demographic and clinical characteristics of participants. Conclusions These data demonstrate that blood pressure may be controlled in two thirds of a multiethnic hypertensive population in diverse practice settings. Systolic blood pressure is more difficult to control than diastolic blood pressure, and at least two antihypertensive medications are required for most patients to achieve blood pressure control. It is likely that the majority of people with hypertension could achieve a blood pressure

Importance Patients with type 2 diabetes are at high risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in part owing to hypertriglyceridemia and low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol. It is unknown whether adding triglyceride-lowering treatment to statin reduces this risk. Objective To determine whether fenofibrate reduces CVD risk in statin-treated patients with type 2 diabetes. Design, Setting, and Participants Posttrial follow-up of the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) Lipid Study between July 2009 and October 2014; 5 years of follow-up were completed for a total of 9.7 years at general community and academic outpatient research clinics in the United States and Canada. Of the original 5518 ACCORD Lipid Trial participants, 4644 surviving participants were selected based on the presence of type 2 diabetes and either prevalent CVD or CVD risk factors and high-density lipoprotein levels less than 50 mg/dL ( Interventions Passive follow-up of study participants previously treated with fenofibrate or masked placebo. Main Outcomes and Measures Occurrence of cardiovascular outcomes including primary composite outcome of fatal and nonfatal myocardial infarction and stroke in all participants and in prespecified subgroups. Results The 4644 follow-on study participants were broadly representative of the original ACCORD study population and included significant numbers of women (n = 1445; 31%), nonwhite individuals (n = 1094; 21%), and those with preexisting cardiovascular events (n = 1620; 35%). Only 4.3% of study participants continued treatment with fenofibrate following completion of ACCORD. High-density lipoprotein and triglyceride values rapidly equalized among participants originally randomized to fenofibrate or placebo. Over a median total postrandomization follow-up of 9.7 years, the hazard ratio (HR) for the primary study outcome among participants originally randomized to fenofibrate vs placebo (HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.83-1.05; P = .25) was comparable with that originally observed in ACCORD (HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.79-1,08; P = .32). Despite these overall neutral results, we continued to find evidence that fenofibrate therapy effectively reduced CVD in study participants with dyslipidemia, defined as triglyceride levels greater than 204 mg/dL and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels less than 34 mg/dL (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.56-0.95). Conclusions and Relevance Extended follow-up of ACCORD-lipid trial participants confirms the original neutral effect of fenofibrate in the overall study cohort. The continued observation of heterogeneity of treatment response by baseline lipids suggests that fenofibrate therapy may reduce CVD in patients with diabetes with hypertriglyceridemia and low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol. A definitive trial of fibrate therapy in this patient population is needed to confirm these findings. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier:NCT00000620.

Background context Neck pain, common among the elderly population, has considerable implications on health and quality of life. Evidence supports the use of spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) and exercise to treat neck pain; however, no studies to date have evaluated the effectiveness of these therapies specifically in seniors. Purpose To assess the relative effectiveness of SMT and supervised rehabilitative exercise, both in combination with and compared to home exercise (HE) alone for neck pain in individuals ages 65 years or older. Study design/setting Randomized clinical trial. Patient sample Individuals 65 years of age or older with a primary complaint of mechanical neck pain, rated ≥3 (0–10) for 12 weeks or longer in duration. Outcome measures Patient self-report outcomes were collected at baseline and 4, 12, 26, and 52 weeks after randomization. The primary outcome was pain, measured by an 11-box numerical rating scale. Secondary outcomes included disability (Neck Disability Index), general health status (Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36), satisfaction (7-point scale), improvement (9-point scale), and medication use (days per week). Methods This study was funded by the US Department of Health and Human Services, Health Resources and Services Administration. Linear mixed model analyses were used for comparisons at individual time points and for short- and long-term analyses. Blinded evaluations of objective outcomes were performed at baseline and 12 weeks. Adverse event data were collected at each treatment visit. Results A total of 241 participants were randomized, with 95% reporting primary outcome data at all time points. After 12 weeks of treatment, the SMT with home exercise group demonstrated a 10% greater decrease in pain compared with the HE-alone group, and 5% change over supervised plus home exercise. A decrease in pain favoring supervised plus HE over HE alone did not reach statistical significance. Compared with the HE group, both combination groups reported greater improvement at week 12 and more satisfaction at all time points. Multivariate longitudinal analysis incorporating primary and secondary patient-rated outcomes showed that the SMT with HE group was superior to the HE-alone group in both the short- and long-term. No serious adverse events were observed as a result of the study treatments. Conclusions SMT with HE resulted in greater pain reduction after 12 weeks of treatment compared with both supervised plus HE and HE alone. Supervised exercise sessions added little benefit to the HE-alone program.

The Treatment of Mild Hypertension Trial was a randomized, double-blind clinical trial conducted from 1986 to 1992 comparing the efficacy of six antihypertensive treatment regimens in 902 participants with stage I hypertension. To satisfy a secondary objective of the study, follow-up information on mortality and cardiovascular morbidity was collected. For this objective the aim was to ascertain the vital and cardiovascular event status as of the last day of the trial. This was accomplished by inviting each participant to attend a closeout visit shortly after the closeout date. In addition to serving as verification of vital status, this visit allowed data collection on nonfatal events that occurred between the last clinic visit and the closeout date. During this visit the patient was unblinded to study medication and given a medical summary of their participation during the trial, as well as a bottle of open-label medication. The advantages of a closeout visit are discussed along with a call for studies to provide clearer definitions of lost to follow-up and censoring times used in life-table analyses, especially when the primary event includes both fatal and nonfatal events. Control Clin Trials 2001;22:56–61

Abstract —Little is known about the patterns of treatment and adequacy of blood pressure control in older women. The Women’s Health Initiative, a 40-center national study of risk factors and prevention of heart disease, breast and colorectal cancer, and osteoporosis in postmenopausal women, provides a unique opportunity to examine these issues in the largest, multiethnic, best-characterized such cohort. Baseline data from the initial 98 705 women, aged 50 to 79 years, enrolled were analyzed to relate prevalence, treatment, and control of hypertension to demographic, clinical, and risk-factor covariates, and logistic regression analyses were performed to estimate odds ratios after adjusting for multiple potential confounders. Overall, 37.8% of the women had hypertension, which is defined as systolic blood pressure ≥140 mm Hg and/or diastolic blood pressure ≥90 mm Hg or being on medication for high blood pressure; 64.3% were treated with drugs, and blood pressure was controlled in only 36.1% of the hypertensive women, with lower rates of control in the oldest group. After adjustment for multiple covariates, current hormone users had higher prevalence than did nonusers (odds ratio 1.25). Hypertensive women had more comorbid conditions than did nonhypertensive women, and women with comorbidities were more likely to be treated pharmacologically. Diuretics were used by 44.3% of hypertensives either as monotherapy or in combination with other drug classes. As monotherapy, calcium channel blockers were used in 16%, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors in 14%, β-blockers in 9%, and diuretics in 14% of the hypertensive women. Diuretics as monotherapy were associated with better blood pressure control than any of the other drug classes as monotherapy. In conclusion, hypertension in older women is not being treated aggressively enough because a large proportion, especially those most at risk for stroke and heart disease by virtue of age, does not have sufficient blood pressure control.

The high Na/low K environment of modern society is related to the genesis of hypertension and stroke. There is prior evidence of racial, geographical, and social class differences in Na and K intake and blood pressure. Baseline data from the Treatment of Mild Hypertension Study (TOMHS) was used to assess urinary Na and K excretion profiles by race, clinic geographic area, and education. Participants were adult black and white hypertensive patients from the Birmingham, Alabama, and Chicago, Illinois, area. Level of education was categorized as: less than college graduate and college graduate or more. Two overnight urine samples were collected and analyzed for Na and K at entry from 154 blacks and 281 whites. The urinary Na:K ratio was significantly higher in both blacks (5.1 v 3.8, P

The Controlled ONset Verapamil INvestigation of Cardiovascular Endpoints (CONVINCE) Trial is a randomized, prospective, double-blind, parallel-group, two-arm, actively controlled, multicenter, international 5-year clinical trial involving 15,000 patients. CONVINCE will compare the incidence of fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), fatal or nonfatal stroke, or cardiovascular-disease-related death in two antihypertensive treatment regimens. One treatment arm begins with controlled onset-extended release (COER)-verapamil, which has its major antihypertensive effect 6-12 hours after administration. The other arm (standard of care (SOC)) begins with either hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) or atenolol, one of which is preselected by the investigator for an individual patient prior to randomization. Secondary objectives include comparisons of the regimens for each of the components of the primary endpoint (separately), death or hospitalization related to cardiovascular disease, efficacy in lowering blood pressure to goal, primary events occurring between 6 am and noon, all-cause mortality, withdrawals from blinded therapy, cancer, and hospitalizations due to bleeding. Patients may be enrolled if they are hypertensive and at least 55 years of age and have an established second risk factor for cardiovascular disease. Initial medications include COER-verapamil (180 mg/d), HCTZ (12.5 mg/d), or atenolol (50 mg/d). Initial doses are doubled if blood pressure (BP) does not reach goal (systolic BP140 mm and diastolic BP90 mm Hg). If BP is not controlled by the higher dose of the initial medication, HCTZ is added to COER-verapamil, or the SOC choice not initially selected is added in the SOC arm. An ACE-inhibitor is recommended (although nearly any open-label medication is allowed) as the third step for patients whose BP is not adequately controlled or who have a contraindication to one of the two SOC medications. Patients take two sets of tablets daily, one in the morning and one in the evening. Although most patients switch from an established antihypertensive medication to randomized treatment, untreated patients with stages I-III hypertension (SBP between 140 and 190 or DBP between 90 and 110 mm Hg) are eligible. Outcomes are monitored by an independent Data and Safety Monitoring Board. Enrollment began during the third quarter of 1996, and follow-up is to be completed in the third quarter of 2002.

In the United States, blacks have higher rates of hypertension than whites. A possible contributing factor to this higher rate of hypertension could be dietary differences between blacks and whites relating to sodium and potassium intake, which in turn could be related to socioeconomic differences between blacks and whites. Baseline data from the Treatment of Mild Hypertension Study (TOMHS) was used to assess differences in the urinary excretion of sodium and potassium, and the Na:K ratio between black and white participants, and also to explore the relationship of socioeconomic status (SES) and urinary electrolyte excretion within each ethnic group. Participants were men and women ages 45 to 69 with stage I diastolic hypertension (DBP < or = 99 mm Hg). Level of education and annual household income were used as indicators of SES. Two overnight urine samples were collected and analyzed for Na and K at entry on 172 black and 710 white participants. Blacks had a significantly higher mean Na:K ratio than whites, 4.3 v 3.6 (P < .001). This was primarily due to higher urinary Na excretion in blacks than whites, 57.8 v 52.7 mmol/8 h (P = .05). Analysis by education and income level showed that higher levels of urinary Na and Na:K in blacks than whites was restricted to those with lower education and income levels. For higher education and income levels, blacks had slightly lower levels of urinary Na and Na:K than whites. Correspondingly, education and income levels were related to urinary Na and Na:K in blacks but not in whites. This suggests that lower SES blacks could benefit from interventions to reduce dietary Na and increase dietary K, which would decrease their urinary Na:K ratio and may make them less prone to developing hypertension.

This trial involved 107 patients in a two-group, parallel, double-blind, randomized study comparing the diuretic, hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) (dose 25 to 50 mg) and the α 1 antagonists, doxazosin (dose 2 to 16 mg). All randomized participants were followed for at least 1 year. Participants were recruited from the community. The study was carried out in four phases: Phase I—Baseline; Phase II—Monotherapy Titration; Phase III—Combination Therapy Titration; and Phase IV—Maintenance. The following measures were carried out: blood pressure, biochemistries, lipids/lipoproteins, quality of life, ambulatory electrocardiograms, echocardiograms, adverse experiences, and drug adherence. Both drugs were well tolerated, with only 4% taken off doxazosin and 7% off HCTZ. Adverse experiences were uncommon and mostly mild. Both drugs were effective in managing hypertension over 1 year of therapy. There was no difference noted in terms of efficacy of blood pressure lowering between the two study drugs, nor was there any evidence of tolerance developing or of any serious adverse effects. Average final doses for drugs were 7.8 mg for doxazosin and 36 mg for HCTZ. The results show that, over the course of 1 year, both drugs significantly lowered systolic and diastolic pressures compared to baseline; doxazosin (−19 and −16 mm Hg); HCTZ (−22 and 15 mm Hg). Blood pressure lowering was not significantly different between drugs. Sitting heart rate was not affected by drugs. Changes in quality of life measures were similar between groups. Echocardiographic measures at 1 year showed significant between-drug differences in change in left internal end systolic and diastolic dimensions and end systolic stress. Both doxazosin and HCTZ were effective drugs over 1 year for treating hypertension.

Background The purpose of the present study was to describe the relation between blood pressure (systolic [SBP] and diastolic [DBP]) and death from coronary heart disease (CHD) and all causes for men with a history of myocardial infarction (MI). Methods and Results The study cohort consisted of men aged 35 to 57 years screened for the Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial (MRFIT) in 1973 through 1975 and followed for survival for an average of 16 years through 1990. There were 5362 men who reported prior hospitalization for a heart attack of at least 2 weeks’ duration at the initial screening of MRFIT. There was a J-shaped relation between SBP and DBP with both CHD and all-cause mortality during the first 2 years of follow-up in older (age, 45 to 57 years) men only. Risk nadirs for SBP were 152 and 145 mm Hg, respectively, for CHD death and all-cause mortality; corresponding DBP risk nadirs were 94 and 90 mm Hg. After the first 2 years, there was a positive association between SBP and death from CHD and all causes. By 15 years, cumulative CHD mortality percentages for men with screening SBP P >.05). However, the relation still appeared J-shaped as cumulative mortality for those with DBP Conclusions In this large cohort of men with prior MI, the association of SBP and DBP with CHD and all-cause mortality varied over the 16-year follow-up period. During early follow-up, in older men only, J- or U-shaped relations were evident. However, after 2 years, these same relations had become positive and graded. Given the substantial excess mortality risk in this cohort associated with high blood pressure, particularly SBP, efforts to gradually lower blood pressure should receive high priority among hypertensive men with prior MI.

Left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) predicts cardiovascular risk in hypertensive patients. We analyzed baseline/follow-up electrocardiographies in 26,376 Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial participants randomized to amlodipine (A), lisinopril (L), or chlorthalidone (C). Prevalent/incident LVH was examined using continuous and categorical classifications of Cornell voltage. At 2 and 4 years, prevalence of LVH in the C group (5.57%; 6.14%) was not statistically different from A group (2 years: 5.47%; P = .806, 4 years: 6.54%; P = .857) or L group (2 years: 5.64%; P = .857, 4 years: 6.50%; P = .430). Incident LVH followed similarly, with no difference at 2 years for C (2.99%) compared to A (2.57%; P = .173) or L (3.16%; P = .605) and at 4 years (C = 3.52%, A = 3.29%, L = 3.71%; P = .521 C vs. A, P = .618 C vs. L). Mean Cornell voltage decreased comparably across treatment groups (Δ baseline, 2 years = +3 to −27 μV, analysis of variance P = .8612; 4 years = +10 to −17 μV, analysis of variance P = .9692). We conclude that risk reductions associated with C treatment in secondary end points of the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial cannot be attributed to differential improvements in electrocardiography LVH.

Background. Questions regarding the efficacy of nonpharmacologic approaches for the treatment of stage 1 hypertension were addressed as part of the Treatment of Mild Hypertension Study (TOMHS), a 4-year, randomized clinical trial (N = 902). This report describes the lifestyle intervention program used in TOMHS, presents data on the lifestyle changes observed, and focuses on the effect of weight loss on blood pressure and blood lipid levels. Methods. Participants were randomly assigned to receive either placebo or one of five different antihypertensive medications. All took part in a lifestyle intervention program to reduce weight and sodium and alcohol intake and to increase physical activity. Results. Substantial changes from baseline levels were achieved for all lifestyle intervention variables. Mean weight change was −10.5 lb (−5.6%) at 1 year, −8.5 lb (−4.5%) at 2 years, −7.4 lb (−4.0%) at 3 years, and −5.7 lb (−3.0%) at 4 years. At 4 years, 70% of participants remained below baseline weight and 34% maintained a weight loss of 10 lb or greater. Mean change in urinary sodium excretion was −12.5 mmol/8 hr (−23%) at 1 year, −10.7 mmol/8 hr (−20%) at 2 years, −8.4 mmol/8 hr (−16%) at 3 years, and −4.6 mmol/8 hr (−9%) at 4 years. Alcohol intake declined by 1.6 drinks/week among drinkers at 4 years. Reported leisure physical activity increased by 86% at 1 year and remained 50% above baseline at 4 years. Beneficial changes in blood pressure and serum lipids were associated with these changes. Conclusions. These results support a role for lifestyle interventions as the initial treatment for stage 1 hypertension and demonstrate that such interventions can be successfully implemented in the clinical setting.

A randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, multicenter trial assigned 32,804 participants aged 55 years and older with hypertension and ≥ 1 other coronary heart disease risk factors to receive chlorthalidone (n=15,002), amlodipine (n=8898), or lisinopril (n=8904) for 4 to 8 years, when double-blinded therapy was discontinued. Passive surveillance continued for a total follow-up of 8 to 13 years using national administrative databases to ascertain deaths and hospitalizations. During the post-trial period, fatal outcomes and nonfatal outcomes were available for 98% and 65% of participants, respectively, due to lack of access to administrative databases for the remainder. This paper assesses whether mortality and morbidity differences persisted or new differences developed during the extended follow-up. Primary outcome was cardiovascular mortality and secondary outcomes were mortality, stroke, coronary heart disease, heart failure, cardiovascular disease, and end-stage renal disease. For the post-trial period, data are not available on medications or blood pressure levels. No significant differences (P.05) appeared in cardiovascular mortality for amlodipine (hazard ratio [HR], 1.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.93-1.06) or lisinopril (HR, 0.97; CI, 0.90-1.03), each compared with chlorthalidone. The only significant differences in secondary outcomes were for heart failure, which was higher with amlodipine (HR, 1.12; CI, 1.02-1.22), and stroke mortality, which was higher with lisinopril (HR, 1.20; CI, 1.01-1.41), each compared with chlorthalidone. Similar to the previously reported in-trial result, there was a significant treatment-by-race interaction for cardiovascular disease for lisinopril vs chlorthalidone. Black participants had higher risk than non-black participants taking lisinopril compared with chlorthalidone. After accounting for multiple comparisons, none of these results were significant. These findings suggest that neither calcium channel blockers nor angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors are superior to diuretics for the long-term prevention of major cardiovascular complications of hypertension.

Renal effects of mild hypertension and therapy have not been established. Since urinary albumin and N-acetyl-beta-D-glucosaminidase excretions reflect renal effects of hypertension, they were related to blood pressure, other cardiovascular risk factors, cardiac target organ effects, and response to therapy in mild hypertension (diastolic blood pressure 85-99 mm Hg). Participants were from two clinics of the Treatment of Mild Hypertension Study (TOMHS), a multicenter randomized, double-blind, controlled trial. Participants received nutritional-hygienic therapy and one of five active drugs or placebo. Urinary albumin and N-acetyl-beta-D-glucosaminidase excretions were assessed prospectively using office "spot" collections from one clinic (n = 213) and retrospectively using overnight collections from the other clinic (n = 210). Relationships were determined between protein excretions and blood pressure, age, gender, race, blood glucose, cholesterol concentrations, and indices of body mass and left ventricular mass and function at baseline. Treatment effects were assessed after 3 to 12 months. Spot and overnight albumin excretions related positively to baseline systolic blood pressure by univariate analyses. Spot albumin excretion related positively to systolic blood pressure, age, creatinine clearance, and left ventricular function while overnight albumin excretion related positively to left ventricular mass and female gender by multiple regression analyses. Spot, but not overnight, albumin excretion declined significantly with active drug therapy. N-acetyl-beta-D-glucosaminidase excretion did not relate to blood pressure or decline with therapy. The combined results suggest albumin excretion correlates with blood pressure, decreases with antihypertensive drug therapy, and is associated with greater left ventricular function and mass, as well as glomerular filtration rate, even at mild levels of hypertension.

Ventricular ectopic activity was recorded at baseline in 5.6% of the 12-lead electrocardiograms and 8.2% of the 2-minute rhythm strips of 4674 subjects with isolated systolic hypertension (systolic blood pressure 160 to 219 mm Hg, diastolic blood pressure 10 VPB on the 2-minute rhythm strip. Correlates of VPB presence on the 12-lead ECG were older-age male sex, presence of Q/QS pattern and higher heart rate. Participants with serum potassium < 3.5 mmol/L had a higher prevalence of VPB. Similarly, the number of VPB on the 2-minute rhythm strip was associated with male sex, increasing age, with lower serum potassium, history of palpitations, and presence of Q/QS patterns.

Chlorthalidone (CTD) reduces 24-hour blood pressure more effectively than hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ), but whether this influences electrocardiographic left ventricular hypertrophy is uncertain. One source of comparative data is the Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial, which randomly assigned 8012 hypertensive men to special intervention (SI) or usual care. SI participants could use CTD or HCTZ initially; previous analyses have grouped clinics by their main diuretic used (C-clinics: CTD; H-clinics: HCTZ). After 48 months, SI participants receiving HCTZ were recommended to switch to CTD, in part because higher mortality was observed for SI compared with usual care participants in H-clinics, whereas the opposite was found in C-clinics. In this analysis, we examined change in continuous measures of electrocardiographic left ventricular hypertrophy using both an ecological analysis by previously reported C- or H-clinic groupings and an individual participant analysis where use of CTD or HCTZ by SI participants was considered and updated annually. Through 48 months, differences between SI and usual care in left ventricular hypertrophy were larger for C-clinics compared with H-clinics (Sokolow-Lyon: −93.9 versus −54.9 μV, P =0.049; Cornell voltage: −68.1 versus −35.9 μV, P =0.019; Cornell voltage product: −4.6 versus −2.2 μV/ms, P =0.071; left ventricular mass: −4.4 versus −2.8 g, P =0.002). At the individual participant level, Sokolow-Lyon and left ventricular mass were significantly lower for SI men receiving CTD compared with HCTZ through 48 months and 84 months of follow-up. Our findings on left ventricular hypertrophy support the idea that greater blood pressure reduction with CTD than HCTZ may have led to differences in mortality observed in the Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial.

A b s t r ac t Background Intensive glucose lowering has previously been shown to increase mortality among persons with advanced type 2 diabetes and a high risk of cardiovascular disease. This report describes the 5-year outcomes of a mean of 3.7 years of intensive glucose lowering on mortality and key cardiovascular events. Methods We randomly assigned participants with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease or additional cardiovascular risk factors to receive intensive therapy (targeting a glycated hemoglobin level below 6.0%) or standard therapy (targeting a level of 7 to 7.9%). After termination of the intensive therapy, due to higher mortality in the intensive-therapy group, the target glycated hemoglobin level was 7 to 7.9% for all participants, who were followed until the planned end of the trial. Results Before the intensive therapy was terminated, the intensive-therapy group did not differ significantly from the standard-therapy group in the rate of the primary outcome (a composite of nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or death from cardiovascular causes) (P = 0.13) but had more deaths from any cause (primarily cardiovascular) (hazard ratio, 1.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02 to 1.44) and fewer nonfatal myocardial infarctions (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.95). These trends persisted during the entire follow-up period (hazard ratio for death, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.03 to 1.38; and hazard ratio for nonfatal myocardial infarction, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.96). After the intensive intervention was terminated, the median glycated hemoglobin level in the intensive-therapy group rose from 6.4% to 7.2%, and the use of glucose-lowering medications and rates of severe hypoglycemia and other adverse events were similar in the two groups. Conclusions As compared with standard therapy, the use of intensive therapy for 3.7 years to target a glycated hemoglobin level below 6% reduced 5-year nonfatal myocardial infarctions but increased 5-year mortality. Such a strategy cannot be recommended for high-risk patients with advanced type 2 diabetes. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00000620.)

Thiazide diuretics are known to raise total and LDL cholesterol. To assess whether chlorthalidone affected levels of putatively atherogenic small, dense LDL (LDL 3), we conducted a 12 week double blind randomized, placebo controlled clinical trial in 34 nonsmoking men aged 35 to 57 years with mild hypertension (DBP 90 to 104 mm Hg). Our a priori hypothesis that chlorthalidone raised LDL 3 levels was not confirmed. However, the fall in LDL 3 (P = .03) and total cholesterol (P = .08) associated with weight loss was attenuated by chlorthalidone. Since weight loss is commonly prescribed during the clinical management of hypertensives with concomitant hypercholesterolemia, consideration should be given to the attenuating effect of chlorthalidone on cholesterol reduction in the management of these patients.

We investigated whether combination therapy with a statin plus a fibrate, as compared with statin monotherapy, would reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus who were at high risk for cardiovascular disease.We randomly assigned 5518 patients with type 2 diabetes who were being treated with open-label simvastatin to receive either masked fenofibrate or placebo. The primary outcome was the first occurrence of nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or death from cardiovascular causes. The mean follow-up was 4.7 years.The annual rate of the primary outcome was 2.2% in the fenofibrate group and 2.4% in the placebo group (hazard ratio in the fenofibrate group, 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.79 to 1.08; P=0.32). There were also no significant differences between the two study groups with respect to any secondary outcome. Annual rates of death were 1.5% in the fenofibrate group and 1.6% in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.75 to 1.10; P=0.33). Prespecified subgroup analyses suggested heterogeneity in treatment effect according to sex, with a benefit for men and possible harm for women (P=0.01 for interaction), and a possible interaction according to lipid subgroup, with a possible benefit for patients with both a high baseline triglyceride level and a low baseline level of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (P=0.057 for interaction).The combination of fenofibrate and simvastatin did not reduce the rate of fatal cardiovascular events, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke, as compared with simvastatin alone. These results do not support the routine use of combination therapy with fenofibrate and simvastatin to reduce cardiovascular risk in the majority of high-risk patients with type 2 diabetes. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00000620.)