Adam P Bress1,2, Jordan B King3, Kathryn E Kreider4, Srinivasan Beddhu5, Debra L Simmons2,6, Alfred K Cheung5, Yingying Zhang7, Michael Doumas8, John Nord9, Mary Ellen Sweeney10, Addison A Taylor11, Charles Herring12, William J Kostis13, James Powell14, Anjay Rastogi15, Christianne L Roumie16, Alan Wiggers17, Jonathan S Williams18, Reem Yunis19, Athena Zias20,21, Greg W Evans22, Tom Greene7,7, Michael V Rocco23, William C Cushman24, David M Reboussin22, Mark N Feinglos25, Vasilios Papademetriou8. 1. Division of Health System Innovation and Research, Department of Population Health Sciences, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT adam.bress@hsc.utah.edu. 2. VA Salt Lake City Health Care System, Salt Lake City, UT. 3. Department of Pharmacy, Kaiser Permanente Colorado, Aurora, CO. 4. Duke University School of Nursing, Durham, NC. 5. Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT. 6. Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT. 7. Division of Epidemiology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT. 8. Washington Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Washington, DC. 9. Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT. 10. Division of Endocrinology, Metabolism and Lipids, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA. 11. Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center and Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX. 12. Department of Pharmacy Practice, Campbell University, Buies Creek, NC. 13. Division of Cardiovascular Disease and Hypertension, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ. 14. Division of General Internal Medicine, Brody School of Medicine, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC. 15. Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA. 16. VA Tennessee Valley Healthcare System Geriatrics Research Education Clinical Center, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN. 17. Department of Medicine, CWRU School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH. 18. Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes, and Hypertension, Brigham and Women's Hospital, and Harvard Medical School, and VA Boston Healthcare Systems, Boston, MA. 19. Department of Medicine, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA. 20. Northport VA Medical Center, Northport, NY. 21. Stony Brook University School of Medicine, Stony Brook, NY. 22. Department of Biostatistical Sciences, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC. 23. Department of Internal Medicine, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC. 24. Preventive Medicine Section, Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Memphis, TN. 25. Department of Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the effects of intensive (<120 mmHg) compared with standard (<140 mmHg) systolic blood pressure (SBP) treatment are different among those with prediabetes versus those with fasting normoglycemia at baseline in the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis of SPRINT. SPRINT participants were categorized by prediabetes status, defined as baseline fasting serum glucose ≥100 mg/dL versus those with normoglycemia (fasting serum glucose <100 mg/dL). The primary outcome was a composite of myocardial infarction, acute coronary syndrome not resulting in myocardial infarction, stroke, acute decompensated heart failure, or death from cardiovascular causes. Cox regression was used to calculate hazard ratios for study outcomes with intensive compared with standard SBP treatment among those with prediabetes and normoglycemia. RESULTS: Among 9,361 participants randomized (age 67.9 ± 9.4 years; 35.5% female), 3,898 and 5,425 had baseline prediabetes and normoglycemia, respectively. After a median follow-up of 3.26 years, the hazard ratio for the primary outcome was 0.69 (95% CI 0.53, 0.89) and 0.83 (95% CI 0.66, 1.03) among those with prediabetes and normoglycemia, respectively (P value for interaction 0.30). For all-cause mortality, the hazard ratio with intensive SBP treatment was 0.77 (95% CI 0.55, 1.06) for prediabetes and 0.71 (95% CI 0.54, 0.94) for normoglycemia (P value for interaction 0.74). Effects of intensive versus standard SBP treatment on prespecified renal outcomes and serious adverse events were similar for prediabetes and normoglycemia (all interaction P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In SPRINT, the beneficial effects of intensive SBP treatment were similar among those with prediabetes and fasting normoglycemia.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the effects of intensive (<120 mmHg) compared with standard (<140 mmHg) systolic blood pressure (SBP) treatment are different among those with prediabetes versus those with fasting normoglycemia at baseline in the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis of SPRINT. SPRINT participants were categorized by prediabetes status, defined as baseline fasting serum glucose ≥100 mg/dL versus those with normoglycemia (fasting serum glucose <100 mg/dL). The primary outcome was a composite of myocardial infarction, acute coronary syndrome not resulting in myocardial infarction, stroke, acute decompensated heart failure, or death from cardiovascular causes. Cox regression was used to calculate hazard ratios for study outcomes with intensive compared with standard SBP treatment among those with prediabetes and normoglycemia. RESULTS: Among 9,361 participants randomized (age 67.9 ± 9.4 years; 35.5% female), 3,898 and 5,425 had baseline prediabetes and normoglycemia, respectively. After a median follow-up of 3.26 years, the hazard ratio for the primary outcome was 0.69 (95% CI 0.53, 0.89) and 0.83 (95% CI 0.66, 1.03) among those with prediabetes and normoglycemia, respectively (P value for interaction 0.30). For all-cause mortality, the hazard ratio with intensive SBP treatment was 0.77 (95% CI 0.55, 1.06) for prediabetes and 0.71 (95% CI 0.54, 0.94) for normoglycemia (P value for interaction 0.74). Effects of intensive versus standard SBP treatment on prespecified renal outcomes and serious adverse events were similar for prediabetes and normoglycemia (all interaction P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In SPRINT, the beneficial effects of intensive SBP treatment were similar among those with prediabetes and fasting normoglycemia.
Authors: Adam P Bress; Holly Kramer; Rasha Khatib; Srinivasan Beddhu; Alfred K Cheung; Rachel Hess; Vinod K Bansal; Guichan Cao; Jerry Yee; Andrew E Moran; Ramon Durazo-Arvizu; Paul Muntner; Richard S Cooper Journal: Circulation Date: 2017-02-13 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Walter T Ambrosius; Kaycee M Sink; Capri G Foy; Dan R Berlowitz; Alfred K Cheung; William C Cushman; Lawrence J Fine; David C Goff; Karen C Johnson; Anthony A Killeen; Cora E Lewis; Suzanne Oparil; David M Reboussin; Michael V Rocco; Joni K Snyder; Jeff D Williamson; Jackson T Wright; Paul K Whelton Journal: Clin Trials Date: 2014-06-05 Impact factor: 2.486
Authors: Dena Ettehad; Connor A Emdin; Amit Kiran; Simon G Anderson; Thomas Callender; Jonathan Emberson; John Chalmers; Anthony Rodgers; Kazem Rahimi Journal: Lancet Date: 2015-12-24 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: William C Cushman; Gregory W Evans; Robert P Byington; David C Goff; Richard H Grimm; Jeffrey A Cutler; Denise G Simons-Morton; Jan N Basile; Marshall A Corson; Jeffrey L Probstfield; Lois Katz; Kevin A Peterson; William T Friedewald; John B Buse; J Thomas Bigger; Hertzel C Gerstein; Faramarz Ismail-Beigi Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2010-03-14 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Ralph B D'Agostino; Ramachandran S Vasan; Michael J Pencina; Philip A Wolf; Mark Cobain; Joseph M Massaro; William B Kannel Journal: Circulation Date: 2008-01-22 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Xinfang Xie; Emily Atkins; Jicheng Lv; Alexander Bennett; Bruce Neal; Toshiharu Ninomiya; Mark Woodward; Stephen MacMahon; Fiona Turnbull; Graham S Hillis; John Chalmers; Jonathan Mant; Abdul Salam; Kazem Rahimi; Vlado Perkovic; Anthony Rodgers Journal: Lancet Date: 2015-11-07 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Karen L Margolis; Patrick J O'Connor; Timothy M Morgan; John B Buse; Robert M Cohen; William C Cushman; Jeffrey A Cutler; Gregory W Evans; Hertzel C Gerstein; Richard H Grimm; Edward W Lipkin; K M Venkat Narayan; Matthew C Riddle; Ajay Sood; David C Goff Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2014-03-04 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Naveen Rathi; Paul K Whelton; Glenn M Chertow; William C Cushman; Alfred K Cheung; Guo Wei; Robert Boucher; Paul L Kimmel; Adam P Bress; Holly J Kramer; Catreena Al-Marji; Tom Greene; Srinivasan Beddhu Journal: Am J Hypertens Date: 2019-11-15 Impact factor: 2.689
Authors: Catherine G Derington; Jordan B King; Kelsey B Bryant; Blake T McGee; Andrew E Moran; William S Weintraub; Brandon K Bellows; Adam P Bress Journal: Curr Hypertens Rep Date: 2019-11-07 Impact factor: 5.369
Authors: Daniel T Lackland; Robert M Carey; Adriana B Conforto; Clive Rosendorff; Paul K Whelton; Philip B Gorelick Journal: Stroke Date: 2018-02-21 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Demetria Hubbard; Lisandro D Colantonio; Rikki M Tanner; April P Carson; Swati Sakhuja; Byron C Jaeger; Robert M Carey; Laura P Cohen; Daichi Shimbo; Mark Butler; Alain G Bertoni; Aisha T Langford; John N Booth; Jolaade Kalinowski; Paul Muntner Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2019-10-07 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Jackson T Wright; Paul K Whelton; Karen C Johnson; Joni K Snyder; David M Reboussin; William C Cushman; Jeff D Williamson; Nicholas M Pajewski; Alfred K Cheung; Cora E Lewis; Suzanne Oparil; Michael V Rocco; Srinivasan Beddhu; Lawrence J Fine; Jeffrey A Cutler; Walter T Ambrosius; Mahboob Rahman; Carolyn H Still; Zhengyi Chen; Curtis Tatsuoka Journal: Hypertension Date: 2021-11-10 Impact factor: 10.190
Authors: Faisal Rahman; John W McEvoy; Toshiaki Ohkuma; Michel Marre; Pavel Hamet; Stephen Harrap; Giuseppe Mancia; Anthony Rodgers; Elizabeth Selvin; Bryan Williams; Paul Muntner; John Chalmers; Mark Woodward Journal: Hypertension Date: 2019-06 Impact factor: 10.190
Authors: Yan Gong; Steven M Smith; Eileen M Handberg; Carl J Pepine; Rhonda M Cooper-DeHoff Journal: J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich) Date: 2018-03-13 Impact factor: 3.738