Literature DB >> 30115425

Comparison of Frequency of Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular and Safety Events With Systolic Blood Pressure <120mm Hg Versus 135-139mm Hg in a Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial Primary Prevention Subgroup.

Timothy B Plante1, Stephen P Juraschek2, Edgar R Miller3, Lawrence J Appel3, Mary Cushman4, Benjamin Littenberg5.   

Abstract

Whether the benefit of intensive blood pressure (BP) control reduces atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk without increasing risks of serious adverse events (SAEs) is unknown. We sought to assess differences in incident ASCVD and SAE with intensive BP control across the spectrum of 10-year ASCVD risk in the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT). SPRINT randomized 9,361 participants who were ≥50years old and ≥1 CVD risk factor to standard or intensive BP control (<120 or 130 to 139mm Hg). We excluded adults with clinical ASCVD or age ≥80. We included 6,875 participants. We compared hazard ratios (HR) and risk differences (RD) of incident ASCVD events or SAEs in all and across quartiles of baseline risk. Median predicted ASCVD risk was 15.9%. Intensive BP control significantly reduced ASCVD events (HR 0.75, 95% confidence interval 0.58, 0.97, p = 0.03; RD -0.94; -1.8, -0.1; p = 0.03). There was no difference in effect across quartiles of ASCVD risk. There was a non-significant increase in SAE with intensive BP control (HR 1.08, 1.00, 1.17 p = 0.06; RD 2.1, -0.1, 4.4, p = 0.03), and no difference in this effect across quartiles of risk. In SPRINT participants without baseline clinical ASCVD, the benefit of intensive BP control for primary prevention of ASCVD may extend to lower risk participants without an increase in SAE. In conclusion, lower risk adults with stage 1 hypertension meeting SPRINT eligibility may benefit from initiation of antihypertensives.
Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30115425      PMCID: PMC7309297          DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2018.06.041

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Cardiol        ISSN: 0002-9149            Impact factor:   2.778


  13 in total

1.  Validation of the atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease Pooled Cohort risk equations.

Authors:  Paul Muntner; Lisandro D Colantonio; Mary Cushman; David C Goff; George Howard; Virginia J Howard; Brett Kissela; Emily B Levitan; Donald M Lloyd-Jones; Monika M Safford
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2014-04-09       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  On the C-statistics for evaluating overall adequacy of risk prediction procedures with censored survival data.

Authors:  Hajime Uno; Tianxi Cai; Michael J Pencina; Ralph B D'Agostino; L J Wei
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2011-01-13       Impact factor: 2.373

3.  The Proposal to Lower P Value Thresholds to .005.

Authors:  John P A Ioannidis
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2018-04-10       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  Impact of Cardiovascular Risk on the Relative Benefit and Harm of Intensive Treatment of Hypertension.

Authors:  Robert A Phillips; Jiaqiong Xu; Leif E Peterson; Ryan M Arnold; Joseph A Diamond; Adam E Schussheim
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2018-03-07       Impact factor: 24.094

5.  2013 ACC/AHA guideline on the assessment of cardiovascular risk: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines.

Authors:  David C Goff; Donald M Lloyd-Jones; Glen Bennett; Sean Coady; Ralph B D'Agostino; Raymond Gibbons; Philip Greenland; Daniel T Lackland; Daniel Levy; Christopher J O'Donnell; Jennifer G Robinson; J Sanford Schwartz; Susan T Shero; Sidney C Smith; Paul Sorlie; Neil J Stone; Peter W F Wilson
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2013-11-12       Impact factor: 24.094

6.  Common carotid intima-media thickness measurements in cardiovascular risk prediction: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Hester M Den Ruijter; Sanne A E Peters; Todd J Anderson; Annie R Britton; Jacqueline M Dekker; Marinus J Eijkemans; Gunnar Engström; Gregory W Evans; Jacqueline de Graaf; Diederick E Grobbee; Bo Hedblad; Albert Hofman; Suzanne Holewijn; Ai Ikeda; Maryam Kavousi; Kazuo Kitagawa; Akihiko Kitamura; Hendrik Koffijberg; Eva M Lonn; Matthias W Lorenz; Ellisiv B Mathiesen; Giel Nijpels; Shuhei Okazaki; Daniel H O'Leary; Joseph F Polak; Jackie F Price; Christine Robertson; Christopher M Rembold; Maria Rosvall; Tatjana Rundek; Jukka T Salonen; Matthias Sitzer; Coen D A Stehouwer; Jacqueline C Witteman; Karel G Moons; Michiel L Bots
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2012-08-22       Impact factor: 56.272

Review 7.  Ankle brachial index combined with Framingham Risk Score to predict cardiovascular events and mortality: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  F G R Fowkes; G D Murray; I Butcher; C L Heald; R J Lee; L E Chambless; A R Folsom; A T Hirsch; M Dramaix; G deBacker; J-C Wautrecht; M Kornitzer; A B Newman; M Cushman; K Sutton-Tyrrell; F G R Fowkes; A J Lee; J F Price; R B d'Agostino; J M Murabito; P E Norman; K Jamrozik; J D Curb; K H Masaki; B L Rodríguez; J M Dekker; L M Bouter; R J Heine; G Nijpels; C D A Stehouwer; L Ferrucci; M M McDermott; H E Stoffers; J D Hooi; J A Knottnerus; M Ogren; B Hedblad; J C Witteman; M M B Breteler; M G M Hunink; A Hofman; M H Criqui; R D Langer; A Fronek; W R Hiatt; R Hamman; H E Resnick; J Guralnik; M M McDermott
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2008-07-09       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  A Randomized Trial of Intensive versus Standard Blood-Pressure Control.

Authors:  Jackson T Wright; Jeff D Williamson; Paul K Whelton; Joni K Snyder; Kaycee M Sink; Michael V Rocco; David M Reboussin; Mahboob Rahman; Suzanne Oparil; Cora E Lewis; Paul L Kimmel; Karen C Johnson; David C Goff; Lawrence J Fine; Jeffrey A Cutler; William C Cushman; Alfred K Cheung; Walter T Ambrosius
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2015-11-09       Impact factor: 91.245

9.  Blood pressure-lowering treatment based on cardiovascular risk: a meta-analysis of individual patient data.

Authors: 
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2014-08-16       Impact factor: 79.321

10.  Prognostic value, clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of high sensitivity C-reactive protein as a marker in primary prevention of major cardiac events.

Authors:  Petra Schnell-Inderst; Ruth Schwarzer; Alexander Göhler; Norma Grandi; Kristin Grabein; Björn Stollenwerk; Volker Klauß; Jürgen Wasem; Uwe Siebert
Journal:  GMS Health Technol Assess       Date:  2009-05-12
View more
  3 in total

1.  Comparison of Frequency of Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Events Among Primary and Secondary Prevention Subgroups of the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial.

Authors:  Timothy B Plante; Stephen P Juraschek; Neil A Zakai; Russell P Tracy; Mary Cushman
Journal:  Am J Cardiol       Date:  2019-09-06       Impact factor: 2.778

2.  Risk-Based Intensive Blood Pressure Lowering and Prevention of Heart Failure: A SPRINT Post Hoc Analysis.

Authors:  Rebecca J Molsberry; Leah Rethy; Michael C Wang; Rupal C Mehta; Donald M Lloyd-Jones; Hongyan Ning; Cora E Lewis; Clyde W Yancy; Sanjiv J Shah; Sadiya S Khan
Journal:  Hypertension       Date:  2021-11-01       Impact factor: 10.190

3.  2022 Guidelines of the Taiwan Society of Cardiology and the Taiwan Hypertension Society for the Management of Hypertension.

Authors:  Tzung-Dau Wang; Chern-En Chiang; Ting-Hsing Chao; Hao-Min Cheng; Yen-Wen Wu; Yih-Jer Wu; Yen-Hung Lin; Michael Yu-Chih Chen; Kwo-Chang Ueng; Wei-Ting Chang; Ying-Hsiang Lee; Yu-Chen Wang; Pao-Hsien Chu; Tzu-Fan Chao; Hsien-Li Kao; Charles Jia-Yin Hou; Tsung-Hsien Lin
Journal:  Acta Cardiol Sin       Date:  2022-05       Impact factor: 1.800

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.