Comorbidity of hypertension and diabetes: the fosinopril versus amlodipine cardiovascular events trial (FACET)

A network meta-analysis comparative the efficacy of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and calcium channel blockers in hypertension

BACKGROUND

Currently, most studies primarily focus on directly comparing the efficacy and safety of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and calcium channel blockers (CCBs), the two major classes of antihypertensive drugs. Moreover, the majority of studies are based on randomized controlled trials and traditional meta-analyses, with few exploring the efficacy and safety comparisons among various members of ACEIs and CCBs.

METHODS

ACEIs and CCB were searched for in randomized controlled trials in CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, China Biology Medicine Disc (Si-noMed), PubMed, EMbase, and Cochrane Library databases. The search can be conducted till November 2022. Stata software (version 16.0) and R 4.1.3 was used for statistical analysis and graphics plotting, applying mvmeta, gemtc, and its packages. Meta-regression analysis was used to explore the inconsistencies of the studies.

RESULTS

In 73 trials involving 33 different drugs, a total of 9176 hypertensive patients were included in the analysis, with 4623 in the intervention group and 4553 in the control group. The results of the analysis showed that, according to the SUCRA ranking, felodipine (MD = -12.34, 95% CI: -17.8 to -6.82) was the drug most likely to be the best intervention for systolic blood pressure, while nitrendipine (MD = -8.01, 95% CI: -11.71 to -4.18) was the drug most likely to be the best intervention for diastolic blood pressure. Regarding adverse drug reactions, nifedipine (OR = 0.32, 95% CI: 0.14-0.74) was the drug most likely to be the safest.

CONCLUSION

The research findings indicate that nifedipine is the optimal intervention for reducing systolic blood pressure in hypertensive patients, nitrendipine is the optimal intervention for reducing diastolic blood pressure in hypertensive patients, and felodipine is the optimal intervention for safety.

Integration of care for hypertension and diabetes: a scoping review assessing the evidence from systematic reviews and evaluating reporting

Background

With the rise in pre-mature mortality rate from non-communicable disease (NCD), there is a need for evidence-based interventions. We evaluated existing systematic reviews on effectiveness of integration of healthcare services, in particular with focus on delivery of care designed to improve health and process outcomes in people with multi-morbidity, where at least one of the conditions was diabetes or hypertension.

Methods

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Health Evidence to November 8, 2016 and consulted experts. One review author screened titles, abstracts and two review authors independently screened short listed full-texts and selected reviews for inclusion. We considered systematic reviews evaluating integration of care, compared to usual care, for people with multi-morbidity. One review author extracted data and another author verified it. Two review authors independently evaluated risk of bias using ROBIS and AMSTAR. Inter-rater reliability was analysed for ROBIS and AMSTAR using Cohen’s kappa and percent agreement. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist was used to assess reporting.

Results

We identified five systematic reviews on integration of care. Four reviews focused on comorbid diabetes and depression and two covered hypertension and comorbidities of cardiovascular disease, depression, or diabetes. Interventions were poorly described. The health outcomes evaluated included risk of all-cause mortality, measures of depression, cholesterol levels, HbA1c levels, effect of depression on HbA1c levels, symptom improvement, systolic blood pressure, and hypertension control. Process outcomes included access and utilisation of healthcare services, costs, and quality of care. Overall, three reviews had a low and medium risk of bias according to ROBIS and AMSTAR respectively, while two reviews had high risk of bias as judged by both ROBIS and AMSTAR. Findings have demonstrated that collaborative care in general resulted in better health and process outcomes when compared to usual care for both depression and diabetes and hypertension and diabetes.

Conclusions

Several knowledge gaps were identified on integration of care for comorbidities with diabetes and/or hypertension: limited research on this topic for hypertension, limited reviews that included primary studies based in low-middle income countries, and limited reviews on collaborative care for communicable and NCDs.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-018-3290-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Principal component analysis characterizes shared pathogenetics from genome-wide association studies

Genome-wide association studies (GWASs) have recently revealed many genetic associations that are shared between different diseases. We propose a method, disPCA, for genome-wide characterization of shared and distinct risk factors between and within disease classes. It flips the conventional GWAS paradigm by analyzing the diseases themselves, across GWAS datasets, to explore their "shared pathogenetics". The method applies principal component analysis (PCA) to gene-level significance scores across all genes and across GWASs, thereby revealing shared pathogenetics between diseases in an unsupervised fashion. Importantly, it adjusts for potential sources of heterogeneity present between GWAS which can confound investigation of shared disease etiology. We applied disPCA to 31 GWASs, including autoimmune diseases, cancers, psychiatric disorders, and neurological disorders. The leading principal components separate these disease classes, as well as inflammatory bowel diseases from other autoimmune diseases. Generally, distinct diseases from the same class tend to be less separated, which is in line with their increased shared etiology. Enrichment analysis of genes contributing to leading principal components revealed pathways that are implicated in the immune system, while also pointing to pathways that have yet to be explored before in this context. Our results point to the potential of disPCA in going beyond epidemiological findings of the co-occurrence of distinct diseases, to highlighting novel genes and pathways that unsupervised learning suggest to be key players in the variability across diseases.

Amlodipine and cardiovascular outcomes in hypertensive patients: meta-analysis comparing amlodipine-based versus other antihypertensive therapy

BACKGROUND/AIMS

This meta-analysis compared the effects of amlodipine besylate, a charged dihydropyridine-type calcium channel blocker (CCB), with other non-CCB antihypertensive therapies regarding the cardiovascular outcome.

METHODS

Data from seven long-term outcome trials comparing the cardiovascular outcomes of an amlodipine-based regimen with other active regimens were pooled and analyzed.

RESULTS

The risk of myocardial infarction was significantly decreased with an amlodipine-based regimen compared with a non-CCB-based regimen (odds ratio [OR], 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.84 to 0.99; p = 0.03). The risk of stroke was also significantly decreased (OR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.79 to 0.90; p < 0.00001). The risk of heart failure increased slightly with marginal significance for an amlodipine-based regimen compared with a non-CCB-based regimen (OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.98 to 1.31; p = 0.08). However, when compared overall with β-blockers and diuretics, amlodipine showed a comparable risk. Amlodipine-based regimens demonstrated a 10% risk reduction in overall cardiovascular events (OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.82 to 0.99; p = 0.02) and total mortality (OR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.91 to 0.99; p = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Amlodipine reduced the risk of total cardiovascular events as well as all-cause mortality compared with non-CCB-based regimens, indicating its benefit for high-risk cardiac patients.

Hypertension management in the high cardiovascular risk population

The incidence of hypertension is increasing every year. Blood pressure (BP) control is an important therapeutic goal for the slowing of progression as well as for the prevention of Cardiovascular disease. The management of hypertension in the high cardiovascular risk population remains a real challenge as the population continues to age, the incidence of diabetes increases, and more and more people survive acute myocardial infarction. We will review hypertension management in the high cardiovascular risk population: patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) and heart failure (HF) as well as in diabetic patients.

Calcium antagonists in patients with type 2 diabetes and hypertension

Hypertension is twice as common in patients with diabetes compared to those without diabetes. It accounts for up to 75% of cardiovascular disease risk leading to the substantial increase in morbidity and mortality. Control of blood pressure in people with diabetes has been shown in randomized controlled trials to decrease cardiovascular risk and improve outcome especially in preventing stroke. A target blood pressure goal of <130/80 mm Hg is currently recommended for patients with diabetes. However, less than 1/3 of these patients achieve such a goal. This is in part due to the inherent difficulty in controlling blood pressure in these patients where hypertension is usually associated with increased salt sensitivity, volume expansion and isolated systolic hypertension. Therefore, patients with diabetes usually require multiple medications for optimal blood pressure control. Calcium channel antagonists have been shown in large clinical trials to be both safe and effective in controlling blood pressure in diabetic patients and will continue to play a major role in the management of hypertension in this population, particularly in the combination therapy that these patients usually require.

The role of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor antagonists in the management of diabetic complications

Evidence suggests that ACE inhibitors can be advantageous for prevention and halting progression of both micro- and macrovascular complications in patients with diabetes mellitus. ACE inhibitors are useful antihypertensive agents in both type 1 and type 2 diabetes; however, ACE inhibitor therapy often needs to be supplemented with calcium channel antagonists, beta-blockers or diuretics to achieve good blood pressure control. ACE inhibitors are also indicated in non-hypertensive patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes who have micro- or macroalbuminuria. The effect of ACE inhibitors in halting the development and progression of retinopathy and, potentially, neuropathy needs further proof in large-scale studies. More recently, angiotensin II receptor antagonists are emerging as drugs with the potential to be successfully included in the management of diabetic complications, especially when ACE inhibitors are not suitable because of adverse effects.

Cardiovascular risk factors in diabetic patients with hypertension

Individuals with diabetes mellitus have cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality comparable to nondiabetics who have suffered a myocardial infarction or stroke. Aggressive management of risk factors such as hypertension, dyslipidemia, and platelet dysfunction in persons with diabetes has been shown to reduce morbidity and mortality in prospective randomized controlled clinical trials. Accordingly, there are national mandates to lower blood pressure to less than 130/85 mm Hg, reduce low-density lipoprotein cholesterol to less than 100 mg/dL, and institute aspirin therapy in adult patients with diabetes. Although not definitively shown to reduce CVD, there are also recommendations to control the level of glycemia, as well. This article discusses CVD risk factors in the diabetic patient with hypertension.

Role of ACE inhibitors in treating hypertensive diabetic patients

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a major determining factor of morbidity and mortality in type 2 diabetic patients. Hypertension, which accompanies diabetes in more than 70% of cases, contributes to increased prevalence of CVD events in this group of patients. Results from the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) indicated that reduction of elevated blood pressure might decrease CVD morbidity and mortality more than reduction of hyperglycemia. Activation of circulating and tissue renin-angiotensin system (RAS) contributes to the development of both hypertension and insulin resistance in patients with the cardiometabolic syndrome. Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor therapy in patients with the cardiometabolic syndrome may improve insulin action as well as lessen CVD. In clinical trials, ACE inhibitors have been shown to be more efficient than other antihypertensive medications (i.e., calcium channel blockers) in the reduction of CVD morbidity and mortality in hypertensive diabetics. In this article, we summarize possible mechanisms by which ACE inhibition may improve insulin resistance, coagulation/clotting, and vascular function abnormalities, and postpone or even prevent the development of type 2 diabetes in hypertensive patients.

Hypertension in special populations

This article discusses various aspects of hypertension in selected special populations. The groups discussed herein are children, pregnant women, African Americans, persons with kidney insufficiency, kidney transplant survivors, and persons with diabetes mellitus. These groups present unique epidemiological, diagnostic and therapeutic challenges for the practitioner. The detection of reduced kidney function merits special attention since it attenuates the blood pressure response to antihypertensive therapy, affects therapeutic decision-making, is both a cause and consequence of poorly controlled hypertension, often lurks undetected, and is excessively prevalent in some special populations.

The use of ACE inhibitors on diabetic patients without renal disease

Strategies that interrupt the renin-angiotensin system, especially with angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibition, reduce cardiovascular disease mortality and morbidity in high-risk persons such as those with the insulin resistance syndrome and diabetes mellitus. In the 1980s emphasis was placed on the renal protective effects of ACE inhibitors in patients with diabetes and proteinuria. During the past several years controlled clinical trials have demonstrated that ACE inhibition reduces cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality and morbidity. This is especially important in patients in the United States, where 80% of excess mortality for diabetes mellitus is attributed to CVD. This article reviews the clinical trials in high-risk patients, especially those with diabetes, that shown beneficial CVD risk reduction with ACE inhibitors.

Blood pressure reduction in the morning yields beneficial effects on progression of chronic renal insufficiency with regression of left ventricular hypertrophy

Self-monitoring values of blood pressure may better reflect the average long-term blood pressure value than sporadic measurements in the physician's office and be more useful for blood pressure control. In the present study, we compared the results of self-monitoring of blood pressure values, especially in the morning, with office blood pressure, and related these to progression of chronic renal insufficiency and left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH). Thirty-four patients were selected from 316 subjects with chronic renal insufficiency (average serum creatinine 1.72 +/- 0.15 mg/dl, mean age 52.6 +/- 3.5 yrs) in accordance with the following criteria (1) office blood pressure was less than 140/90 mmHg, (2) blood pressure was controlled with amlodipine (5-20 mg/day) combined with benazepril (2.5 mg/day), (3) morning blood pressure was greater than 150/90 mmHg at 6-9 AM and (4) LVH had been determined by echocardiography (posterior wall thickness; PWT > or = 12 mm). The patients were assigned to 2 groups at random and were given: (1) guanabenz (GB; 2-8 mg at I I PM, n = 17) or (2) placebo (n = 17). Two years later, the average blood pressure of both groups as measured in the office was not significantly different: however, BP in the morning was significantly reduced from 158 +/- 6 to 134 +/- 4 mmHg in GB treated group (P< 0.001). In 14 of 17 patients in GB treated group, LVH resolved and there was only mild progression of nephropathy (serum creatinine: 1.69 +/- 0.18 to 1.81 +/- 0.19 mg/dl). In 12 of 14 patients in placebo group, whose morning blood pressure remained at greater than 150/90 mmHg, LVH was retained and there was moderate progression of nephropathy (serum creatinine: 1.73 +/- 0.14 to 2.62 +/- 0.50mg/dl). From these results, it is suggested that antihypertensive treatment with combination therapy based on self-monitoring BP is cardio-renoprotective in patients with chronic renal insufficiency and LVH.

Beyond the usual strategies for blood pressure reduction: therapeutic considerations and combination therapies

Rapidly accumulating clinical data have repeatedly demonstrated not only the critical importance of even small increases in blood pressure as a pathophysiologic factor in the development of cardiovascular disease, particularly in individuals with diabetes mellitus, but also the therapeutic necessity of more aggressive blood pressure reduction and the achievement of progressively lower blood pressure targets in reducing cardiovascular event rates. JNC VI has defined optimal blood pressure as <or=120/80 mm Hg, and Stage 1 hypertension as >or=140/80 mm Hg. Target blood pressures are now <or=130/80 mm Hg in patients with diabetes and <125/75 mm Hg for patients with hypertensive renal disease with proteinuria of >1 gm/24 hours. Achieving such target pressures is increasingly difficult, particularly in diabetic patients with chronic renal disease, who require complex multidrug antihypertensive regimens. This review attempts to provide some suggestions for constructing such antihypertensive regimens, and provides considerations for the appropriate use of diuretics and the most effective drug combinations. Factors potentially contributing to drug resistant hypertension include such problems as failure to maximize drug dosing, suboptimal diuretic use, noncompliance, and possible confounding effects of such concomitant medications as nonsteroidal and anti-inflammatory drugs or decongestants. The issues underlying drug-resistant hypertension are listed, together with strategies for overcoming this problem.

Vascular complications in diabetes and their prevention

Diabetes mellitus is increasing throughout the world. Cardiovascular disease (CVD) accounts for up to 80% of excess mortality in this high-risk population. Patients with diabetes have the same CVD risk factors as those people without diabetes. However, these risk factors are much more powerful in diabetic patients. CVD risk is especially high for diabetic women, and premenopausal diabetic women lose all the protection normally afforded to them by female sex hormones. Controlled clinical trials have clearly demonstrated that rigorous treatment of blood pressure, dyslipidemia and platelet hyperaggrebility strikingly reduces CVD risk in diabetic patients. Strategies directed at interrupting the renin-angiotensin system (both tissue and systemic systems) and the use of 3-hydroxy-3-methyl-glutaryl coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitors have proven to be especially beneficial for this high-risk population.

Diabetes mellitus and diabetes-associated vascular disease

Diabetes-related cardiovascular disease remains the leading cause of death in patients with type 2 diabetes. Hypertension is common among diabetics and has the same pathogenetic mechanisms as insulin resistance, in which the activated renin-angiotensin system contributes to the emerging high blood pressure and hyperglycemia. Hyperglycemia is one of the triggering factors for vascular dysfunction and clotting abnormalities and, therefore, for accelerated atherosclerosis in diabetes. Glycated hemoglobin levels, as a reflection of the degree of glycemia, are strongly associated with the risk of cardiovascular disease in diabetics and in the general population. Tight glycemic control, the treatment of dyslipidemia and raised blood pressure, in addition to the use of antiplatelet therapy, all powerfully reduce the risks associated with diabetes. Furthermore, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors might offer additional cardioprotection to diabetics above that provided by blood pressure reduction.

Are calcium antagonists effective in preventing complications of hypertension and progression of renal disease?

Long-acting calcium antagonists have been shown to be safe and effective in lowering blood pressure, both as first-line agents and in combination with other classes of antihypertensive drug. They have also been shown to reduce the incidence of cerebrovascular and cardiovascular events in elderly patients with predominantly systolic hypertension. It is clear that reduced morbidity and mortality in hypertension is related to the degree to which blood pressure is reduced, regardless of the therapy used. This is the single most important conclusion of all recent trials, especially in the sub-group of hypertensive patients with diabetes. The World Health Organization-International Society of Hypertension guidelines acknowledge this and do not make specific recommendations as to initial therapy in the absence of other medical factors. However the use of thiazide diuretics and beta-blockers has strong support from large placebo-controlled trials in patients with mild-moderate essential hypertension. The British Hypertension Society and JNC VI guidelines restrict their recommendations for the use of calcium antagonists to isolated systolic hypertension and angina, or when other agents have failed, are contraindicated or are not tolerated. However, their efficacy in lowering blood pressure, their tolerability and potentially beneficial secondary effect on proteinuria, especially in combination with an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, still make them attractive antihypertensive agents. The results of further long-term outcome trials that make direct comparisons between calcium antagonists and other classes of antihypertensive drug are still awaited. Unlike angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, the antiproteinuric effect of calcium antagonists, even that of the non-dihydropyridine type, seems to depend on an adequate and stable reduction in blood pressure.

Oxidation of low-density lipoprotein in normotensive type 2 diabetic patients. Comparative effects of enalapril versus nifedipine: a randomized cross-over over study

The role of lipoprotein oxidation in promoting atherosclerosis is gaining recognition as its spectrum of effects is being unveiled. Accelerated atherosclerosis is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in diabetic patients. Treatment with ACE inhibitors reduces oxidation of low-density lipoprotein (LDL-ox) in hypertensive subjects, however, their effect on LDL-ox in diabetic patients is yet obscure. To evaluate the effect of the ACE inhibitor enalapril and the calcium channel blocker nifedipine on LDL oxidation in normotensive type 2 diabetic patients. A randomized single blinded cross-over study was conducted on 24 nonobese, metabolically stable, normotensive patients with type 2 diabetes who were randomly allocated to receive either enalapril, 10 mg/day, or nifedipine, 30 mg/day, for 4 weeks followed by a 2-week washout period. They were then crossed over to a 4-week course with the alternate drug. The oxidation of LDL was evaluated by three methods: dialdehyde analysis using the thiobarbituric acid reactive substances assay with and without the addition of CuSO(4) as well as determination of conjugated dienes in the LDL lipid extract. The propensity of the serum to oxidize LDL was reduced by enalapril by 17-28% depending on the laboratory method used (P=0.0001). Treatment with nifedipine resulted in a rise in LDL-ox of 7-11% as compared to baseline (P<0.05). The difference between the effects of enalapril and nifedipine was statistically significant with all three laboratory methods used (P=0.0001). Both drugs were equally effective in reducing systolic and diastolic blood pressure without affecting HbA(1c) levels and lipid profile. The albumin excretion rate was significantly reduced during treatment with enalapril returning to baseline levels during the washout period and the nifedipine treatment course. Our findings suggest that oxidation of LDL is attenuated by ACE inhibition and augmented by some calcium channel blockers. This observation may contribute insight into the underlying mechanism of the therapeutic effects of ACE inhibition in diabetic patients.

The diabetic patient as paradigm for selective antihypertensive therapy

General recommendations from US and international organizations indicate that an ideal approach to the therapy of hypertension should begin with lifestyle modifications, such as decreased salt and fat intake and a careful aerobic exercise program, with the therapeutic goal of a blood pressure (BP) < 140/90 mm Hg. The most recent guidelines recommend more rigorous targets for BP lowering in high-risk populations, such as those with hypertension and concomitant diabetes and/or renal disease with proteinuria. This chapter addresses hypertension in patients with diabetes as an example of a group at especially high risk. It reviews recent clinical trials that support more rigorous BP goals in such patients to reduce cardiovascular morbidity and mortality and considers the importance of combination therapy in achieving these goals.

Management of patients with hypertension and diabetes mellitus: advances in the evidence for intensive treatment

Diabetes mellitus is common in patients with hypertension, and greatly increases the risk of cardiovascular disease, including myocardial infarction, stroke, and peripheral vascular disease. "The pharmacologic therapy of patients with hypertension and diabetes has been surrounded by controversy because of concerns about the metabolic effects of several antihypertensive agents, as well as concerns about the safety of calcium antagonists. The objective of this review is to re-evaluate the management of diabetic patients with hypertension in light of the latest clinical trials. We also review the importance of intensive blood pressure control in these patients.