Comparison of antihypertensive treatments in preventing cardiovascular events in elderly diabetic patients: results from the Swedish Trial in Old Patients with Hypertension-2. STOP Hypertension-2 Study Group

Guideline for the Management of Diabetes Mellitus in the Elderly in China (2024 Edition)

With the deepening of aging in China, the prevalence of diabetes in older people has increased noticeably, and standardized diabetes management is critical for improving clinical outcomes of diabetes in older people. In 2021, the National Center of Gerontology, Chinese Society of Geriatrics, and Diabetes Professional Committee of Chinese Aging Well Association organized experts to write the first guideline for diabetes diagnosis and treatment in older people in China, the Guideline for the Management of Diabetes Mellitus in the Elderly in China (2021 Edition). The guideline emphasizes that older patients with diabetes are a highly heterogeneous group requiring comprehensive assessment and stratified and individualized management strategies. The guideline proposes simple treatments and de-intensified treatment strategies for older patients with diabetes. This edition of the guideline provides clinicians with practical and operable clinical guidance, thus greatly contributing to the comprehensive and full-cycle standardized management of older patients with diabetes in China and promoting the extensive development of clinical and basic research on diabetes in older people and related fields. In the past 3 years, evidence-based medicine for older patients with diabetes and related fields has further advanced, and new treatment concepts, drugs, and technologies have been developed. The guideline editorial committee promptly updated the first edition of the guideline and compiled the Guideline for the Management of Diabetes Mellitus in the Elderly in China (2024 Edition). More precise management paths for older patients with diabetes are proposed, for achieving continued standardization of the management of older Chinese patients with diabetes and improving their clinical outcomes.

Management of hypertension and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system blockade in adults with diabetic kidney disease: Association of British Clinical Diabetologists and the Renal Association UK guideline update 2021

People with type 1 and type 2 diabetes are at risk of developing progressive chronic kidney disease (CKD) and end-stage kidney failure. Hypertension is a major, reversible risk factor in people with diabetes for development of albuminuria, impaired kidney function, end-stage kidney disease and cardiovascular disease. Blood pressure control has been shown to be beneficial in people with diabetes in slowing progression of kidney disease and reducing cardiovascular events. However, randomised controlled trial evidence differs in type 1 and type 2 diabetes and different stages of CKD in terms of target blood pressure. Activation of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) is an important mechanism for the development and progression of CKD and cardiovascular disease. Randomised trials demonstrate that RAAS blockade is effective in preventing/ slowing progression of CKD and reducing cardiovascular events in people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes, albeit differently according to the stage of CKD. Emerging therapy with sodium glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors, non-steroidal selective mineralocorticoid antagonists and endothelin-A receptor antagonists have been shown in randomised trials to lower blood pressure and further reduce the risk of progression of CKD and cardiovascular disease in people with type 2 diabetes. This guideline reviews the current evidence and makes recommendations about blood pressure control and the use of RAAS-blocking agents in different stages of CKD in people with both type 1 and type 2 diabetes.

Blood pressure targets for hypertension in patients with type 2 diabetes

BACKGROUND

Clinical guidelines vary in determining optimal blood pressure targets in adults with diabetes mellitus.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and clinicaltrials.gov in March 2018; conducted random effects frequentist meta-analyses of direct aggregate data; and appraised the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology.

RESULTS

From eligible 14 meta-analyses and 95 publications of randomized controlled trials (RCT), only 6 RCTs directly compared lower versus higher blood pressure targets; remaining RCTs aimed at comparative effectiveness of hypotensive drugs. In adults with diabetes mellitus and elevated systolic blood pressure (SBP), direct evidence (2 RCTs) suggests that intensive target SBP <120-140 mmHg decreases the risk of diabetes-related mortality [relative risk (RR) =0.68; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.50-0.92], fatal (RR =0.41; 95% CI, 0.20-0.84) or nonfatal stroke (RR =0.60; 95% CI, 0.43-0.83), prevalence of left ventricular hypertrophy and electrocardiogram (ECG) abnormalities, macroalbuminuria, and non-spine bone fractures, with no differences in all-cause or cardiovascular mortality or falls. In adults with diabetes mellitus and elevated diastolic blood pressure (DBP) ≥90 mmHg, direct evidence (2 RCTs) suggests that intensive DBP target ≤80 versus 80-90 mmHg decreases the risk of major cardiovascular events. Published meta-analyses of aggregate data suggested a significant association between lower baseline and attained blood pressure and increased cardiovascular mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

We concluded that in adults with diabetes mellitus and arterial hypertension, in order to reduce the risk of stroke, clinicians should target blood pressure at 120-130/80 mmHg, with close monitoring for all drug-related harms.

Type 2 Diabetes and Thiazide Diuretics

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In patients with prediabetes or type 2 diabetes, the use of thiazides as antihypertensive agents has been challenged because associated metabolic adverse events, including new-onset diabetes.

RECENT FINDINGS

These metabolic disturbances are less marked with low-dose thiazides and, in most but not all studies, with thiazide-like diuretics (chlorthalidone, indapamide) than with thiazide-type diuretics (hydrochlorothiazide). In post hoc analyses of subgroups of patients with hypertension and type 2 diabetes, thiazides resulted in a significant reduction in cardiovascular events, all-cause mortality, and hospitalization for heart failure compared to placebo and generally were shown to be non-inferior to other antihypertensive agents. Benefits attributed to thiazide diuretics in terms of cardiovascular event reduction outweigh the risk of worsening glucose control in type 2 diabetes and of new-onset diabetes in non-diabetic patients. Thiazides still play a key role in the management of patients with type 2 diabetes and hypertension.

The new angiotensin II receptor blocker Edarbi® as part of the pathogenetic treatment of arterial hypertension in patients with metabolic disorders

Relevance. Recently, the proportion of angiotensin receptor blockers has significantly increased among prescribed antihypertensive drugs. High organoprotective properties, additional metabolic effects and tolerability comparable to placebo make them the drugs of choice, especially in patients with stage 1 and stage 2 hypertension having low adherence to antihypertensive therapy, but already burdened by additional metabolic risk factors. Purpose of the study - study of the antihypertensive efficacy of the angiotensin receptor blocker azilsartan medoxomil (Edarbi®), its effect on cardiometabolic risk factors and damage of target organs in patients with stage 2 hypertension. Materials and methods. The study included 32 patients (mean age 47.32±8.4 years), 19 men and 13 women with stage 2 hypertension. All patients were evaluated for clinical blood pressure (BP), total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglyceride, creatinine, glucose level in a carbohydrate tolerance test, 24-hour blood pressure monitoring, central aortic systolic pressure, сarotid-femoral pulse wave velocity and intima-media thickness was determined initially and after 6 months of therapy. Results. During taking Edarbi® 82% of patients with stage 1 and stage 2 hypertension and metabolic syndrome reached the target level of BP, which was accompanied by a significant improvement in diastolic function of the left ventricle in 56% of patients. Already in the first 6 months the treatment reduced arterial stiffness and improved metabolic control

Effects of blood-pressure-lowering treatment on outcome incidence in hypertension: 10 - Should blood pressure management differ in hypertensive patients with and without diabetes mellitus? Overview and meta-analyses of randomized trials

BACKGROUND

Type 2 diabetes mellitus is associated with an increased risk of hypertension, and cardiovascular and renal disease, and it has been recommended that management of hypertension should be more aggressive in presence than in absence of diabetes mellitus, but the matter is controversial at present.

OBJECTIVES

Meta-analysing all available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare the effects on cardiovascular and renal outcomes of blood pressure BP lowering to different systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) levels or by different drug classes in patients with and without diabetes mellitus.

METHODS

The database consisted of 72 BP-lowering RCTs (260 210 patients) and 50 head-to-head drug comparison RCTs (247 006). Among these two sets, RCTs or RCT subgroups separately reporting data from patients with and without diabetes mellitus were identified, and stratified by in-treatment achieved SBP and DBP, by drug class compared with placebo, and drug class compared with all other classes. Risk ratios and 95% confidence intervals, and absolute risk reductions of six fatal and non-fatal cardiovascular outcomes, all-cause death, and end-stage renal disease (ESRD) were calculated (random-effects model) separately for diabetes mellitus and no diabetes mellitus, and compared by interaction analysis.

RESULTS

We identified 41 RCTs providing data on 61 772 patients with diabetes mellitus and 40 RCTs providing data on 191 353 patients without diabetes mellitus. For achieved SBP at least 140 mmHg, relative and absolute reductions of most cardiovascular outcomes were significantly greater in diabetes mellitus than no diabetes mellitus, whereas for achieved SBP below 130 mmHg, the difference disappeared or reversed (greater outcome reduction in no diabetes mellitus). Significant ESRD reduction was found only in diabetes mellitus, but it was greatest when achieved SBP was at least 140 mmHg, and no further effect was found at SBP below 140 mmHg. All antihypertensive drug classes reduced cardiovascular risk vs. placebo in diabetes mellitus and no diabetes mellitus, but angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors were the only class more effective in diabetes mellitus than in no diabetes mellitus. When compared to other classes, renin-angiotensin system blockers were equally effective in cardiovascular prevention in no diabetes mellitus, but moderately, though significantly, more effective in diabetes mellitus.

CONCLUSION

BP-lowering treatment significantly and importantly reduces cardiovascular risk both in diabetes mellitus and no diabetes mellitus, but evidence for reduced ESRD risk is available only in diabetes. Contrary to past recommendations, in diabetes mellitus there is little or no further benefit in lowering SBP below 130 mmHg, whereas continuing benefit is seen in no diabetes mellitus also at SBP below 130 mmHg. Although all BP-lowering drugs can beneficially be prescribed in hypertensive patients with diabetes mellitus, the current recommendation to initiate or include a renin-angiotensin system blocker is supported by the evidence here presented.

Classes of antihypertensive agents and mortality in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes-Network meta-analysis of randomized trials

AIMS

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of antihypertensive drug classes in mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, Clinical Trials and Cochrane Library were searched for randomized trials comparing thiazides, beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers (CCBs), angiotensin-converting inhibitors (ACEi) and angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs), alone or in combination for hypertension treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes. Outcomes were overall and cardiovascular mortality. Network meta-analysis was used to obtain pooled effect estimate.

RESULTS

A total of 27 studies, comprising 49,418 participants, 5647 total and 1306 cardiovascular deaths were included. No differences in total or cardiovascular mortality were observed with isolated antihypertensive drug classes compared to each other or placebo. The ACEi and CCB combination showed evidence of reduction in cardiovascular mortality comparing to placebo [median HR, 95% credibility intervals: 0.16, 0.01-0.82], betablockers (0.20, 0.02-0.98), CCBs (0.21, 0.02-0.97) and ARBs (0.18, 0.02-0.91). In included trials, this combination was the treatment that most consistently achieved both lower systolic and diastolic end of study blood pressure.

CONCLUSIONS

There is no benefit of a single antihypertensive class in reduction of mortality in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes. Reduction of cardiovascular mortality observed in patients treated with ACEi and CCB combination may be related to lower blood pressure levels.

Hypertension Management in the Diabetes Patient

Approximately 11 million of the 17 million US citizens with type 2 diabetes mellitus also have hypertension. The development of diabetic nephropathy in patients with type 1 diabetes is frequently associated with hypertension, and both may present several years after the onset of diabetes. In type 2 diabetes, hypertension may precede the development of diabetes by several years. Differences that exist between type 1 and type 2 diabetes and the development of hypertension may indicate differences in the concomitant disease processes, yet the inevitable development of both diseases contributes to significant increases in risk of cardiovascular disease.The pharmacist must be familiar with blood pressure treatment goals in the hypertensive-diabetic patient and appropriate pharmacotherapeutic management. This article outlines treatment goals in the patient with diabetes and concurrent hypertension, reviews trials assessing pharmacologic treatments, and provides a summary of monitoring parameters to guide the pharmacist in the management of this population.

Antihypertensive Therapy in Females: A Clinical Review Across the Lifespan

Hypertension affects one-third of all females in the United States, with the prevalence increasing over a female's lifespan. The approach to treating females with hypertension varies depending on a female's age, race, comorbidities, and whether she is of child-bearing age or pregnant. It is important to factor in the safety and effectiveness of antihypertensive medications across these populations of females. Blood pressure target goals are the same in females as in males regardless of comorbidities or stage of life, with the exception of those females who are pregnant. Recommendations for antihypertensive medication do not differ between females and males based on disease state or stage of life, with the exception of females who are pregnant, breastfeeding, or of child-bearing age. Multiple guidelines recommend avoiding renin-angiotensin system blockers during pregnancy and suggest balancing the risk versus benefit in females of child-bearing age. Further, multiple guidelines provide race-based therapy recommendations for the use of calcium channel blockers and thiazide diuretics in black versus nonblack patients, irrespective of sex. Future research is needed to evaluate whether there are sex differences relative to blood pressure and cardiovascular event-lowering relative to specific antihypertensive medications with a focus on pharmacogenomic differences.

Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) outperform angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors on ischemic stroke prevention in patients with hypertension and diabetes - A real-world population study in Taiwan

BACKGROUND

Combination therapy with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARB) has been stressed for its comprehensive blocking of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system, but the evidence for their respective safety and efficacy, in particular with stroke prevention, is still insufficient in population-based follow-up studies in the real world.

METHODS

Using Taiwan's National Health Insurance claims data, we identified 5445 subjects aged 18years and older who had newly diagnosed hypertension in 1997-2010, from them diagnosed type 2 diabetes later. Among them, 2161 patients took ACEI, 1703 patients took ARB, 165 patients took both ACEI and ARB, and 1416 patients had neither.

RESULTS

During the follow-up period, the stroke incidence density was the lowest (23.02 per 1000person-years) in ARB group, followed by the group with neither medication, the ACEI group, and ARB/ACEI combination group (24.06, 30.23, and 37.86 per 1000person-years, respectively). Compared with patients taking neither medication, the adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were 1.27 (95% CI 1.02-1.58) for ACEI group, 0.95 (95% CI 0.74-1.22) for ARB group, and 1.56 (95% CI 0.99-2.47) for ARB/ACEI combined group. Greater reduction in risk of stroke was observed in patients with high dose ARB (adjusted HR=0·42, 95% CI 0·24-0·75).

CONCLUSION

Our findings support the practice that ARBs could be used, from the perspective of stroke prevention, as a first-line antihypertensive drug for patients with both hypertension and diabetes. The group with ARB regimen reduces 26% of stroke in contrast to the group with ACEI regimen.

Cardiovascular and Renal Outcomes of Renin-Angiotensin System Blockade in Adult Patients with Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review with Network Meta-Analyses

BACKGROUND

Medications aimed at inhibiting the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) have been used extensively for preventing cardiovascular and renal complications in patients with diabetes, but data that compare their clinical effectiveness are limited. We aimed to compare the effects of classes of RAS blockers on cardiovascular and renal outcomes in adults with diabetes.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

Eligible trials were identified by electronic searches in PubMed/MEDLINE and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (1 January 2004 to 17 July 2014). Interventions of interest were angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), and direct renin (DR) inhibitors. The primary endpoints were cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, and stroke-singly and as a composite endpoint, major cardiovascular outcome-and end-stage renal disease [ESRD], doubling of serum creatinine, and all-cause mortality-singly and as a composite endpoint, progression of renal disease. Secondary endpoints were angina pectoris and hospitalization for heart failure. In all, 71 trials (103,120 participants), with a total of 14 different regimens, were pooled using network meta-analyses. When compared with ACE inhibitor, no other RAS blocker used in monotherapy and/or combination was associated with a significant reduction in major cardiovascular outcomes: ARB (odds ratio [OR] 1.02; 95% credible interval [CrI] 0.90-1.18), ACE inhibitor plus ARB (0.97; 95% CrI 0.79-1.19), DR inhibitor plus ACE inhibitor (1.32; 95% CrI 0.96-1.81), and DR inhibitor plus ARB (1.00; 95% CrI 0.73-1.38). For the risk of progression of renal disease, no significant differences were detected between ACE inhibitor and each of the remaining therapies: ARB (OR 1.10; 95% CrI 0.90-1.40), ACE inhibitor plus ARB (0.97; 95% CrI 0.72-1.29), DR inhibitor plus ACE inhibitor (0.99; 95% CrI 0.65-1.57), and DR inhibitor plus ARB (1.18; 95% CrI 0.78-1.84). No significant differences were showed between ACE inhibitors and ARBs with respect to all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, angina pectoris, hospitalization for heart failure, ESRD, or doubling serum creatinine. Findings were limited by the clinical and methodological heterogeneity of the included studies. Potential inconsistency was identified in network meta-analyses of stroke and angina pectoris, limiting the conclusiveness of findings for these single endpoints.

CONCLUSIONS

In adults with diabetes, comparisons of different RAS blockers showed similar effects of ACE inhibitors and ARBs on major cardiovascular and renal outcomes. Compared with monotherapies, the combination of an ACE inhibitor and an ARB failed to provide significant benefits on major outcomes. Clinicians should discuss the balance between benefits, costs, and potential harms with individual diabetes patients before starting treatment.

REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42014014404.

Possible prevention of dialysis-requiring congestive heart failure by angiotensin-II receptor blockers in non-dialysis Japanese patients with Stage 5 chronic kidney disease

BACKGROUND

Preventive medications for dialysis-requiring congestive heart failure (CHF) in non-dialysis Japanese patients with Stage 5 chronic kidney disease (CKD) are unknown. Our aim was to explore which CKD medication was associated with a reduced prevalence of dialysis-requiring CHF in non-dialysis Japanese patients with Stage 5 CKD.

METHODS

The present multicenter, retrospective, cross-sectional study examined the association between CKD medications and the prevalence of dialysis-requiring CHF in non-dialysis Japanese patients with Stage 5 CKD.

RESULTS

There were 1536 Japanese Stage 5 CKD patients who satisfied our inclusion criteria. We had 309 (20.1%) patients whom had developed dialysis-requiring CHF and 940 patients (60.8%) whom had been using angiotensin-II receptor blockers (ARBs) before initiating dialysis. In our multivariate analysis, only ARB use was significantly associated with a lower risk of CHF (Odds ratio (OR): 0.680, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.516-0.897; p = 0.0064), of the CKD treatments examined in this study.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that ARB use during the pre-dialysis period is associated with a lower prevalence of CHF in the non-dialysis Japanese patients with Stage 5 CKD, suggesting a possible prevention of dialysis-requiring CHF by ARBs, in non-dialysis Japanese patients with Stage 5 CKD.

Pharmacotherapy for hypertension in older adults: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Hypertension increases with increasing age. Optimal treatment of hypertension is important to reduce cardiovascular disease. Recent guidelines for hypertension have made recommendations for older adults but are supported by evidence that includes younger individuals. This systematic review evaluates the benefits and harms of antihypertensive agents in adults aged ≥65 years.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE and ClinicalTrials.gov for studies from 1996 to 2014. Eligible studies included participants aged ≥65 years with hypertension. Eligible studies had clearly defined treatment assignments, blood pressure (BP) targets, and evaluated endpoints of cardiovascular morbidity, mortality, and/or harms of antihypertensive medications. We abstracted study characteristics, cardiovascular benefits, and harms.

RESULTS

Thirty-one articles met the inclusion criteria. Most studies compared different antihypertensive agents and/or placebo groups. These studies consistently demonstrated reduced cardiovascular morbidity and mortality compared with no treatment. Seven studies examined optimal BP targets. Strict control [systolic BP (SBP)<140 mmHg] was not consistently better than mild control (SBP<150 mmHg) for adults aged ≥65 years. Mild SBP control benefitted subjects in all age ranges over 65 years. Few studies assessed and explicitly reported harms.

CONCLUSIONS

In this review, older adults with hypertension had decreased cardiovascular morbidity and mortality with antihypertensives compared with no treatment. Strict control was not consistently better than mild control in older adults. There was enormous heterogeneity in these studies, and reporting of harms stratified by age is lacking. The current evidence is insufficient to determine the safest, most beneficial hypertension regimen in older adults.

Effects of lercanidipine versus amlodipine in hypertensive patients with cerebral ischemic stroke

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of lercanidipine and amlodipine in the treatment of hypertensive patients with acute cerebral ischemic stroke.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

An open label, controlled, randomized, parallel-group study was conducted on 104 hypertensive patients (blood pressure [BP] >130/80 mmHg) diagnosed with ischemic stroke. Enrolled subjects were randomly assigned to a 4 week treatment with lercanidipine 20 mg/day or amlodipine 10 mg/day. The treatment was administered during the acute phase of the stroke, either immediately after the diagnosis or during an observation period of maximum 6 days.

RESULTS

Both lercanidipine and amlodipine were able to significantly reduce mean clinical systolic BP (SBP)/diastolic BP (DBP), mean 24 h ambulatory BP and day-time and night-time BP. In particular, mean clinical SBP/DBP was reduced from 168.9 ± 21.6/96.2 ± 13.6 mmHg to 147.1 ± 22.0/87.1 ± 14.0 mmHg in the lercanidipine group (p < 0.001 for SBP and p < 0.01 for DBP) and from 167.1 ± 19.9/97.8 ± 14.5 mmHg to 143.3 ± 21.9/82.8 ± 14.1 mmHg in the amlodipine-treated group (p < 0.001 for both SBP and DBP). No statistical difference was observed between the two treatments in the reduction of clinical BP. The response and normalization rates registered in the two groups of patients were also similar, with no significant difference between the two drugs. In addition, both treatments reported comparable results in terms of early morning BP surge reduction and BP stabilization, measured through trough-peak ratio and smoothness index. However lercanidipine showed a better tolerability profile than amlodipine, with fewer adverse events and a lower percentage of patients suffering from side effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Lercanidipine is as effective as amlodipine in the reduction and stabilization of BP in hypertensive patients after a stroke, and presents some advantages in terms of safety. Larger studies are necessary to further evaluate these preliminary findings.

Association between blood pressure and disability-free survival among community-dwelling elderly patients receiving antihypertensive treatment

A reduction of elevated blood pressure (BP) is an important treatment goal in elderly hypertensive patients. However, excessive reduction of systolic BP (SBP) and/or diastolic BP (DBP) might be harmful in such patients. We investigated whether this was the case with regard to risk of incident disability or death in community-dwelling elderly subjects. We analyzed 570 patients receiving antihypertensive treatment aged 65-94 years. The endpoint was the composite outcome of incident disability, defined as first certification of a support/care need or death. Relationships among each of the four classes of SBP or DBP and the risk of incident disability or death were estimated using the Cox proportional hazards model. Over four years, 77 (13.5%) incident disabilities or deaths occurred. After adjustment for age, sex and variables selected according to their univariate analysis P-value <0.20, the risk of events was significantly higher in subjects with baseline SBP<120 mm Hg (hazard ratio (HR)=2.81, P=0.023) and ⩾160 mm Hg (HR=4.32, P<0.001), compared with subjects with baseline SBP of 140-159 mm Hg, who showed the lowest incidence of events. This J-curve relationship was observed in very elderly patients (⩾75 years) but not in younger patients. Patients with SBP<120 mm Hg tended to have a higher risk of incident disability caused by cerebral events, and those with SBP⩾160 mm Hg had a higher risk of incident disability caused by falls/bone fractures. These observations indicate that excessive BP reduction could cause discontinuance of disability-free survival in community-dwelling elderly patients.

Importance of cardiovascular disease risk management in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is commonly accompanied by other cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors, such as hypertension, obesity, and dyslipidemia. Furthermore, CVD is the most common cause of death in people with T2DM. It is therefore of critical importance to minimize the risk of macrovascular complications by carefully managing modifiable CVD risk factors in patients with T2DM. Therapeutic strategies should include lifestyle and pharmacological interventions targeting hyperglycemia, hypertension, dyslipidemia, obesity, cigarette smoking, physical inactivity, and prothrombotic factors. This article discusses the impact of modifying these CVD risk factors in the context of T2DM; the clinical evidence is summarized, and current guidelines are also discussed. The cardiovascular benefits of smoking cessation, increasing physical activity, and reducing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and blood pressure are well established. For aspirin therapy, any cardiovascular benefits must be balanced against the associated bleeding risk, with current evidence supporting this strategy only in certain patients who are at increased CVD risk. Although overweight, obesity, and hyperglycemia are clearly associated with increased cardiovascular risk, the effect of their modification on this risk is less well defined by available clinical trial evidence. However, for glucose-lowering drugs, further evidence is expected from several ongoing cardiovascular outcome trials. Taken together, the evidence highlights the value of early intervention and targeting multiple risk factors with both lifestyle and pharmacological strategies to give the best chance of reducing macrovascular complications in the long term.

Choice of anti-hypertensive agents in diabetic subjects

Hypertension is an extremely common co-morbid condition in diabetes leading to acceleration in micro-vascular and macro-vascular complications. The use of anti-hypertensives in diabetic patients should be considered in the context of preventing the development of complications. Various factors contribute to the pathophysiology of diabetes in hypertension. With the advancements in technology, the understanding of the pathophysiological mechanisms has increased, and this can contribute in providing evidence for beneficial role of certain anti-hypertensives. Many clinical trials have been carried out for use of diuretics, beta blockers, calcium channel blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers. The present review gives an overview of pathophysiological mechanisms of hypertension and diabetes in addition to the details of clinical trials of anti-hypertensives in diabetic patients. This is an attempt to provide some evidences for the clinicians, which may serve as a guide for use of anti-hypertensives in clinical practice.

Calcium Channel Blockers as Initial Therapeutic Agents in Hypertension

Blood pressure (BP) control is central to health promotion and maintenance across the health care continuum. Optimal control has been associated with improved microvascular end organ outcomes, reduced morbidity and mortality, and improved quality of life. Calcium channel blockers (CCBs) are a frequently utilized first-line antihypertensive agent, either as a monotherapy or in combination, as advocated by the 2003 Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC VII). However, despite their ability to achieve BP parameters comparable to alternative agents, CCBs may be inducing heart failure (HF) pathology by a mechanism other than the well-known negative inotropic effects of nondihydropyridine CCBs and thus may be responsible for more incident HF than was previously thought. Review of current literature indicates that there is a strong association between all types of CCBs and incident HF, that this association is found in persons with and without preexisting myocardial dysfunction, that BP measurement alone is an insufficient measure of end organ preservation with CCB use, and that CCB-induced HF is more problematic with comorbid coronary disease, renal disease, and diabetes mellitus. Furthermore, current research suggests that these outcomes are a result of CCB-induced neurohormonal sympathetic activation, sustained CCB-generated nitric oxide production leading to inflammation and tissue destruction, and/or increased systemic calcification secondary to concurrent calcium supplementation. These findings suggest the pressing need for reevaluation of CCBs as first-line agents in treating hypertension and for possible revision of JNC VII hypertension guidelines.

Further data on beta-blockers and cancer risk: observational study and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

BACKGROUND

The aim of the present paper is to provide some further data on the relationship between β-blocker treatment and the incidence of cancer, using two different approaches (epidemiological study and meta-analysis of clinical trials).

METHODS

In a consecutive series of 1340 diabetic patients starting insulin therapy, 112 cases of cancer during a mean follow-up of 75.9 months were identified as first hospital admission or death. For each case, the controls were chosen randomly from those members of the cohort matched for age, sex and BMI. The main predefined analysis was the comparison of cases and controls for length of exposure to β-blockers and proportion of patients exposed using a conditional logistic regression which takes into account the matching structure. For the meta-analytic sub-study, an extensive search of Medline and the Cochrane Library (any date up to December 31st, 2011) was performed for all trials in which a β-blocker was used. Mantel-Haenszel Odds Ratios (MH-OR) with 95% confidence intervals for incident malignancies were calculated using a random effect model.

RESULTS

After adjusting for mean daily dose of glargine and metformin, and ischemic heart disease, exposure to β-blockers was associated with a reduced overall risk of cancer (HR 0.33 [0.13; 0.83], p = 0.019; HR for each month of exposure 0.87 [0.77; 0.98], p = 0.025). In the meta-analysis sub-study, performed on nine trials, β-blockers were associated with a non-significant trend toward lower risk of cancer (MH-OR 0.93 [0.86; 1.01], p = 0.070).

STUDY LIMITATION

Limitations of the observational study are the small sample size that limits the statistical power of analyses, that it was performed on diabetic patients only, and that diagnoses of malignancies were derived from administrative data.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, this research seem to confirm a possible beneficial effect of β-blockers against the risk of cancer development.

A guide to the management of blood pressure in the diabetic hypertensive patient

Diabetes mellitus and hypertension frequently coexist in patients with the insulin resistance syndrome (IRS). Patients with both diabetes and hypertension typically have widespread endothelial dysfunction, increased oxidative stress, an activated sympathoadrenal system, and an elevated systemic burden of inflammatory mediators. Patients with diabetes and hypertension also have concomitant mixed dyslipidemia and obesity with significant frequency, and are at high risk for the development of macro- and microvascular disease, congestive heart failure, and nephropathy. Current data suggest that ACE inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers with or without a diuretic are important, if not preferred, initial therapies for the patient with diabetes and hypertension. Other drug classes such as combined alpha-/beta-adrenoceptor antagonists, dihydropyridine calcium channel antagonists (CCAs), and peripheral alpha-adrenoceptor antagonists are also useful therapeutic options in these patients. In order to optimally reduce the risk for cardiovascular events in the patient with diabetes and hypertension, optimal BP control should be coupled with comprehensive lifestyle modification and aggressive management of dyslipidemia and hyperglycemia.

Effects of renin-angiotensin system blockades on cardiovascular outcomes in patients with diabetes mellitus: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

To determine whether renin-angiotensin system (RAS) blockade is beneficial for cardiovascular outcomes in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) using meta-analysis.

METHODS

The MEDLINE and Cochrane library databases were searched for randomized controlled trials published up to June 2010. We also reviewed reference lists from identified trials and review articles to identify any other relevant studies, and the ClinicalTrials.gov website to identify randomized controlled trials that were registered as completed but not yet published. A random-effects model was used to combine the estimates for risk ratios (RR).

RESULTS

Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials (including post hoc analyses) assessing the effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin-receptor blockers on cardiovascular events compared to controls in patients with DM. Nineteen clinical trials with 41,042 patients and 6039 cardiovascular events were identified. RAS blockade significantly reduced the risk of major cardiovascular events (RR 0.92, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84-1.00, I(2) statistic 53%) and myocardial infarction (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.72-0.94, I(2)=55%). There were trends towards fewer strokes and lower all-cause mortality but these were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence shows that treatment with RAS blockade can routinely be considered for diabetic patients to reduce major cardiovascular events.

Management of blood pressure in patients with diabetes

Hypertension is a major modifiable risk factor for cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in patients with diabetes. Lowering blood pressure (BP) to 135/85 mm Hg is the main goal of treatment. A nonpharmcologic approach is recommended in all patients. If BP levels remain above the target despite nonpharmacologic treatment, drug therapy should be initiated. Blockers of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) represent the cornerstone of the antihypertensive drug arsenal; however, in most patients, combination therapy is required. For many patients, a combination of RAAS blocker and calcium antagonist is the combination preferred by the treating physician. Often three or even four drugs are needed. Treatment should be individualized according to concomitant risk factors and diseases and depending on the age and hemodynamic and laboratory parameters of the patient. In order to maximally reduce cardio renal risk, control of lipid and glycemic levels should also be ensured.

Benefits of tight blood pressure control in diabetic patients with hypertension: importance of early and sustained implementation of effective treatment strategies

In 2008, when the UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) group presented their 30-year findings concerning the possible sustained effects of improved glycemic control after 10 years of extended follow-up in type 2 diabetic patients, a so-called "legacy effect" was reported to address the long-term emergent and/or sustained benefits of early improved glycemic control. Opposite results were obtained by the Hypertension in Diabetes Study (HDS) carried out in the frame of UKPDS, with no evidence of any legacy effect on cardiovascular (CV) outcomes for an initial 4-year period of tight blood pressure (BP) control. Thus, it was concluded that BP control has to be continued over time, since, although it had a short time-to-effect relationship in preventing stroke, BP control was associated with a short persistence of its clinical benefits once the intervention was discontinued. These findings are unique because, whereas most interventional trials in hypertension that included diabetic patients have shown a reduction in CV outcomes shortly after starting treatment, only the UKPDS-HDS specifically explored the possible persistence of clinical benefits after discontinuing intensive BP-lowering intervention. This article aims to provide a critical interpretation of the UKPDS findings of lack of BP legacy, in the context of the currently available evidence on the benefits of antihypertensive treatment. The importance of effective BP control in type 2 diabetic patients to prevent CV outcomes and other diabetes-related complications is underlined, with emphasis on early, tight, and continuous BP control to optimize patients' protection.

Underuse of ACE inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers among patients with diabetic nephropathy in Taiwan

OBJECTIVES

National guidelines recommend angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) therapy for diabetic patients with hypertension and/or proteinuria to hinder renal disease progression. However, little is known about the adequacy of adherence to these guidelines in diabetic patients and about the predictors of such appropriate ACEIs or ARBs use. We sought to define the rates of ACEIs and ARBs use in a large population of patients with diabetic nephropathy (DN).

METHODS

Using linked medical claims from the National Health Insurance Research Database, we studied a cohort of patients with DN. We used multivariate logistic regression to measure the predictors of usage of the agents studied.

RESULTS

Of the 7159 DN patients studied, 5564 patients (77.7%) had hypertension. Of these, only 50.6% were administered ACEIs or ARBs during the quarter studied. In multivariate analyses, greater rates for usage of ACEIs or ARBs were found in patients with coronary artery disease or congestive heart failure.

CONCLUSIONS

Only 50% of the patients with DN received the recommended treatment with ACEIs or ARBs. This shortfall provides an opportunity for quality-improvement interventions that could provide beneficial clinical outcomes for these high-risk patients.

Best strategies for hypertension management in type 2 diabetes and obesity

Insulin resistance, dyslipidemia, hypertension, obesity, cardiovascular disease, and chronic kidney disease cluster together, and the incidence of all of these disease states is increasing throughout the world. Current strategies for hypertension management-including the use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, calcium antagonists, and thiazide diuretics-are effective for most patients. However, as the incidence of hypertension increases in this target population, so does that of resistant hypertension. As such, significant research and effort must be put forth to bring blood pressure to goal and delay or prevent target organ damage. Such efforts should frequently include a dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker such as amlodipine. Other agents that are currently underused in this population for the treatment of resistant hypertension include nebivolol, carvedilol, aliskiren, and aldosterone antagonists. Finally, significant potential is seen for darusentan, an endothelin antagonist, if it comes to market.

Hypertension and diabetes mellitus are associated with cardiovascular events in the elderly without cardiovascular disease. Results of a 15-year follow-up in a Mediterranean population

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Epidemiological prospective data on cardiovascular (CV) events in elderly subjects from Mediterranean populations are lacking. We aimed to investigate 15-year incidence of CV events and to evaluate the association with CV risk factors in an elderly Mediterranean population.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The population of a small Sicilian village were enrolled, visited and a blood sample was drawn at baseline. CV events were recorded in the 15 years of follow-up. From 1351 subjects (75% of the resident population); 315 were in the age range 65-85 years; 266 subjects free from CV disease were analysed. Seventy-seven CV events were recorded in 73 out of 266 subjects, with a 19.7% rate (in 10 years). Hypertension (HTN) (hazards ratio=2.1) and diabetes mellitus (DM) (hazards ratio=1.8) were independently associated with CV events. Subjects with both DM and HTN showed a lower survival free of CV events compared to those with DM or HTN.

CONCLUSIONS

In a 15-year follow-up of an elderly Mediterranean population free from CV disease, diabetes mellitus and hypertension were related to CV events. The control of risk factors in the elderly needs to be reinforced to achieve better results in terms of CV prevention.

The impact of a multidisciplinary information technology-supported program on blood pressure control in primary care

BACKGROUND

Hypertension is a leading mortality risk factor yet inadequately controlled in most affected subjects. Effective programs to address this problem are lacking. We hypothesized that an information technology-supported management program could help improve blood pressure (BP) control.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This randomized controlled trial included 223 primary care hypertensive subjects with mean 24-hour BP >130/80 and daytime BP >135/85 mm Hg measured with ambulatory monitoring (ABPM). Intervention subjects received a BP monitor and access to an information technology-supported adherence and BP monitoring system providing nurses, pharmacists, and physicians with monthly reports. Control subjects received usual care. The mean (+/-SD) follow-up was 348 (+/-78) and 349 (+/-84) days in the intervention and control group, respectively. The primary end point of the change in the mean 24-hour ambulatory BP was consistently greater in intervention subjects for both systolic (-11.9 versus -7.1 mm Hg; P<0.001) and diastolic BP (-6.6 versus -4.5 mm Hg; P=0.007). The proportion of subjects that achieved Canadian Guideline target BP (46.0% versus 28.6%) was also greater in the intervention group (P=0.006). We observed similar BP declines for ABPM and self-recorded home BP suggesting the latter could be an alternative for confirming BP control. The intervention was associated with more physician-driven antihypertensive dose adjustments or changes in agents (P=0.03), more antihypertensive classes at study end (P=0.007), and a trend toward improved adherence measured by prescription refills (P=0.07).

CONCLUSIONS

This multidisciplinary information technology-supported program that provided feedback to patients and healthcare providers significantly improved blood pressure levels in a primary care setting.

Reducing the risk of stroke in type 2 diabetes: pathophysiological and therapeutic perspectives

Reducing the excess cerebrovascular burden in patients with type 2 diabetes remains a major therapeutic challenge, especially with respect to the high risk of recurrent events. Targeting the traditional metabolic risk factors of hypertension, dyslipidemia, and hyperglycemia has failed to remove this excess risk, and agents targeting thrombotic risk (i.e., antiplatelet and anticoagulant drugs) remain poorly studied in the context of stroke in diabetes. This may relate to the accumulation of risk factors in type 2 diabetes as well as to diabetes-specific pathophysiologic factors. Regrettably, there is a lack of prospective evidence to support the efficacy of interventions in the secondary prevention of cerebrovascular events in type 2 diabetes, particularly recurrent stroke events. Overall, there is a need for rigorous evaluations of new therapeutic approaches in both primary and secondary prevention of stroke and management of acute stroke in patients with type 2 diabetes. This systematic review of the published literature summarizes the evidence regarding current therapeutic interventions and their impact on the risk of stroke in people with type 2 diabetes, and highlights potential strategies for improving outcomes.

Risk factor assessment for new onset diabetes: literature review

Metabolic syndrome (MS), typified by hypertension, abdominal obesity, dyslipidaemia and impaired glucose metabolism, is a precursor of type 2 diabetes. Thiazide diuretics (TD) and beta-blockers are associated with increased risk of diabetes in patients with hypertension; however, the role of these agents in development of diabetes in MS patients is unknown. We reviewed the literature regarding risk factors for diabetes development and compared this with data from the Study of Trandolapril/Verapamil SR And Insulin Resistance (STAR), which investigated the effects of two fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) [trandolapril/verapamil SR and losartan/hydrochlorothiazide (L/H)] on glucose control and new diabetes in MS patients. In STAR, logistic regression modelling identified haemoglobin A1c [odds ratio (OR) 4.21 per 1% increment; p = 0.003), L/H treatment (OR 4.04; p = 0.002) and 2-h oral glucose tolerance test glucose levels (OR 1.39 per 10 mg/dl increments; p < 0.001) as baseline predictors of diabetes. These data support prior analyses and suggest that choice of antihypertensive agent is important. Patients with MS may be at lower risk of diabetes when using a FDC calcium channel blocker + angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor compared with an angiotensin receptor blocker + TD.

Metabolic syndrome: treatment of hypertensive patients

Metabolic syndrome (MetSyndr), a constellation of abnormalities [obesity, glucose intolerance, insulin resistance (IR), dyslipidemia (low HDL-cholesterol, high LDL-cholesterol and triglycerides (TG)], and elevated blood pressure (BP)], increases the risk of cardiovascular (CV) disease and premature death. From 10% to 30% of the adult population in industrialized countries has MetSyndr, which effectively predicts the development of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) and CV disease. Because of the complex etiology of MetSyndr, a multi-targeted, integrated therapeutic approach is required to simultaneously treat high BP, obesity, lipid disorders and T2D (if present), to fully protect CV, cerebrovascular and renal systems. If lifestyle modification (weight control, diet, exercise, smoking cessation, moderation of alcohol intake) is ineffective, pharmaco-theraphy should be added to treat simultaneously the lipid- and non-lipid CV risk factors. Patients with HTN and MetSyndr should be started on angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, unless contraindicated. The ACE inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) reduce the odds of developing new onset T2D and also decrease albuminuria. The ACE inhibitors provide cardioprotective and renoprotective benefits beyond their effect on BP; they also improve IR. The ARBs are renoprotective in addition to being cardioprotective. Long-acting calcium channel blockers are also recommended in hypertensive patients with MetSyndr; these drugs also improve IR. Thiazides (at low doses) and selected ss-blockers can be given to patients with HTN and MetSyndr. Celiprolol in combination with diuretics has a favorable effect on glucose tolerance and IR in patients with HTN and MetSyndr, and spironolactone added to ACE inhibitor or ARB therapy provides additional reno- and CV protective benefits in patients with diabetic nephropathy. Carvedilol, a ss-blocker with vasodilating properties, added to ACE inhibitor or ARB therapy, is effective in preventing worsening of microalbuminuria in patients with HTN and MetSyndr; it also improves IR and glycemic control. Most patients eventually require two or more antihypertensive drugs to reach BP goal. It is recommended that therapy in patients whose BP is more than 20/10 mm Hg above target at diagnosis be initiated with a combination of antihypertensive drugs, administered either as individual drugs or as fixed-dose formulations. Treatment with fixed-dose combinations, such as irbesartan + hydrochlorothiazide provides good BP control in more than two-thirds of hypertensive patients with MetSyndr. Lipid and BP targets are reached in a high percent of patients with HTN and CV disease treated with a combination of amlodipine + atorvastatin. In conclusion, hypertensive patients with the MetSyndr be treated aggressively for each component of the syndrome to provide CV, cerebrovascular and renal protection.

Understanding the quality chasm for hypertension control in diabetes: a structured review of "co-maneuvers" used in clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Observational studies routinely describe a significant gap between rates of blood pressure control in routine diabetes care compared with those achieved in randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of the literature to identify co-maneuvers used in RCTs, defined as ancillary activities or agents administered before, during, or immediately after the main agent under investigation (ie, principal maneuver), but not effectively translated to routine diabetes care. We searched multiple databases for RCTs evaluating the efficacy of treatments for hypertension control in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus. We considered only phase III human studies of interventions that achieved blood pressure control and scrutinized all elements related to the implementation of the principal maneuver in each candidate study. These elements were then sorted into a taxonomy of co-maneuvers.

RESULTS

Nearly all eligible RCTs used highly consistent groups of co-maneuvers. These typically began with (1) the use of consensual and clearly stated blood pressure goals; (2) frequent visits in which blood pressure levels were measured and compared with predefined goals; and, if the goal was not attained, (3) modifications to the treatment based on a detailed action plan that included communication of adverse events. Patient education, feedback to clinicians, and interventions for medication adherence were not commonly used among eligible trials.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians should translate key behavioral co-maneuvers along with clinically proven treatments for hypertension control in diabetes. These co-maneuvers are conceptually similar to collaborative goal setting and action planning interventions used in innovative chronic care programs.