Lowering Nighttime Blood Pressure With Bedtime Dosing of Antihypertensive Medications: Controversies in Hypertension-Pro Side of the Argument

The Option of Chronotherapy of Hypertension

The aim of the present paper is to explore the option of chronotherapy of hypertension and its effectiveness in blood pressure (BP) lowering compared with its standard daily treatment. The treatment of BP has gone through many different schemes over the years. From no treatment in the early 1930s, to step care, to multiple drug combinations, or to single daily drug combinations with 2-3 drugs, still BP is not well controlled in a significant number of patients. Recently, the role of the circadian rhythm in the treatment of hypertension has been tested by several studies comparing the evening versus the morning drug administration with no clear evidence of superiority of either mode of drug administration. However, in cases of morning surge of BP, nocturnal hypertension, and renal disease, the evening drug administration has been more effective than the morning drug administration, and thus, more preferable. In order to get a better perspective on this approach of hypertension treatment, a Medline search of the English literature was contacted between 2010 and 2023 using the terms BP control, circadian rhythm, morning drug administration, evening drug administration, and 38 pertinent papers were selected for analysis. Careful review of the selected papers showed that chronotherapy of hypertension is effective. However, the overall effectiveness of evening drug administration compared with the morning administration is not significantly more effective compared to the morning administration and more work is needed in this field.

Critical appraisal of recent translational chronopharmacology and chronotherapeutic reviews, meta-analyses, and pragmatic patient trials discloses significant deficiencies of design and conduct and suspect findings

The conduct of molecular and laboratory animal circadian rhythm research has increased exponentially in the past few decades, such that today investigations are being performed by scientists of many diverse disciplines. Knowledge gained from past works is now being explored for translational applications to clinical medicine, often termed "circadian medicine," through the implementation of patient trials. However, these trials are being led, more often than not, by investigators who have little or no formal training and in-depth expertise in the methods of human circadian rhythm research, causing them to be deficient in design and produce dubious findings that have already led to unnecessary medical controversy at the expense of advances in patient care. Evidence of the very significant shortcomings of today's translational circadian medicine research is exemplified in two recent publications in well-read reputable medical journals concerning the chronotherapy of blood pressure (BP) medications: one a review and meta-analysis by Maqsood et al. published in the journal Hypertension in 2023 that pertains to ingestion-time differences in the extent of BP reduction exerted by hypertensive medications and the other a report by Mackenzie et al. in the journal Lancet in 2022 that details the results of the pragmatic TIME study that assessed ingestion-time differences in cardiovascular disease outcomes. Herein, we appraise the inaccurate trial selection, lack of quality assessment, and the numerous other shortcomings that culminated in suspect findings and faulty conclusions of the former, as well as the deficiencies in design and conduct of the latter using as reference the eight items identified in 2021 by a working committee of the International Society for Chronobiology and American Association for Medical Chronobiology and Chronotherapeutics as being necessary for high-quality research of circadian rhythm-dependencies of the therapeutic effects of BP-lowering medications. The TIME study when rated for its quality according to the extent to which its investigational methods satisfy all of the eight recommended items attains a very low overall score of + 1 out of a possible range of -1 to + 7. Moreover, our review of the methods of the currently ongoing pragmatic BedMed trial discloses major deficiencies of the same sort rending a poor quality score of + 0.5. Although the focus of this article is the appraisal of the quality of contemporary circadian medicine hypertension chronotherapy research, it additionally exposes the inadequacies and dubious quality of the critique of such manuscripts submitted for publication to influential journals, in that some peer reviewers might also be deficient in the knowledge required to properly rate their merit.

Cardiovascular outcomes in adults with hypertension with evening versus morning dosing of usual antihypertensives in the UK (TIME study): a prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded-endpoint clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Studies have suggested that evening dosing with antihypertensive therapy might have better outcomes than morning dosing. The Treatment in Morning versus Evening (TIME) study aimed to investigate whether evening dosing of usual antihypertensive medication improves major cardiovascular outcomes compared with morning dosing in patients with hypertension.

METHODS

The TIME study is a prospective, pragmatic, decentralised, parallel-group study in the UK, that recruited adults (aged ≥18 years) with hypertension and taking at least one antihypertensive medication. Eligible participants were randomly assigned (1:1), without restriction, stratification, or minimisation, to take all of their usual antihypertensive medications in either the morning (0600-1000 h) or in the evening (2000-0000 h). Participants were followed up for the composite primary endpoint of vascular death or hospitalisation for non-fatal myocardial infarction or non-fatal stroke. Endpoints were identified by participant report or record linkage to National Health Service datasets and were adjudicated by a committee masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was assessed as the time to first occurrence of an event in the intention-to-treat population (ie, all participants randomly assigned to a treatment group). Safety was assessed in all participants who submitted at least one follow-up questionnaire. The study is registered with EudraCT (2011-001968-21) and ISRCTN (18157641), and is now complete.

FINDINGS

Between Dec 17, 2011, and June 5, 2018, 24 610 individuals were screened and 21 104 were randomly assigned to evening (n=10 503) or morning (n=10 601) dosing groups. Mean age at study entry was 65·1 years (SD 9·3); 12 136 (57·5%) participants were men; 8968 (42·5%) were women; 19 101 (90·5%) were White; 98 (0·5%) were Black, African, Caribbean, or Black British (ethnicity was not reported by 1637 [7·8%] participants); and 2725 (13·0%) had a previous cardiovascular disease. By the end of study follow-up (March 31, 2021), median follow-up was 5·2 years (IQR 4·9-5·7), and 529 (5·0%) of 10 503 participants assigned to evening treatment and 318 (3·0%) of 10 601 assigned to morning treatment had withdrawn from all follow-up. A primary endpoint event occurred in 362 (3·4%) participants assigned to evening treatment (0·69 events [95% CI 0·62-0·76] per 100 patient-years) and 390 (3·7%) assigned to morning treatment (0·72 events [95% CI 0·65-0·79] per 100 patient-years; unadjusted hazard ratio 0·95 [95% CI 0·83-1·10]; p=0·53). No safety concerns were identified.

INTERPRETATION

Evening dosing of usual antihypertensive medication was not different from morning dosing in terms of major cardiovascular outcomes. Patients can be advised that they can take their regular antihypertensive medications at a convenient time that minimises any undesirable effects.

FUNDING

British Heart Foundation.

Ingestion-time differences in the pharmacodynamics of dual-combination hypertension therapies: Systematic review and meta-analysis of published human trials

The pharmacodynamics of hypertension medications can be significantly affected by circadian rhythms in the biological mechanisms of the 24 h blood pressure (BP) pattern. Hypertension guidelines fail to recommend the time of day when patients, including those who require treatment with multiple medications, are to ingest BP-lowering therapy. We conducted a systematic review of published prospective trials that investigated hypertension medications for ingestion-time differences in BP-lowering, safety, patient adherence, and markers of target organ pathology. Among the search-retried 155 trials, 17 published between 1991 and 2020 totaling 1,508 hypertensive participants concerned the differential ingestion-time dependent effects of 14 unique dual-combination therapies. All but one (94.1%) of the trials, involving 98.5% of the total number of investigated individuals, reported clinically and statistically significant benefits - including enhanced reduction of asleep BP without induction of sleep-time hypotension, reduced prevalence of BP non-dipping, decreased adverse effects, improved kidney function, and reduced cardiac pathology - when dual-combination hypertension medications were ingested at-bedtime/evening rather than upon-waking/morning. A systematic and comprehensive review of the literature published in the past three decades reveals no single dual-combination hypertension trial reported significantly better benefit of the still conventional, yet unjustified by medical evidence, upon-waking/morning hypertension treatment scheme.