Blood Pressure Intervention and Control in SPRINT

Role of Diuretics in Cardiovascular Events and Mortality in Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial: A Post Hoc Analysis

BACKGROUND

In a post hoc analysis, we examined whether postrandomization diuretics use can explain and/or mediate the beneficial effects of intensive systolic BP lowering on cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality in the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT).

METHODS

SPRINT was a randomized, controlled trial of 9361 participants comparing the effects of intensive (systolic BP target <120 mm Hg) versus standard (systolic BP target <140 mm Hg) BP control on a primary composite cardiovascular end point in participants aged 50 years or older with systolic BP of 130-180 mm Hg. In time-varying multivariable Cox analyses, we assessed hazard ratios (HRs) of cardiovascular end points and all-cause mortality in participants on thiazide type, loop and/or potassium (K) sparing, or no diuretics. We also conducted mediation analysis to formally assess the role of diuretics in the effects of intensive systolic BP lowering.

RESULTS

At baseline, diuretics were prescribed in 46% and 48% of participants in standard and intensive systolic BP-lowering groups, respectively, and in 46% and 74% in the corresponding groups during the trial. The lower risk of cardiovascular end points in the intensive group (HR, 0.75; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64 to 0.89) persisted after adjustment for postrandomization time-varying diuretics use (HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.62 to 0.89). Across the entire study population, time-varying diuretics use was not associated with cardiovascular end points (compared with no diuretics, HR for thiazide type, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.10, and loop/K sparing, 1.29; 95% CI, 0.97 to 1.73). However, thiazide-type diuretics were associated with lower risk of cardiovascular end points in the intensive (HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.85) but not in the standard (HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.82 to 1.39) group. In mediation analysis, HRs for total effect, direct effect (not mediated through diuretics use), and indirect effect (mediated through diuretics) of the intervention on cardiovascular end points were 0.66 (95% CI, 0.54 to 0.79), 0.67 (95% CI, 0.54 to 0.81), and 0.98 (95% CI, 0.88 to 1.10), respectively. The results were largely similar for all-cause mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

The favorable effects of intensive systolic BP lowering on cardiovascular end points and all-cause mortality in SPRINT were independent of and not mediated by time-varying diuretics use. However, thiazide-type diuretics use associated with benefit if intensive systolic BP lowering was targeted.

Single-pill combination for treatment of hypertension: Just a matter of practicality or is there a real clinical benefit?

Elevated blood pressure (BP) is the largest contributor to the incident cardiovascular disease worldwide. Despite explicit guideline recommendations for the diagnosis and management of hypertension, a large proportion of patients remain undiagnosed, untreated, or treated but uncontrolled. Inadequate BP control is associated with many complex factors including patient preference, physician's inertia, health systems disparities, and poor adherence to prescribed antihypertensive drug treatment. The primary driver for reduced cardiovascular morbidity and mortality is lowering of BP ''per se'' and not class effects of specific pharmacotherapies. The recent ESH guidelines recommend the use of four major classes of drugs including renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAS) blockers (angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi)), calcium channel blockers (CCB), thiazide and thiazide-like diuretics, and betablockers. Initiation of treatment for hypertension with a two-drug regimen, preferably in a single pill combination (SPC), is recommended for most patients. Preferred combinations should comprise a RAS blocker (either an ACEi or an ARB) with a CCB or thiazide/thiazide-like diuretic. These strategies are supported by robust evidence that combination therapy produces greater BP reductions than monotherapy, reduces side effects of the individual components, improves therapeutic adherence and long-term persistence on treatment, and permits achievement of earlier BP control.

In emergency hypertension, could biomarkers change the guidelines?

BACKGROUND

Hypertension may cause target organ damage (TOD). Target blood pressure (BP) management may not be appropriate in some conditions.

AIM

We aim to assess the impact of targeted BP management in severe hypertension on renal TOD.

PATIENTS & METHODS

This is a prospective cohort study involving patients admitted due to severe hypertension (BP > 180/120) associated with any symptoms. The study involved patients referred to the ICU in our tertiary center during the period between August 2017 and February 2018. All patients underwent target BP treatment according to recent guidelines. Hs-Troponin T (hs-TNT) and serum creatinine (s.creat) were measured in all patients on admission and 24 h later. Patients were divided into Group A (with initial normal hs-TNT) and Group B (with initial high hs-TNT). The main outcome was in-hospital renal-related morbidity (including renal failure).

RESULTS

Four hundred seventy consecutive patients with hypertensive crises were involved in the study. Group B had a significantly higher incidence of in-hospital mortality (4 patients) and renal TOD (acute renal dysfunction) than Group A (P value = 0.001 and 0.000 respectively). There was a significant difference between initial s.creat on admission and follow-up s.creat values in Group B with significant elevation of their s.creat on the following 24 h (P = 0.002), while this difference is insignificant in Group A (P = 0.34). There was a significant positive correlation between hs-TNT and the follow-up s.creat (P = 0.004).

CONCLUSION

In severe HTN, hs-TNT may be elevated due to marked afterload. Patients with severe HTN and high hs-TNT have higher s.creat values, which are associated with an increased risk of renal failure and in-hospital mortality if their BP decreases acutely to the guideline-target BP. Using biomarkers during the management of emergency HTN should be considered before following clinical guidelines. However, our findings do underscore the potential utility of hs-TNT as an indicator for risk stratification in patients with severe or emergency HTN.

Association Between Self-Reported Medication Adherence and Therapeutic Inertia in Hypertension: A Secondary Analysis of SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial)

BACKGROUND

Therapeutic inertia (TI), failure to intensify antihypertensive medication when blood pressure (BP) is above goal, remains prevalent in hypertension management. The degree to which self-reported antihypertensive adherence is associated with TI with intensive BP goals remains unclear.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Cross-sectional analysis was performed of the 12-month visit of participants in the intensive arm of SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial), which randomized adults to intensive (<120 mm Hg) versus standard (<140 mm Hg) systolic BP goals. TI was defined as no increase in antihypertensive regimen intensity score, which incorporates medication number and dose, when systolic BP is ≥120 mm Hg. Self-reported adherence was assessed using the 8-Item Morisky Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS-8) and categorized as low (MMAS-8 score <6), medium (MMAS-8 score 6 to <8), and high (MMAS-8 score 8). Poisson regressions estimated prevalence ratios (PRs) and 95% CIs for TI associated with MMAS-8. Among 1009 intensive arm participants with systolic BP >120 mm Hg at the 12-month visit (mean age, 69.6 years; 35.2% female, 28.8% non-Hispanic Black), TI occurred in 50.8% of participants. Participants with low adherence (versus high) were younger and more likely to be non-Hispanic Black or smokers. The prevalence of TI among patients with low, medium, and high adherence was 45.0%, 53.5%, and 50.4%, respectively. After adjustment, neither low nor medium adherence (versus high) were associated with TI (PR, 1.11 [95% CI, 0.87-1.42]; PR, 1.08 [95% CI, 0.84-1.38], respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Although clinician uncertainty about adherence is often cited as a reason for why antihypertensive intensification is withheld when above BP goals, we observed no evidence of an association between self-reported adherence and TI.

Fixed-Dose Combination Therapy for the Prevention of Cardiovascular Diseases in CKD: An Individual Participant Data Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Fixed-dose combination treatments reduce cardiovascular disease in primary prevention. We aim to explore whether those benefits differ in the presence of CKD.

METHODS

We conducted an individual participant data meta-analysis in 18,162 participants on the efficacy and safety of treatment for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease. Combination therapies consisted of at least two BP-lowering drugs and a statin, with or without aspirin versus placebo or minimal care. Here, we examine the differential effect of fixed-dose combination treatment on the risk of developing cardiovascular disease in participants with a low eGFR (<60 ml/min per 1.73 m 2 ; Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration formula) compared with a normal eGFR (≥60 ml/min per 1.73 m 2 ). The primary composite outcome was time to first occurrence of a combination of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or arterial revascularization.

RESULTS

At baseline, the mean level of eGFR was 76 ml/min per 1.73 m 2 (SD 17). In total, 3315 (18%) participants had low eGFR at baseline. During a median follow-up of 5 years, among participants with normal eGFR, the primary outcome occurred in 232 (3%) participants in the treatment group compared with 339 (5%) in the control group (hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.57 to 0.81; P < 0.001). In participants with low eGFR, the primary outcome occurred in 64 (4%) participants in the treatment group compared with 130 (8%) in the control group (hazard ratio, 0.49; 95% confidence interval, 0.36 to 0.66; P < 0.001; P for interaction 0.047). The relative risk reduction among participants with low eGFR was larger for combination strategies, including aspirin compared with treatments without aspirin. Apart from dizziness, other side effects did not differ between treatment and control groups, regardless of the stage of their kidney function.

CONCLUSIONS

A fixed-dose combination treatment strategy is effective and safe at preventing cardiovascular disease, irrespective of eGFR, but relative and absolute risk reductions are larger in individuals with low eGFR.

PODCAST

This article contains a podcast at https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/www.asn-online.org/media/podcast/CJASN/2023_11_08_CJN0000000000000251.mp3.

Estimated Population Health Benefits of Intensive Systolic Blood Pressure Treatment Among SPRINT-Eligible US Adults

BACKGROUND

The Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) demonstrated an intensive (<120 mm Hg) vs. standard (<140 mm Hg) systolic blood pressure (SBP) goal lowered cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. Estimating the effect of intensive SBP lowering among SPRINT-eligible adults most likely to benefit can guide implementation efforts.

METHODS

We studied SPRINT participants and SPRINT-eligible participants in the Reasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) Study and National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (NHANES). A published algorithm of predicted CVD benefit with intensive SBP treatment was used to categorize participants into low, medium, or high predicted benefit. CVD event rates were estimated with intensive and standard treatment.

RESULTS

Median age was 67.0, 72.0, and 64.0 years in SPRINT, SPRINT-eligible REGARDS, and SPRINT-eligible NHANES participants, respectively. The proportion with high predicted benefit was 33.0% in SPRINT, 39.0% in SPRINT-eligible REGARDS, and 23.5% in SPRINT-eligible NHANES. The estimated difference in CVD event rate (standard minus intensive) was 7.0 (95% confidence interval [CI] 3.4-10.7), 8.4 (95% CI 8.2-8.5), and 6.1 (95% CI 5.9-6.3) per 1,000 person-years in SPRINT, SPRINT-eligible REGARDS participants, and SPRINT-eligible NHANES participants, respectively (median 3.2-year follow-up). Intensive SBP treatment could prevent 84,300 (95% CI 80,800-87,920) CVD events per year in 14.1 million SPRINT-eligible US adults; 29,400 and 28,600 would be in 7.0 million individuals with medium or high predicted benefit, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Most of the population health benefit from intensive SBP goals could be achieved by treating those characterized by a previously published algorithm as having medium or high predicted benefit.

Single-Pill Combination Product Availability of the Antihypertensive Regimens Used for Intensive Systolic Blood Pressure Treatment in the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial

BACKGROUND

Single-pill combination (SPC) antihypertensive products improve blood pressure control and medication adherence among patients with hypertension. It is unknown to what degree commercially available SPC products could be used to target an intensive systolic blood pressure goal of <120 mm Hg.

METHODS

This cross-sectional analysis included participants randomized to the intensive treatment arm (goal systolic blood pressure <120 mm Hg) of the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) using ≥2 antihypertensive medication classes at the 12-month postrandomization visit. Antihypertensive medication data were collected using pill bottle review by research coordinators, and regimens were categorized by the unique combinations of antihypertensive classes. We calculated the proportion of regimens used, which are commercially available as one of the 7 SPC class combinations in the United States as of January 2023.

RESULTS

Among the 3833 SPRINT intensive arm participants included (median age, 67.0 years; 35.5% female), participants were using 219 unique antihypertensive regimens. The 7 regimens for which there are class-equivalent SPC products were used by 40.3% of participants. Only 3.2% of all medication class regimens used are available as a class-equivalent SPC product (7/219). There are no SPC products available with 4 or more medication classes, which were used by 1060 participants (27.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

Most SPRINT participants in the intensive arm used an antihypertensive medication regimen, which is not commercially available as a class equivalent SPC product. To achieve the SPRINT results in real-world settings, maximize the potential benefit of SPCs, and reduce pill burden, improvements in the product landscape are needed.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov/ct2/show/NCT01206062; Unique identifier: NCT01206062.

Evidence for Age Bias Contributing to Therapeutic Inertia in Blood Pressure Management: A Secondary Analysis of SPRINT

BACKGROUND

Despite evidence supporting the cardiovascular and cognitive benefits of intensive blood pressure management, older adults have the lowest rates of blood pressure control. We determined the association between age and therapeutic inertia (TI) in SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial), and whether frailty, cognitive function, or gait speed moderate or mediate these associations.

METHODS

We performed a secondary analysis of SPRINT of participant visits with blood pressure above randomized treatment goal. We categorized baseline age as <60, 60 to <70, 70 to <80, and ≥80 years and TI as no antihypertensive medication intensification per participant visit. Generalized estimating equations generated odds ratios for TI associated with age, stratified by treatment group based on nested models adjusted for baseline frailty index score (fit [frailty index, ≤0.10], less fit [0.10

RESULTS

Participants 60 to <70, 70 to <80, and ≥80 years of age had a higher prevalence of TI in both treatment groups versus participants <60 years of age (standard: 59.7%, 60.5%, and 60.1% versus 56.0%; 29 527 participant visits; intensive: 55.1%, 57.2%, and 57.8% versus 53.8%; 47 129 participant visits). The adjusted odds ratios for TI comparing participants ≥80 versus <60 years of age were 1.32 (95% CI, 1.14-1.53) and 1.25 (95% CI, 1.11-1.41) in the standard and intensive treatment groups, respectively. Adjustment for frailty, cognitive function, or gait speed did not attenuate the association or demonstrate effect modification (all Pinteraction, >0.10).

CONCLUSIONS

Older age is associated with greater TI independent of physical or cognitive function, implying age bias in hypertension management.

Collapse

Key Words

• frailty
• functional status
• goals
• hypertension
• odds ratio

Collapse

MESH Headings

• Aged
• Aged, 80 and over
• Humans
• Middle Aged
• Antihypertensive Agents/therapeutic use
• Antihypertensive Agents/pharmacology
• Blood Pressure/physiology
• Frailty/diagnosis
• Frailty/epidemiology
• Hypertension/diagnosis
• Hypertension/drug therapy
• Hypertension/epidemiology
• Risk Factors

Collapse

Grants

• K01 HL133468 NHLBI NIH HHS
• K24 AG080168 NIA NIH HHS
• K01 MD014158 NIMHD NIH HHS
• R01 AG065805 NIA NIH HHS
• R01 AG055606 NIA NIH HHS
• R38 HL143605 NHLBI NIH HHS
• R01 HL139837 NHLBI NIH HHS

Collapse

Affiliation(s)

Alexander R Zheutlin Department of Internal Medicine (A.R.Z.), Spencer Fox Eccles School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City
Daniel K Addo Intermountain Healthcare Department of Population Health Sciences (D.K.A., J.A.J., C.G.D., J.S.H., T.G., A.P.B.), Spencer Fox Eccles School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City
Joshua A Jacobs Intermountain Healthcare Department of Population Health Sciences (D.K.A., J.A.J., C.G.D., J.S.H., T.G., A.P.B.), Spencer Fox Eccles School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City
Catherine G Derington Intermountain Healthcare Department of Population Health Sciences (D.K.A., J.A.J., C.G.D., J.S.H., T.G., A.P.B.), Spencer Fox Eccles School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City
Jennifer S Herrick Intermountain Healthcare Department of Population Health Sciences (D.K.A., J.A.J., C.G.D., J.S.H., T.G., A.P.B.), Spencer Fox Eccles School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City Informatics, Decision-Enhancement, and Analytic Sciences Center, Veterans Affairs, Salt Lake City Health Care System, Utah (J.S.H., A.P.B.)
Tom Greene Intermountain Healthcare Department of Population Health Sciences (D.K.A., J.A.J., C.G.D., J.S.H., T.G., A.P.B.), Spencer Fox Eccles School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City
Eric L Stulberg Department of Neurology (E.L.S.), Spencer Fox Eccles School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City
Dan R Berlowitz Department of Public Health, University of Massachusetts-Lowell (D.R.B.)
Jeff D Williamson Section on Gerontology and Geriatric Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine (J.D.W.), Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC
Nicholas M Pajewski Department of Biostatistics and Data Science, Division of Public Health Sciences (N.M.P.), Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC
Mark A Supiano Geriatrics Division, Spencer Fox Eccles School of Medicine, University of Utah Center on Aging, Salt Lake City (M.A.S.)
Adam P Bress Intermountain Healthcare Department of Population Health Sciences (D.K.A., J.A.J., C.G.D., J.S.H., T.G., A.P.B.), Spencer Fox Eccles School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City Informatics, Decision-Enhancement, and Analytic Sciences Center, Veterans Affairs, Salt Lake City Health Care System, Utah (J.S.H., A.P.B.)

Collapse

Antihypertensive Medication Regimens Used by US Adults With Hypertension and the Potential for Fixed-Dose Combination Products: The National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys 2015 to 2020

Background Fixed-dose combination (FDC) antihypertensive products improve blood pressure control and adherence among patients with hypertension. It is unknown to what degree commercially available FDC products meet the current hypertension management prescription patterns in the United States. Methods and Results This cross-sectional analysis of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys 2015 to March 2020 included participants with hypertension taking ≥2 antihypertensive medications (N=2451). After constructing each participant's regimen according to antihypertensive classes used, we estimated the extent to which the 7 class-level FDC regimens available in the United States as of January 2023 would match the regimens used. Among a weighted population of 34.1 million US adults (mean age, 66.0 years; 52.8% women; 69.1% non-Hispanic White race and ethnicity), the proportions using 2, 3, 4, and ≥5 antihypertensive classes were 60.6%, 28.2%, 9.1%, and 1.6%, respectively. The 7 FDC regimens were among 189 total regimens used (3.7%), and 39.2% of the population used one of the FDC regimens (95% CI, 35.5%-43.0%; 13.4 million US adults); 60.8% of the population (95% CI, 57.0%-64.5%; 20.7 million US adults) were using a regimen not available as a class-equivalent FDC product. Conclusions Three in 5 US adults with hypertension taking ≥2 antihypertensive classes are using a regimen that is not commercially available as a class-equivalent FDC product as of January 2023. To maximize the potential benefit of FDCs to improve medication adherence (and thus blood pressure control) among patients taking multiple antihypertensive medications, use of FDC-compatible regimens and improvements in the product landscape are needed.

The therapeutic concordance approach reduces adverse drug reactions in patients with resistant hypertension

Background

Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) remain among the leading causes of therapy-resistant hypertension (TRH) and uncontrolled blood pressure (BP). We have recently reported beneficial results in BP control in patients with TRH adopting an innovative approach, defined as therapeutic concordance, in which trained physicians and pharmacists reach a concordance with patients to make them more involved in the therapeutic decision-making process.

Methods

The main scope of this study was to investigate whether the therapeutic concordance approach could lead to a reduction in ADR occurrence in TRH patients. The study was performed in a large population of hypertensive subjects of the Campania Salute Network in Italy (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02211365).

Results

We enrolled 4,943 patients who were firstly followed-up for 77.64 ± 34.44 months, allowing us to identify 564 subjects with TRH. Then, 282 of these patients agreed to participate in an investigation to test the impact of the therapeutic concordance approach on ADRs. At the end of this investigation, which had a follow-up of 91.91 ± 54.7 months, 213 patients (75.5%) remained uncontrolled while 69 patients (24.5%, p < 0.0001) reached an optimal BP control. Strikingly, during the first follow-up, patients had complained of a total of 194 ADRs, with an occurrence rate of 68.1% and the therapeutic concordance approach significantly reduced ADRs to 72 (25.5%).

Conclusion

Our findings indicate that the therapeutic concordance approach significantly reduces ADRs in TRH patients.

Antihypertensive Medication Regimens Used in the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial

BACKGROUND

Describing the antihypertensive medication regimens used in the SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial) would contextualize the standard and intensive systolic blood pressure (SBP) interventions and may inform future implementation efforts to achieve population-wide intensive SBP goals.

METHODS

We included SPRINT participants with complete medication data at the prerandomization and 12-month visits. Regimens were categorized by antihypertensive medication class. Analyses were stratified by treatment group (standard goal SBP <140 mm Hg versus intensive goal SBP <120 mm Hg).

RESULTS

Among 7860 participants (83.7% of 9361 randomized), the median number of classes used at the prerandomization visit was 2.0 and 2.0 in the standard and intensive groups (P=0.559). At 12-months, the median number of classes used was 3.0 and 2.0 in the intensive and standard groups (P<0.001). Prerandomization, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACE), or angiotensin-II receptor blocker (ARB) monotherapy was the most common regimen in the intensive and standard groups (12.6% versus 12.2%). At 12-months, ACE/ARB monotherapy was still the most common regimen among standard group participants (14.7%) and was used by 5.3% of intensive group participants. Multidrug regimens used by the intensive and standard participants at 12 months were as follows: an ACE/ARB with thiazide (12.2% and 7.9%); an ACE/ARB with calcium channel blocker (6.2% and 6.8%); an ACE/ARB, thiazide, and calcium channel blocker (11.4% and 4.3%); and an ACE/ARB, thiazide, calcium channel blocker, and beta-blocker (6.5% and 1.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

SPRINT investigators favored combining ACEs or ARBs, thiazide diuretics, and calcium channel blockers to target SBP <120 mm Hg, compared to ACE/ARB monotherapy to target SBP <140 mm Hg.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01206062.