Deprescribing preventive cardiovascular medication in patients with predicted low cardiovascular disease risk in general practice - the ECSTATIC study: a cluster randomised non-inferiority trial

Withdrawal of antihypertensive drugs in older people

BACKGROUND

Hypertension is an important risk factor for subsequent cardiovascular events, including ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke, myocardial infarction, and heart failure, as well as chronic kidney disease, cognitive decline, and premature death. Overall, the use of antihypertensive medications has led to a reduction in cardiovascular disease, morbidity rates, and mortality rates. However, the use of antihypertensive medications is also associated with harms, especially in older people, including the development of adverse drug reactions and drug-drug interactions, and can contribute to increasing medication-related burden. As such, discontinuation of antihypertensives may be considered appropriate in some older people.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of withdrawal of antihypertensive medications used for hypertension or primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in older adults.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched the Cochrane Hypertension Specialised Register, CENTRAL (2022, Issue 9), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, the WHO ICTRP, and ClinicalTrials.gov up to October 2022. We also conducted reference checking and citation searches, and contacted study authors to identify any additional studies when appropriate. There were no language restrictions on the searches.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of withdrawal versus continuation of antihypertensive medications used for hypertension or primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in older adults (defined as 50 years of age and over). Eligible participants were living in the community, residential aged care facilities, or based in hospital settings. We included trials evaluating the complete withdrawal of all antihypertensive medication, as well as those focusing on a dose reduction of antihypertensive medication.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We compared the intervention of discontinuing or reducing the dose of antihypertensive medication to continuing antihypertensive medication using mean differences (MD) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) for continuous variables, and Peto odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CI for binary variables. Our primary outcomes were mortality, myocardial infarction, and the development of adverse drug reactions or adverse drug withdrawal reactions. Secondary outcomes included hospitalisation, stroke, blood pressure (systolic and diastolic), falls, quality of life, and success in withdrawing from antihypertensives. Two review authors independently, and in duplicate, conducted all stages of study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified no new studies in this update. Six RCTs from the original review met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review (1073 participants). Study duration and follow-up ranged from 4 weeks to 56 weeks. Meta-analysis of studies showed that discontinuing antihypertensives, compared to continuing, may result in little to no difference in all-cause mortality (OR 2.08, 95% CI 0.79 to 5.46; P = 0.14, I2 = 0%; 4 studies, 630 participants; low certainty of evidence), and that the evidence is very uncertain about the effect on myocardial infarction (OR 1.86, 95% CI 0.19 to 17.98; P = 0.59, I2 = 0%; 2 studies, 447 participants; very low certainty of evidence). Meta-analysis was not possible for the development of adverse drug reactions and withdrawal reactions; the evidence is very uncertain about the effect of antihypertensive discontinuation on the risk of adverse drug reactions (very low certainty of evidence), and the included studies did not assess adverse drug withdrawal reactions specifically. One study reported on hospitalisations; discontinuing antihypertensives may result in little to no difference in hospitalisation (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.33 to 2.10; P = 0.70; 1 study, 385 participants; low certainty of evidence). Meta-analysis showed that discontinuing antihypertensives may result in little to no difference in stroke (OR 1.44, 95% CI 0.25 to 8.35; P = 0.68, I2 = 6%; 3 studies, 524 participants; low certainty of evidence). Blood pressure may be higher in the discontinuation group than the continuation group (systolic blood pressure: MD 9.75 mmHg, 95% CI 7.33 to 12.18; P < 0.001, I2 = 67%; 5 studies, 767 participants; low certainty of evidence; and diastolic blood pressure: MD 3.5 mmHg, 95% CI 1.82 to 5.18; P < 0.001, I2 = 47%; 5 studies, 768 participants; low certainty of evidence). No studies reported falls. The sources of bias included selective reporting (reporting bias), lack of blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias), incomplete outcome data (attrition bias), and lack of blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The main conclusions from the 2020 review still apply. Discontinuing antihypertensives may result in little to no difference in mortality, hospitalisation, and stroke. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of discontinuing antihypertensives on myocardial infarction and adverse drug reactions and adverse drug withdrawal reactions. Discontinuing antihypertensives may result in an increase in blood pressure. There was no information about the effect on falls. The evidence was of low to very low certainty, mainly due to small studies and low event rates. These limitations mean that we cannot draw any firm conclusions about the effect of deprescribing antihypertensives on these outcomes. Future research should focus on populations with the greatest uncertainty of the benefit:risk ratio for the use of antihypertensive medications, such as those with frailty, older age groups, and those taking polypharmacy, and measure clinically important outcomes such as adverse drug events, falls, and quality of life.

Latent Class Analysis Identifies Four Distinct Patient Deprescribing Typologies Among Older Adults in Four Countries

Background and Objectives

Polypharmacy, the concurrent use of multiple medicines, is a growing concern among older adults and those with chronic conditions. Deprescribing through dose reduction or discontinuing selected medicines is a strategy for reducing medicine-related harm. The Patient Deprescribing Typology was developed using qualitative methods to describe the varying factors that are important to older adults when they consider deprescribing. The objective of this study was to use quantitative methods to define distinct classes of older adults via the Patient Deprescribing Typology.

Research Design and Methods

This study used a cross-sectional experimental design in which data was collected via an online survey from participants 65 years and older in Australia, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and the United States. A latent class analysis was performed using the 4-item Patient Deprescribing Typology that collected data about the beliefs about the importance of medicines, how older adults learn about medicines, medicine decision-making preferences, and attitudes towards stopping medicines.

Results

Older adults (n = 2,250) were a median of 70 years and 2-thirds reported that their highest level of education was an associate's degree or trade school or less. We identified 4 distinct Patient Deprescribing Typology classes: Class 1 "Trusts their doctor" (41.6%), Class 2 "Makes own decisions" (30.2%), Class 3 "Avoids deprescribing" (15.5%), and Class 4 'Medicines not important' (12.7%).

Discussion and Implications

Older adults report diverse perspectives about deprescribing, emphasizing the need for tailored communication strategies in clinical settings. Additional research is needed to examine older adults' preferences in real-world contexts to refine and improve deprescribing interventions.

Clinical Trial Registration

NCT04676282.

Deprescribing of Antihypertensive Medications and Cognitive Function in Nursing Home Residents

Importance

Antihypertensive medication deprescribing is common among nursing home residents, yet its association with cognitive decline remains uncertain.

Objective

To investigate the association of deprescribing antihypertensive medication with changes in cognitive function in nursing home residents.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study using a target trial emulation approach included VA long-term care residents aged 65 years or older with stays of at least 12 weeks from 2006 to 2019. Residents who were not prescribed antihypertensive medication, with blood pressure greater than 160/90 mm Hg, or with heart failure were excluded. Eligible residents with stable medication use for 4 weeks were classified into deprescribing or stable user groups and followed for 2 years or until death or discharge for intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis. Participants switching treatment groups were censored in the per-protocol analysis. Cognitive function measurements during follow-up were analyzed using an ordinal generalized linear mixed model, adjusting for confounders with inverse probability of treatment weighting. Per-protocol analysis included inverse probability of censoring weighting. Data analyses were performed from May 1, 2023, and July 1, 2024.

Exposures

Deprescribing was defined as a reduction in the total number of antihypertensive medications or a decrease in medication dosage by 30%, sustained for a minimum of 2 weeks.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Cognitive Function Scale (CFS) was classified as cognitively intact (CFS = 1), mildly impaired (CFS = 2), moderately impaired (CFS = 3), and severely impaired (CFS = 4).

Results

Of 45 183 long-term care residents, 12 644 residents (mean [SD] age 77.7 [8.3] years; 329 [2.6%] females and 12 315 [97.4%] males) and 12 053 residents (mean [SD] age 77.7 [8.3] years; 314 [2.6%] females and 11 739 [97.4%] males) met eligibility for ITT and per-protocol analyses, respectively. At the end of the follow-up, 12.0% of residents had a worsened CFS (higher score) and 7.7% had an improved CFS (lower score) with 10.8% of the deprescribing group and 12.1% of the stable user group showing a worsened CFS score. In the per-protocol analysis, the deprescribing group had a 12% reduction in the odds of progressing to a worse CFS category per 12-week period (odds ratio, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.78-0.99) compared to the stable user group. Among residents with dementia, deprescribing was associated with 16% reduced odds of cognitive decline (odds ratio, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.72-0.98). These patterns remained consistent in the ITT analysis.

Conclusions and Relevance

This cohort study indicates that deprescribing is associated with less cognitive decline in nursing home residents, particularly those with dementia. More data are needed to understand the benefits and harms of antihypertensive deprescribing to inform patient-centered medication management in nursing homes.

Deprescribing Hypertension Medication in Older Adults: Can It Lower Drug Burden Without Causing Harm?

Due to the high prevalence of older individuals with multiple morbidities, polypharmacy, and exposed to unnecessary or inappropriate treatments that can cause potentially serious adverse effects, better medication management should be an objective of all health professionals. This is particularly important in older patients with hypertension. Antihypertensive deprescribing and non-pharmacological strategies have been disseminated as viable and safe alternatives for improving the quality of care for hypertension in the older population.

Deprescribing in hospitalized patients with cancer: A clinical pharmacist-initiated multidisciplinary intervention

PURPOSE

To examine the feasibility and utility of a clinical pharmacist-led multidisciplinary deprescribing intervention in hospitalized cancer patients.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study among cancer patients hospitalized in oncology department who underwent a medication review by a clinical pharmacist. The pharmacist's recommendations were evaluated by a multidisciplinary team. We collected demographic and clinical information, including information on medication burden before and after intervention and number and types of deprescribing recommendations and their acceptance, and compared them among patients with different estimated life expectancies.

RESULTS

During a 2-year study period, 392 patients evaluated by the clinical pharmacist received 2808 prescriptions (median, 7 per patient). The clinical pharmacist recommended deprescribing of 559 medications (19.9%; 95 CI, 18.4-21.4%), at least 1 medication in 321 patients (82%). The multidisciplinary team accepted 89.6% of deprescribing recommendations, resulting in a reduction of the medication burden by 501 medications (P < 0.001). 12.8% of deprescriptions addressed clinically manifested adverse drug effects in 15.1% of patients. The estimation of life expectancy by the senior oncologist was reasonably accurate, but did not affect deprescribing rate.

CONCLUSIONS

A clinical pharmacist-led deprescribing intervention within a multidisciplinary team effectively reduces medication burden and addresses adverse drug effects in cancer patients. Deprescribing interventions should be incorporated in cancer patients at any stage of the disease.

Targets for deprescribing in patients with hypertension and reflex syncope

BACKGROUND

We aimed to identify the target of deprescribing, i.e. the 24-hour SBP increase needed to achieve the greatest reduction of SBP drops.

METHOD

Forty hypertensive patients (mean age 73.6 ± 9.3 years, 26 females) with reflex syncope and SBP drops on a screening ABPM were advised to withdraw or to reduce their therapy. The study objective was the reduction of SBP drops <90 mmHg and <100 mmHg on a second ABPM performed within 3 months.

RESULTS

Out of a total of 98 drugs taken during ABPM 1, 44 were withdrawn, 16 had a dose reduction and 38 remained unchanged at the time of ABPM 2. 24-hour SBP increased from 119.7 ± 10.1 mmHg to 129.4 ± 13.2 mmHg during ABPM2. Total disappearance of daytime SBP drops <100 mmHg was achieved in 20 (50 %) patients who had 24-hour SBP of 134±13 mmHg and an increase from ABPM 1 of 12 (IQR 5-20) mmHg. Compared with the 20 patients who had persistence of drops, these patients had a greater reduction of the number of hypotensive drugs (67 % versus 19 %, p = 0.002) and a greater rate of withdrawals (62 % versus 29 %, p = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

In hypertensive patients with reflex syncope, an increase of 12 mmHg and an absolute value of 24-hour SBP of 134 mmHg appear to represent the optimal goals aimed to prevent SBP drops. Drugs withdrawal, rather than simply dose reduction, is mostly required to achieve the above target.

Blood pressure and variability responses to the down-titration of antihypertensive drugs

OBJECTIVES

Several recent guidelines have proposed the gradual reduction of antihypertensive drugs for patients with well controlled blood pressure (BP). However, no studies have examined alterations in BP variability (BPV) during the down-titration of antihypertensives. This study aims to investigate changes in home BPV during the down-titration of antihypertensives.

METHODS

We analyzed 83 hypertensive patients who underwent down-titration of antihypertensives and had available home BP data during the down-titration. Down-titration was performed when home SBP was less than 120 mmHg, regardless of the clinic SBP. Primary exposure variable was the standard deviation (SD) of home BP.

RESULTS

Among 83 patients (mean age 66.3 ± 11.9 years; 45.8% men), down-titration led to increase home SBP (from 110.5 to 118.7 mmHg; P  < 0.001), and home DBP (from 68.8 to 72.8 mmHg; P  = 0.001) significantly. There were no significant differences in SDs of SBP [from 6.02 ± 3.79 to 5.76 ± 3.09 in morning, P  = 0.570; from 6.13 ± 3.32 to 6.63 ± 3.70 in evening, P  = 0.077; and from 6.54 (4.80, 8.31) to 6.37 (4.65, 8.76) in home SBP, P  = 0.464] and SDs of DBP during the down-titration of antihypertensive drugs.

CONCLUSION

Down-titration of antihypertensive drugs did not have notable impact on clinic BP and home BPV, while significantly increasing home BP. These findings provide important insights indicating that the potential concern related to an increase in BPV in the planned strategy of reducing antihypertensive drugs is not substantial.

Efficacy of decentralised home-based antihypertensive treatment in older adults with multimorbidity and polypharmacy (ATEMPT): an open-label randomised controlled pilot trial

BACKGROUND

Older patients with multimorbidity and polypharmacy have been under-represented in clinical trials. We aimed to assess the effect of different intensities of antihypertensive treatment on changes in blood pressure, major safety outcomes, and patient-reported outcomes in this population.

METHODS

ATEMPT was a decentralised, two-armed, parallel-group, open-label randomised controlled pilot trial conducted in the Thames Valley area, South East England. Individuals aged 65 years or older with multimorbidity (three or more chronic conditions) or polypharmacy (five or more types of medications) and a systolic blood pressure of 115-165 mm Hg were eligible for inclusion. Participants were identified through a search of national hospital discharge databases, identification of patients registered with an online pharmacy, and via targeted advertising on social media platforms. Participants were randomly assigned to receive up to two more classes versus up to two fewer classes of antihypertensive medications. Apart from routine home visits for conducting the baseline assessment, all communication, monitoring, and management of participants by the trial team was conducted remotely. The primary outcome was change in home-measured blood pressure.

FINDINGS

Between Dec 15, 2020, and Aug 31, 2022, 230 participants were randomly assigned (n=126 to more vs n=104 to fewer antihypertensive medications). The frequency of serious adverse events was similar across both groups; no cardiovascular events occurred in the more antihypertensive drugs group, compared with six in the fewer antihypertensive drugs group, of which two were fatal. Over a 13-month follow-up period, the mean systolic blood pressure in the group allocated to receive more antihypertensive medications decreased from 134·5 mm Hg (SD 10·7) at baseline to 122·1 mm Hg (10·5). By contrast, in the group allocated to receive fewer antihypertensive medications, it remained relatively unchanged, moving from 134·8 mm Hg (SD 11·2) at baseline to 132·9 mm Hg (15·3); this corresponded to a mean difference of -10·7 mm Hg (95% CI -17·5 to -4·0).

INTERPRETATION

Remotely delivered antihypertensive treatment substantially reduced systolic blood pressure in older adults who are often less represented in trials, with no increase in the risk of serious adverse events. The results of this trial will inform a larger clinical trial focusing on assessing major cardiovascular events, safety, physical functioning, and cognitive function that is currently in the planning stages. These results also underscore the efficiency of decentralised trial designs, which might be of broader interest in other settings.

FUNDING

National Institute for Health Research Oxford Biomedical Research Centre and the Oxford Martin School.

Interventions aimed to increase average 24-h systolic blood pressure reduce blood pressure drops in patients with reflex syncope and orthostatic intolerance

AIMS

Systolic blood pressure (SBP) drops recorded by 24-h ambulatory blood pressure (BP) monitoring (ABPM) identify patients with susceptibility to reflex syncope and orthostatic intolerance. We tested the hypothesis that treatments aimed to increase BP (reassurance, education, and lifestyle measures plus pharmacological strategies) can reduce SBP drops.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This was a multicentre, observational proof-of-concept study performed in patients with reflex syncope and/or orthostatic intolerance and with SBP drops on a screening ABPM. Among 144 eligible patients, 111 underwent a second ABPM on average 2.5 months after start of treatment. Overall, mean 24-h SBP increased from 114.1 ± 12.1 to 121.4 ± 14.5 mmHg (P < 0.0001). The number of SBP drops <90 and <100 mmHg decreased by 61%, 46% during daytime, and by 48% and 37% during 24-h period, respectively (P < 0.0001 for all). The dose-response relationship between difference in 24-h average SBP increase and reduction in number of SBP drops reached a plateau around ∼15 mmHg increase of 24-h SBP. The reduction in SBP drop rate was consistent and significant in patients who underwent deprescription of hypotensive medications (n = 44) and in patients who received BP-rising drugs (n = 67).

CONCLUSION

In patients with reflex syncope and/or orthostatic intolerance, an increase in average 24-h SBP, regardless of the implemented strategy, significantly reduced the number of SBP drops and symptom burden. A 13 mmHg increase in 24-h SBP appears to represent the optimal goal for aborting the maximal number of SBP drops, representing a possible target for future interventions. ClincalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05729724.

Pharmacist-Led Deprescribing for Patients With Polypharmacy and Chronic Disease States: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Background: Current literature and practice have demonstrated that pharmacists have an integral role in deprescribing. However, research regarding their impact on patients with chronic diseases is limited. Objective: To assess the impact of a pharmacist-led intervention on deprescribing inappropriate medication for patients with chronic diseases within a four-month study period compared to patients receiving usual care. Methods: This study was conducted at NYU Langone Health. Patients of the intervention group were referred by a provider and met the criteria of polypharmacy, required chronic disease states management, were nonadherent to medications, had poor health literacy, or required titration for heart failure (HF) guideline directed medical therapy. Results: A total of 142 patients were reviewed over a two-year period. At the end of the study period, the median number of medications for the two respective groups was similar (11 [4 - 30] vs 11 [2 - 23]). The pharmacist-led intervention had on average one medication deprescribed (m = -1.00, sd = 2.57), whereas the control group had on average .44 additional medications (m = 0.44, sd = 3.32) prescribed. Furthermore, the intervention group presented statistically significant differences (P = 0.046) regarding their diastolic blood pressure after the pharmacists' intervention (m = 72.69, sd = 11.64). Most importantly, patients with HF presented statistically significant improvement in their ejection fractions after the intervention (m = 41.46%, sd = 19.28%). Conclusion: The pharmacist-led intervention resulted in significant discontinuation of medications for patients in the intervention group compared to those in the usual care group within four-months.

Centrally acting antihypertensives and alpha-blockers in people at risk of falls: therapeutic dilemmas-a clinical review

PURPOSE

The aim of this clinical review was to summarise the existing knowledge on the adverse effects of alpha-blockers and centrally acting antihypertensives, the effect these may have on falls risk, and guide deprescribing of these medications.

METHODS

Literature searches were conducted using PubMed and Embase. Additional articles were identified by searching reference lists and reference to personal libraries. We discuss the place of alpha-blockers and centrally acting antihypertensives in the treatment of hypertension and methods for deprescribing.

RESULTS

Alpha-blockers and centrally acting antihypertensives are no longer recommended for the treatment of hypertension unless all other agents are contraindicated or not tolerated. These medications carry a significant falls risk and non-falls risk-associated side effects. Tools to aid and guide de-prescribing and monitoring of the withdrawal of these medication classes are available to assist the clinician including information on reducing the risk of withdrawal syndromes.

CONCLUSIONS

Centrally acting antihypertensives and alpha-blockers increase the risk of falls through a variety of mechanisms-principally by increasing the risk of hypotension, orthostatic hypotension, arrhythmias and sedation. These agents should be prioritised for de-prescribing in older frailer individuals. We identify a number of tools and a withdrawal protocol to aid the clinician in identifying and de-prescribing these medications.

Withdrawal of antihypertensive medication in young to middle-aged adults: a prospective, single-group, intervention study

BACKGROUND

Although antihypertensive drug therapy is commonly believed to be a life-long therapy, several recent guidelines have suggested that antihypertensive medications can be gradually reduced or discontinued for some patients whose blood pressure (BP) is well-controlled for an extended period. Thus, this pilot study aimed to describe the success rate of antihypertensive drug discontinuation over 6 months among young and middle-aged patients with hypertension.

METHODS

This was a prospective, single-group, intervention study. Patients were eligible for inclusion if their cardiologist judged them to be appropriate candidates for this study, their BP had been controlled both in the office (< 140/90 mmHg) and 24-h ambulatory BP monitoring (< 135/85 mmHg) for at least 6 months with a single tablet dose of antihypertensive medication. A total of 16 patients withdrew their antihypertensive medications at baseline after they received the education, and were followed up over 6 months. After the follow-ups, six patients participated in the in-depth interview.

RESULTS

The likelihood of remaining normotensive at 30, 90, 180, and 195 days was 1.00, 0.85, 0.51, and 0.28, respectively. There were also no significant differences in baseline characteristics and self-care activities over time between normotensive (n = 8) and hypertensive groups (n = 8). In the interview, most patients expressed ambivalent feelings toward stopping medications. Psychological distress (e.g., anxiety) was the primary reason for withdrawal from this study although the patients' BP was under control.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that only a limited portion of antihypertensive patients could stop their medication successively over 6 months. Although we could not identify factors associated with success in maintaining BP over 6 months, we believe that careful selection of eligible patients may increase success in stopping antihypertensive medications. Also, continuous emotional support might be essential in maintaining patients' off-medication.

Feasibility of a protocol for deprescribing antihypertensive medication in older patients in Dutch general practices

BACKGROUND

Older patients using antihypertensive medication may experience Adverse Drug Events (ADEs), and thus benefit from deprescribing. The lack of a practical protocol may hamper deprescribing. Therefore, we aimed to develop a deprescribing protocol, based on a review of literature, combined with a feasibility test in a small number of patients.

METHODS

A deprescribing protocol for general practitioners was drafted and tested in older patients using multiple antihypertensive medication in a single arm intervention. Patients were included if they were 75 years or older, were using two or more antihypertensives, had at least one ADE linked to antihypertensive medication and deprescribing was considered to be safe by their general practitioner. The primary outcome was the percentage of patients for whom one or more antihypertensive drugs were stopped or reduced in dose after 12 months of follow up while maintaining safe blood pressures. Secondary outcomes were the proportion of patients reporting no ADEs after 12 months and the number of deprescribed antihypertensives. Patient's opinions on deprescribing and enablers and barriers for study participation were also collected.

RESULTS

Nine general practitioners included 14 patients to deprescribe antihypertensive medication using the deprescribing protocol. After 12 months antihypertensive drug use was lowered in 11 patients (79%). These patients had a mean systolic blood pressure increase of 16 mmHg and a mean diastolic blood pressure increase of 8 mmHg. Nine patients (64%) reported experiencing no ADEs anymore after twelve months. The mean number of deprescribed antihypertensives was 1.1 in all patients and 1.4 (range: 0.5 to 3.5) in patients who successfully lowered their medication. At baseline, being able to use less medication was the most frequently mentioned enabler to participate in this study. The most frequently mentioned positive experience at the end of the study was using less medication, which was in line with the most mentioned enabler to participate in this study.

CONCLUSION

A protocol for deprescribing antihypertensives in older patients was considered feasible, as it resulted in a substantial degree of safe deprescribing in this pilot study. Larger studies are needed to demonstrate the effect and safety of deprescribing antihypertensives in older patients.

Antihypertensive Deprescribing in Older Adults: a Practical Guide

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To summarise evidence on both appropriate and inappropriate antihypertensive drug withdrawal.

RECENT FINDINGS

Deprescribing should be attempted in the following steps: (1) identify patients with several comorbidities and significant functional decline, i.e. people at higher risk for negative outcomes related to polypharmacy and lower blood pressure; (2) check blood pressure; (3) identify candidate drugs for deprescribing; (4) withdraw medications at 4-week intervals; (5) monitor blood pressure and check for adverse events. Although evidence is accumulating regarding short-term outcomes of antihypertensive deprescribing, long-term effects remain unclear. The limited evidence for antihypertensive deprescribing means that it should not be routinely attempted, unless in response to specific adverse events or following discussions between physicians and patients about the uncertain benefits and harms of the treatment.

PERSPECTIVES

Clinical controlled trials are needed to examine the long-term effects of deprescribing in older subjects, especially in those with comorbidities, and significant functional decline.

Polypharmacy and Cardiovascular Diseases: Consideration for Older Adults and Women

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The intent of this review is to provide an update in polypharmacy in older adults and women with a focus on common determinants and strategies to mitigate polypharmacy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Polypharmacy is becoming a critical focus in the management of cardiovascular diseases. It may emerge unintentionally while managing multimorbidity in older adults or in the vulnerable subgroup of patients, such as pregnant and lactating females. Clinicians should utilize several approaches such as deprescribing, sex-specific risk assessment, and encouraging healthy lifestyle to minimize inappropriate and unnecessary use of medications. A shared decision-making model along with coordination and collaboration among healthcare providers should be utilized in the selection and management of pharmacotherapies.

Evaluating alternative methods of comparing antihypertensive treatment intensity

OBJECTIVES

To change blood pressure treatment, clinicians can modify medication count or dose. However, existing studies have measured count modification, which may miss clinically important dose change in the absence of count change. This research demonstrates how dose modification captures more information about management than medication count alone.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

METHODS

We included patients 65 years and older with established primary care at the Veterans Health Administration (July 2011-June 2013). We captured medication count and standardized dose change over 90 to 120 days using a validated pharmacy fill algorithm. We determined frequency of dose change without count change (and vice versa), no change in either, change in same direction ("concordant"), and change in opposite direction ("discordant"). We compared change according to systolic blood pressure (SBP) and compared concordance using a minimum threshold definition of dose change of at least 50% (instead of any change) of baseline dose modification.

RESULTS

Among 440,801 patients, 64.2% had dose change; 22.0%, count change; 35.6%, no change in either; 42.4%, dose change without count modification; and 0.2%, count change without dose modification. Discordance occurred in 2.1% of observations. Using the minimum threshold definition of change, 68.7% had no change in either dose or count. Treatment was more frequently changed at SBP greater than 140 mm Hg.

CONCLUSIONS

Measuring change in antihypertensive treatment using medication count frequently missed an isolated dose change in treatment modification and less often misclassified regimen modifications where there was no modification in total dose. In future research, measuring dose modification using our new algorithm would capture change in hypertension treatment intensity more precisely than current methods.

Characterising older adults' risk of harm from blood-pressure lowering medications: a sub-analysis from the PRIME study

AIM

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is common amongst frail older people. The evidence base for CVD commonly excludes older adults with multimorbidity or chronic conditions. Most cardiovascular drugs have the potential to lower blood pressure (BP) and therefore cause medication-related harm (MRH). We aimed to identify key clinical and sociodemographic characteristics associated with MRH in older people taking BP-lowering drugs for whatever indication they were prescribed.

METHODS

The PRIME (prospective study to develop a model to stratify the risk of MRH in hospitalised elderly patients in the UK) study investigating the incidence and cost of MRH in older people across Southern England. Adults ≥65 years were recruited from five teaching hospitals at hospital discharge and followed up for 8 weeks. Telephone interviews with study participants, review of primary care records and hospital readmissions were undertaken to identify MRH. PRIME study participants taking BP-lowering drugs (as defined by National Institute for Health and Care Excellence hypertension guidelines) were included in this analysis.

RESULTS

One hundred and four (12%) study patients experienced a total of 153 MRH events associated with BP-lowering drugs. Patients on four BP-lowering drugs were five times more likely to experience MRH compared to those taking one medication (OR 4.96; 95%CI 1.63-15.13; P = 0.01). Most MRH events were classified 'serious' (80%, n = 123), requiring dose change or treatment cessation. Almost half of MRH were potentially preventable (49%, n = 75).

CONCLUSION

Polypharmacy from BP-lowering drugs in older people is associated with preventable harm. Decisions around cardiovascular risk reduction should be carefully considered in view of MRH arising from BP-lowering drugs.

Statin Discontinuation and Cardiovascular Events Among Older People in Denmark

Importance

Statin use is common in older persons. Given uncertainties in ongoing benefit, changes in health status, and shifting goals of care and preferences, statin discontinuation may be considered in some older persons, although there is currently little evidence to guide this decision.

Objective

To evaluate the association between statin discontinuation and the rate of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) among people aged 75 years or older who receive long-term statin treatment.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study included all persons in Denmark aged 75 years or older who were treated with statins for at least 5 consecutive years as of January 1, 2011. Participants were followed up until December 31, 2016. Data were analyzed from July to November, 2020.

Exposure

Statin discontinuation.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Rate of occurrence of MACE and its components (myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack, coronary revascularization, and death due to myocardial infarction or ischemic stroke) in persons continuing statins compared with those discontinuing statins. Confounding adjustment was done using inverse probability of treatment weighting. Analyses were conducted separately for primary prevention (no history of cardiovascular disease) and secondary prevention (history of cardiovascular disease).

Results

The study included 67 418 long-term statin users, including 27 463 in the primary prevention analysis (median age, 79 years [IQR, 77-83 years]; 18 134 [66%] female) and 39 955 in the secondary prevention analysis (median age, 80 years [IQR, 77-84 years]; 18 717 [47%] female). In both primary and secondary prevention analyses, the rate of MACE was higher among persons who discontinued statins compared with those who continued statins. In the primary prevention cohort, the weighted rate difference was 9 per 1000 person-years (95% CI, 5-12 per 1000 person-years) and the adjusted sub-hazard ratio was 1.32 (95% CI, 1.18-1.48), corresponding to 1 excess MACE per 112 persons who discontinued statins per year. In the secondary prevention cohort, the weighted rate difference was 13 per 1000 person-years (95% CI, 8-17 per 1000 person-years) and the adjusted sub-hazard ratio was 1.28 (95% CI, 1.18-1.39), corresponding to 1 excess MACE per 77 persons who discontinued statins per year.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study, among older adults receiving long-term statin treatment, discontinuation of statins was associated with a higher rate of MACE compared with statin continuation in both the primary and the secondary prevention cohorts. These findings suggest a need for robust evidence from randomized clinical trials.

Anti-hypertensive drugs deprescribing: an updated systematic review of clinical trials

Background

Polypharmacy is defined as the prescription of at least 5 different medicines for therapeutic or prophylactic effect and is a serious issue among elderly patients, who are frequently affected by multi-morbidity. Deprescribing is one of the proposed approaches to reduce the number of administered drugs, by eliminating those that are inappropriately prescribed. The aim of this systematic review is to provide an updated and systematic assessment of the benefit-risk profile of deprescribing of anti-hypertensive drugs, which are among the most commonly used drugs.

Methods

MEDLINE, EMBASE and The Cochrane Library were searched for studies assessing the efficacy and safety of anti-hypertensive drugs deprescribing in the period between January, 12,016 and December, 312,019. The quality of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) was assessed using the GRADE approach for the evaluation of the main outcomes. The risk of bias assessment was carried out using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool.

Results

Overall, two RCTs were identified. Despite summarized evidence was in favor of anti-hypertensive deprescribing, the overall risk of bias was rated as high for each RCT included. According to the GRADE approach, the overall quality of the RCTs included was moderate regarding the following outcomes: systolic blood pressure < 150 mmHg after 12 weeks of follow-up, quality of life, frailty and cardiovascular risk.

Conclusions

This updated systematic review of the efficacy and safety of anti-hypertensive treatment deprescribing found two recently published RCTs, in addition to the previous guideline of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Evidence points towards non-inferiority of anti-hypertensive deprescribing as compared to treatment continuation, despite the quality of published studies is not high. High quality experimental studies are urgently needed to further assess the effect of deprescribing for this drug class in specific categories of patients.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12875-021-01557-y.

Clinical outcomes of modifying hypertension treatment intensity in older adults treated to low blood pressure

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Hypertension treatment reduces cardiovascular events. However, uncertainty remains about benefits and harms of deintensification or further intensification of antihypertensive medication when systolic blood pressure (SBP) is tightly controlled in older multimorbid patients, because of their frequent exclusion in trials. We assessed the association of hypertension treatment deintensification or intensification with clinical outcomes in older adults with tightly controlled SBP.

DESIGN

Longitudinal cohort study (2011-2013) with 9-month follow-up.

SETTING

U.S.-nationwide primary care Veterans Health Administration healthcare system.

PARTICIPANTS

Veterans aged 65 and older with baseline SBP <130 mmHg and ≥1 antihypertensive medication during ≥2 consecutive visits (N = 228,753).

EXPOSURE

Deintensification or intensification, compared with stable treatment.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Cardiovascular events, syncope, or fall injury, as composite and distinct outcomes, within 9 months after exposure. Adjusted logistic regression and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW, sensitivity analysis).

RESULTS

Among 228,753 patients (mean age 75 [SD 7.5] years), the composite outcome occurred in 11,982/93,793 (12.8%) patients with stable treatment, 14,768/72,672 (20.3%) with deintensification, and 11,821/62,288 (19.0%) with intensification. Adjusted absolute outcome risk (95% confidence interval) was higher for deintensification (18.3% [18.1%-18.6%]) and intensification (18.7% [18.4%-19.0%]), compared with stable treatment (14.8% [14.6%-15.0%]), p < 0.001 for both effects in the multivariable model). Deintensification was associated with fewer cardiovascular events than intensification. At baseline SBP <95 mmHg, cardiovascular event risk was similar for deintensification and stable treatment, and fall risk lower for deintensification than intensification. IPTW yielded similar results. Mean follow-up SBP was 124.1 mmHg for stable treatment, 125.1 mmHg after deintensification (p < 0.001), and 124.0 mmHg after intensification (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Antihypertensive treatment deintensification in older patients with tightly controlled SBP was associated with worse outcomes than continuing same treatment intensity. Given higher mortality among patients with treatment modification, confounding by indication may not have been fully corrected by advanced statistical methods for observational data analysis.

Deprescribing intervention activities mapped to guiding principles for use in general practice: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

To identify and characterise activities for deprescribing used in general practice and to map the identified activities to pioneering principles of deprescribing.

SETTING

Primary care.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, EMBASE (Ovid), CINAHL, Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR), Clinicaltrials.gov, ISRCTN registry, OpenGrey, Annals of Family Medicine, BMC Family Practice, Family Practice and British Journal of General Practice (BJGP) from inception to the end of June 2021.

STUDY SELECTION

Included studies were original research (randomised controlled trial, quasi-experimental, cohort study, qualitative and case studies), protocol papers and protocol registrations.

DATA EXTRACTION

Screening and data extraction was completed by one reviewer; 10% of the studies were independently reviewed by a second reviewer. Coding of full-text articles in NVivo was conducted and mapped to five deprescribing principles.

RESULTS

Fifty studies were included. The most frequently used activities were identification of appropriate patients for deprescribing (76%), patient education (50%), general practitioners (GP) education (48%), and development and use of a tapering schedule (38%). Six activities did not align with the five deprescribing principles. As such, two principles (engage practice staff in education and appropriate identification of patients, and provide feedback to staff about deprescribing occurrences within the practice) were added.

CONCLUSION

Activities and guiding principles for deprescribing should be paired together to provide an accessible and comprehensive guide to deprescribing by GPs. The addition of two principles suggests that practice staff and practice management teams may play an instrumental role in sustaining deprescribing processes within clinical practice. Future research is required to determine the most of effective activities to use within each principle and by whom.

MediQuit, an Electronic Deprescribing Tool for Patients on Polypharmacy: Results of a Feasibility Study in German General Practice

BACKGROUND

Deprescribing is an important task for general practitioners (GPs) in the face of risky polypharmacy. The electronic tool "MediQuit" was developed to guide GPs and patients through a deprescribing consultation that entails a drug-selection phase, shared decision making, and advice on safe implementation.

OBJECTIVES

A pilot study was conducted to determine the target group of patients that is selected for consultation and to assess the impact, patient involvement, and feasibility of the tool.

METHODS

This was an uncontrolled pilot study. GPs from two German regions were invited to use MediQuit in consultations with a view to deprescribing one drug, if appropriate. They selected patients on the basis of broad inclusion criteria. Collected data entailed participants' characteristics, patients' medication lists, deprescribed drugs, and feasibility assessments. Patients were contacted shortly after the consultation and again after 4 weeks.

RESULTS

In total, 16 GPs agreed to participate, of whom ten actually performed deprescribing consultations. They selected 41 predominately older patients on excessive polypharmacy. Deprescribing was achieved in 70% of consultations in agreement with patients. Drugs deprescribed were symptom-lowering and preventive drugs (mainly anatomical therapeutic chemical classes A and C). GPs found MediQuit useful in initiating communication on this issue and enhancing deliberations for a deprescribing decision. The median consultation length was 15 min (interquartile range 10-20). At follow-up, GPs and patients infrequently disagreed on which drug(s) was discontinued, and GPs rated patient involvement higher than did patients themselves.

DISCUSSION

MediQuit assists in identifying concrete deprescribing opportunities, patient involvement, and shared decision making. The three-step deprescribing procedure is well-accepted once initial organizational efforts are overcome. After revision, further studies are needed to enhance the quality of evidence on acceptance and effectiveness.

Pharmacist-led intervention on the reduction of inappropriate medication use in patients with heart failure: A systematic review of randomized trials and non-randomized intervention studies

BACKGROUND

Polipharmacy has been identified as a contributing factor to the high hospital readmission rates of heart failure (HF) patients. Nevertheless, there limited evidence on pharmacist-led intervention on the reduction of inappropriate medication use in patients.

OBJECTIVE

To summarize the available evidence resulting from interventions, led by pharmacists (alone or as part of a professional team), aimed at reducing inappropriate medications in patients with heart failure.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted using MEDLINE through PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library and Scopus until June 2020. We reviewed both randomized controlled trials and non-randomized intervention studies.The quality of evidence was assessed in accordance with the modified Cochrane Collaboration tool to assess risk of bias for randomized controlled trials. The search and extraction process followed PRISMA guidelines.

RESULTS

Of the 4367 records screening, 9 studies were included in the analysis. In 4 (44.4%) studies, the intervention was carried out by a pharmacist working together with a physician; in 4 (44.4%) the intervention was carried out by a pharmacist alone, and in 1 study, the pharmacist collaborated with a nurse. Only 5 (55.5%) studies described the utilization of guidelines or recommendations to carry out the deprescription, and 3 of these showed improved clinical outcomes in the interventional group compared to the control group. The other studies (4, 44.4%) did not follow a specific guideline or recommendation to evaluate the appropriateness of medication, and none of them showed statistically significant differences in clinical outcomes between interventional and control groups.

CONCLUSION

Only those studies where pharmacists evaluated the appropriateness of treatment to specific HF guidelines showed significant differences in patients' clinical outcomes. The development and validation of a specific tool to evaluate medication appropriateness in patients with HF, could contribute to the improvement of patient health.

A narrative review of evidence to guide deprescribing among older adults

Potentially inappropriate prescription and polypharmacy are well‐known risk factors for morbidity and mortality among older adults. However, recent systematic reviews have failed to demonstrate the overall survival benefits of deprescribing. Thus, it is necessary to synthesize the current evidence to provide a practical direction for future research and clinical practice. This review summarizes the existing body of evidence regarding deprescribing to identify useful intervention elements. There is evidence that even simple interventions, such as direct deprescribing targeted at risky medications and explicit criteria‐based approaches, effectively reduce inappropriate prescribing. On the other hand, if the goal is to improve clinical outcomes such as hospitalization and emergency department visits, patient‐centered multimodal interventions such as a combination of medication review, multidisciplinary collaboration, and patient education are likely to be more effective. We also consider the opportunities and challenges for deprescribing within the Japanese healthcare system.

Trends and concerns of potentially inappropriate medication use in patients with cardiovascular diseases

Introduction: The use of potentially inappropriate medications (PIM) is an alarming social risk factor in cardiovascular patients. PIM administration may result in iatrogenic disorders and adverse consequences may be attenuated by limiting PIM intake.Areas covered: The goal of this review article is to discuss the trends, risks, and concerns regarding PIM administration with focus on cardiovascular patients. To find data, we searched literature using electronic databases (Pubmed/Medline 1966-2021 and Web of Science 1975-2021). The data search terms were cardiovascular diseases, potentially inappropriate medication, potentially harmful drug-drug combination, potentially harmful drug-disease combination, drug interaction, deprescribing, and electronic health record.Expert opinion: Drugs for heart diseases are the most commonly prescribed medications in older individuals. Despite the availability of explicit and implicit PIM criteria, the incidence of PIM use in cardiovascular patients remains high ranging from 7 to 85% in different patient categories. Physician-induced disorders often occur when PIM is administered and adverse effects may be reduced by limiting PIM intake. Main strategies promising for addressing PIM use include deprescribing, implementation of systematic electronic records, pharmacist medication review, and collaboration among cardiologists, internists, geriatricians, clinical pharmacologists, pharmacists, and other healthcare professionals as basis of multidisciplinary assessment teams.

Blood Pressure Changes Following Antihypertensive Medication Reduction, by Drug Class and Dose Chosen for Withdrawal: Exploratory Analysis of Data From the OPTiMISE Trial

Aims: Deprescribing of antihypertensive drugs is recommended for some older patients with polypharmacy, but there is little evidence to inform which drug (or dose) should be withdrawn. This study used data from the OPTiMISE trial to examine whether short-term outcomes of deprescribing vary by drug class and dose of medication withdrawn. Methods: The OPTiMISE trial included patients aged ≥80 years with controlled systolic blood pressure (SBP; <150 mmHg), receiving ≥2 antihypertensive medications. This study compared SBP control, mean change in SBP and frequency of adverse events after 12 weeks in participants stopping one medication vs. usual care, by drug class and equivalent dose of medication withdrawn. Equivalent dose was determined according to the defined daily dose (DDD) of each medication type. Drugs prescribed below the DDD were classed as low dose and those prescribed at ≥DDD were described as higher dose. Outcomes were examined by generalized linear mixed effects models. Results: A total of 569 participants were randomized, aged 85 ± 3 years with controlled blood pressure (mean 130/69 mmHg). Within patients prescribed calcium channel blockers, higher dose medications were more commonly selected for withdrawal (90 vs. 10%). In those prescribed beta-blockers, low dose medications were more commonly chosen (87 vs. 13%). Withdrawal of calcium channel blockers was associated with an increase in SBP (5 mmHg, 95%CI 0-10 mmHg) and reduced SBP control (adjusted RR 0.89, 95%CI 0.80-0.998) compared to usual care. In contrast, withdrawal of beta-blockers was associated with no change in SBP (-4 mmHg, 95%CI -10 to 2 mmHg) and no difference in SBP control (adjusted RR 1.15, 95%CI 0.96-1.37). Similarly, withdrawal of higher dose medications was associated with an increase in SBP but no change in BP control. Withdrawal of lower dose medications was not associated with a difference in SBP or SBP control. There was no association between withdrawal of specific drug classes and adverse events. Conclusion: These exploratory data suggest withdrawal of higher dose calcium channel blockers should be avoided if the goal is to maintain BP control. However, low dose beta-blockers may be removed with little impact on blood pressure over 12-weeks of follow-up. Larger studies are needed to confirm these associations.

Deprescribing: a challenge for clinical cardiologists

Deprescribing is a holistic process to identify medications that can be ceased, substituted or reduced. This process can improve the health of older patients and also enhance their compliance to the prescribed medications which are actually beneficial. Recommendations and guidelines have been elaborated for extensively prescribed drugs. In clinical cardiology the process of deprescribing is a challenge for doctors because of withdrawal-related adverse effects, but it may be applied in certain clinical conditions such as the discontinuation of statin prescription in patients with advanced senile dementia and those with limited life expectancy. Deprescribing is also focussed on the scarcely known effects of prolonged therapy after the acute phase of a disease is over, especially when continuation may signify potential life-long treatment. There needs to be collaboration between the consultant cardiologist who first prescribes medications and family doctors who are responsible for the long-term care of the patient and reviewing prescribed medications may be necessary.

Withdrawal of antihypertensive drugs in older people

BACKGROUND

Hypertension is an important risk factor for subsequent cardiovascular events, including ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke, myocardial infarction, heart failure, chronic kidney disease, cognitive decline and premature death. Overall, the use of antihypertensive medications has led to reduction in cardiovascular disease, morbidity rates and mortality rates. However, the use of antihypertensive medications is also associated with harms, especially in older people, including the development of adverse drug reactions, drug-drug interactions and can contribute to increasing medication-related burden. As such, discontinuation of antihypertensives may be considered and appropriate in some older people.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate whether withdrawal of antihypertensive medications is feasible, and evaluate the effects of withdrawal of antihypertensive medications on mortality, cardiovascular outcomes, hypertension and quality of life in older people.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Hypertension Information Specialist searched the following databases for randomised controlled trials up to April 2019: the Cochrane Hypertension Specialised Register, CENTRAL (2019, Issue 3), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov. We also conducted reference checking, citation searches and, when appropriate, contacted study authors to identify any additional studies. The searches had no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of withdrawal versus continuation of antihypertensive medications used for hypertension or primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in older adults (defined as 50 years and over). Participants were eligible if they lived in the community, residential aged care facilities, or were based in hospital settings. We sought to include trials looking at the complete withdrawal of the antihypertensive medication, and those focusing on a dose reduction of the antihypertensive medicine.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We compared the intervention of discontinuing or reducing antihypertensive medication to usual treatment using mean differences (MD) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) for continuous variables and we used Peto odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CI for binary variables. Our primary outcomes included: mortality, myocardial infarction, development of adverse drug reactions or adverse drug withdrawal reactions. Secondary outcomes included: blood pressure, hospitalisation, stroke, success of withdrawing from antihypertensives, quality of life, and falls. Two authors independently, and in duplicate, conducted all stages of study selection, data extraction and quality assessment.

MAIN RESULTS

Six RCTs met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review (1073 participants). Study duration and follow-up ranged from 4 weeks to 56 weeks. Meta-analysis of studies showed that, in the discontinuation group compared to continuation, the odds for all-cause mortality were 2.08 (95% CI 0.79 to 5.46; low certainty of evidence), for myocardial infarction 1.86 (95% CI 0.19 to 17.98; very low certainty of evidence) and for stroke 1.44 (95% CI 0.25 to 8.35; low certainty of evidence). Blood pressure was higher in the discontinuation group than the continuation group (systolic blood pressure: MD = 9.75 mmHg, 95% CI 7.33 to 12.18; and diastolic blood pressure: MD = 3.5 mmHg, 95% CI 1.82 to 5.18; low certainty of evidence). For the development of adverse events, meta-analysis was not possible; antihypertensive discontinuation did not appear to increase the risk of adverse events and may lead to resolution of adverse drug reactions, although eligible studies had limited reporting of adverse effects of drug withdrawal (very low certainty of evidence). One study reported hospitalisation with an odds ratio of 0.83 for discontinuation compared to continuation (95% CI 0.33 to 2.10; low certainty of evidence). No studies were identified which reported falls. Between 10.5% and 33.3% of participants in the discontinuation group compared to 9% to 15% in the continuation group experienced raised blood pressure or other clinical criteria (as pre-defined by the studies) that would require restarting of therapy/removal from the study. The sources of bias included selective reporting (reporting bias), lack of blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias), incomplete outcome data (attrition bias), and lack of blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence of an effect of discontinuing compared with continuing antihypertensives used for hypertension or primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in older adults on all-cause mortality and myocardial infarction. The evidence was low to very low certainty mainly due to small studies and low event rates. These limitations mean that we cannot make any firm conclusions about the effect of deprescribing antihypertensives on these outcomes. Future research should focus on populations with the greatest uncertainty of the benefit:risk ratio for use of antihypertensive medications, such as those with frailty, older age groups and those taking polypharmacy, and measure clinically important outcomes such as falls, quality of life and adverse drug events.

Effect of Antihypertensive Medication Reduction vs Usual Care on Short-term Blood Pressure Control in Patients With Hypertension Aged 80 Years and Older: The OPTIMISE Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Deprescribing of antihypertensive medications is recommended for some older patients with polypharmacy and multimorbidity when the benefits of continued treatment may not outweigh the harms.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to establish whether antihypertensive medication reduction is possible without significant changes in systolic blood pressure control or adverse events during 12-week follow-up.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

The Optimising Treatment for Mild Systolic Hypertension in the Elderly (OPTIMISE) study was a randomized, unblinded, noninferiority trial conducted in 69 primary care sites in England. Participants, whose primary care physician considered them appropriate for medication reduction, were aged 80 years and older, had systolic blood pressure lower than 150 mm Hg, and were receiving at least 2 antihypertensive medications were included. Participants enrolled between April 2017 and September 2018 and underwent follow-up until January 2019.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants were randomized (1:1 ratio) to a strategy of antihypertensive medication reduction (removal of 1 drug [intervention], n = 282) or usual care (control, n = 287), in which no medication changes were mandated.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was systolic blood pressure lower than 150 mm Hg at 12-week follow-up. The prespecified noninferiority margin was a relative risk (RR) of 0.90. Secondary outcomes included the proportion of participants maintaining medication reduction and differences in blood pressure, frailty, quality of life, adverse effects, and serious adverse events.

RESULTS

Among 569 patients randomized (mean age, 84.8 years; 276 [48.5%] women; median of 2 antihypertensive medications prescribed at baseline), 534 (93.8%) completed the trial. Overall, 229 (86.4%) patients in the intervention group and 236 (87.7%) patients in the control group had a systolic blood pressure lower than 150 mm Hg at 12 weeks (adjusted RR, 0.98 [97.5% 1-sided CI, 0.92 to ∞]). Of 7 prespecified secondary end points, 5 showed no significant difference. Medication reduction was sustained in 187 (66.3%) participants at 12 weeks. Mean change in systolic blood pressure was 3.4 mm Hg (95% CI, 1.1 to 5.8 mm Hg) higher in the intervention group compared with the control group. Twelve (4.3%) participants in the intervention group and 7 (2.4%) in the control group reported at least 1 serious adverse event (adjusted RR, 1.72 [95% CI, 0.7 to 4.3]).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among older patients treated with multiple antihypertensive medications, a strategy of medication reduction, compared with usual care, was noninferior with regard to systolic blood pressure control at 12 weeks. The findings suggest antihypertensive medication reduction in some older patients with hypertension is not associated with substantial change in blood pressure control, although further research is needed to understand long-term clinical outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

EudraCT Identifier: 2016-004236-38; ISRCTN identifier: 97503221.

Polypharmacy Increases Risk of Dyspnea Among Adults With Serious, Life-Limiting Diseases

BACKGROUND

Polypharmacy is associated with dyspnea in cross-sectional studies, but associations have not been determined in longitudinal analyses. Statins are commonly prescribed but their contribution to dyspnea is unknown. We determined whether polypharmacy was associated with dyspnea trajectory over time in adults with advanced illness enrolled in a statin discontinuation trial, overall, and in models stratified by statin discontinuation.

METHODS

Using data from a parallel-group unblinded pragmatic clinical trial (patients on statins ≥3 months with life expectancy of 1 month to 1 year, enrolled in the parent study between June 3, 2011, and May 2, 2013, n = 308/381 [81%]), we restricted analyses to patients with available baseline medication count and ≥1 dyspnea score. Polypharmacy was assessed by self-reported chronic medication count. Dyspnea trajectory group, our primary outcome, was determined over 24 weeks using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System.

RESULTS

The mean age of the patients was 73.8 years (standard deviation [SD]: ±11.0) and the mean medication count was 11.6 (SD: ±5.0). We identified 3 dyspnea trajectory groups: none (n = 108), mild (n = 130), and moderate-severe (n = 70). Statins were discontinued in 51.8%, 48.5%, and 42.9% of patients, respectively. In multivariable models adjusting for age, sex, diagnosis, and statin discontinuation, each additional medication was associated with 8% (odds ratio [OR] = 1.08 [1.01-1.14]) and 16% (OR = 1.16 [1.08-1.25]) increased risk for mild and moderate-severe dyspnea, respectively. In stratified models, polypharmacy was associated with dyspnea in the statin continuation group only (mild OR = 1.12 [1.01-1.24], moderate-severe OR = 1.24 [1.11-1.39]) versus statin discontinuation (mild OR = 1.03 [0.95-1.12], and moderate-severe OR = 1.09 [0.98-1.22]).

CONCLUSION

Polypharmacy was strongly associated with dyspnea. Prospective interventions to decrease polypharmacy may impact dyspnea symptoms, especially for statins.

Deprescribing in Older Adults With Cardiovascular Disease

Deprescribing, an integral component of a continuum of good prescribing practices, is the process of medication withdrawal or dose reduction to correct or prevent medication-related complications, improve outcomes, and reduce costs. Deprescribing is particularly applicable to the commonly encountered multimorbid older adult with cardiovascular disease and concomitant geriatric conditions such as polypharmacy, frailty, and cognitive dysfunction-a combination rarely addressed in current clinical practice guidelines. Triggers to deprescribe include present or expected adverse drug reactions, unnecessary polypharmacy, and the need to align medications with goals of care when life expectancy is reduced. Using a framework to deprescribe, this review addresses the rationale, evidence, and strategies for deprescribing cardiovascular and some noncardiovascular medications.

Attitudinal predictors of older peoples' and caregivers' desire to deprescribe in hospital

Background

Deprescribing is a partnership between practitioners, patients and caregivers. External characteristics including age, comorbidities and polypharmacy are poor predictors of attitude towards deprescribing. This hospital-based study aimed to describe the desire of patients and caregivers to be involved in medicine decision-making, and identify attitudinal predictors of desire to try stopping a medicine.

Methods

Patients and caregivers recruited from seven Older People’s Medicine wards across two UK hospitals completed the revised Patients’Attitudes Towards Deprescribing (rPATD) questionnaire. Patients prescribed polypharmacy and caregivers involved in medication decision-making of such patients were eligible. A target of 150 patients and caregivers provided a 95% confidence interval of ±11.0% or smaller around rPATD item agreement. Descriptive statistics characterised participants and rPATD responses. Responses to items regarding desire to be involved in medication decision-making and desire to try stopping a medicine were used to address the aims. Binary logistic regression provided the adjusted odds ratios (OR) for predictors of desire to try stopping a medicine.

Results

Patient participants (N = 75) were a median (IQ) 87.0 (83.0, 90.0) years old and the median (IQ) number of pre-admission medication was 8.0 (6.0, 10.0). Caregiver participants (N = 76) were a median (IQ) 70.0 (57.0, 83.0) years old and the majority were a spouse (63.2%). For patients and caregivers respectively, the following were reported: 58.7 and 65.8% wanted to be involved in medication decision-making; 29.3 and 43.5% reported a desire to try stopping a medicine. Attitudinal predictors of low desire to try stopping a medicine for patients and caregivers are a perception that there are no unnecessary prescribed medicines [OR = 0.179 (patients) and 0.044 (caregivers)] and no desire for dose reduction [OR = 0.199 (patients) and 0.024 (caregivers)]. A perception of not being prescribed too many medicines also predicted low patient desire to try stopping a medicine [OR = 0.195].

Conclusion

A substantial proportion of patients and caregivers did not want to be involved medication decision-making, however this should not result in practitioners dismissing deprescribing opportunities. The three diagnostic indicators for establishing desire to try stopping a medicine are perceived necessity of the medicine, appropriateness of the number prescribed medications and a desire for dose reduction.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12877-019-1127-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Preventive drugs in the last year of life of older adults with cancer: Is there room for deprescribing?

BACKGROUND

The continuation of preventive drugs among older patients with advanced cancer has come under scrutiny because these drugs are unlikely to achieve their clinical benefit during the patients' remaining lifespan.

METHODS

A nationwide cohort study of older adults (those aged ≥65 years) with solid tumors who died between 2007 and 2013 was performed in Sweden, using routinely collected data with record linkage. The authors calculated the monthly use and cost of preventive drugs throughout the last year before the patients' death.

RESULTS

Among 151,201 older persons who died with cancer (mean age, 81.3 years [standard deviation, 8.1 years]), the average number of drugs increased from 6.9 to 10.1 over the course of the last year before death. Preventive drugs frequently were continued until the final month of life, including antihypertensives, platelet aggregation inhibitors, anticoagulants, statins, and oral antidiabetics. Median drug costs amounted to $1482 (interquartile range [IQR], $700-$2896]) per person, including $213 (IQR, $77-$490) for preventive therapies. Compared with older adults who died with lung cancer (median drug cost, $205; IQR, $61-$523), costs for preventive drugs were higher among older adults who died with pancreatic cancer (adjusted median difference, $13; 95% confidence interval, $5-$22) or gynecological cancers (adjusted median difference, $27; 95% confidence interval, $18-$36). There was no decrease noted with regard to the cost of preventive drugs throughout the last year of life.

CONCLUSIONS

Preventive drugs commonly are prescribed during the last year of life among older adults with cancer, and often are continued until the final weeks before death. Adequate deprescribing strategies are warranted to reduce the burden of drugs with limited clinical benefit near the end of life.

OPtimising Treatment for MIld Systolic hypertension in the Elderly (OPTiMISE): protocol for a randomised controlled non-inferiority trial

INTRODUCTION

Recent evidence suggests that larger blood pressure reductions and multiple antihypertensive drugs may be harmful in older people, particularly frail individuals with polypharmacy and multimorbidity. However, there is a lack of evidence to support deprescribing of antihypertensives, which limits the practice of medication reduction in routine clinical care. The aim of this trial is to examine whether antihypertensive medication reduction is possible in older patients without significant changes in blood pressure control at follow-up.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This trial will use a primary care-based, open-label, randomised controlled trial design. A total of 540 participants will be recruited, aged ≥80 years, with systolic blood pressure <150 mm Hg and receiving ≥2 antihypertensive medications. Participants will have no compelling indication for medication continuation and will be considered to potentially benefit from medication reduction due to existing polypharmacy, comorbidity and frailty. Following a baseline appointment, individuals will be randomised to a strategy of medication reduction (intervention) with optional self-monitoring or usual care (control). Those in the intervention group will have one antihypertensive medication stopped. The primary outcome will be to determine if a reduction in medication can achieve a proportion of participants with clinically safe blood pressure levels at 12-week follow-up (defined as a systolic blood pressure <150 mm Hg), which is non-inferior (within 10%) to that achieved by the usual care group. Qualitative interviews will be used to understand the barriers and facilitators to medication reduction. The study will use economic modelling to predict the long-term effects of any observed changes in blood pressure and quality of life.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The protocol, informed consent form, participant information sheet and all other participant facing material have been approved by the Research Ethics Committee (South Central-Oxford A; ref 16/SC/0628), Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (ref 21584/0371/001-0001), host institution(s) and Health Research Authority. All research outputs will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at national and international conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

EudraCT 2016-004236-38; ISRCTN97503221; Pre-results.