BLOOD PRESSURE-LOWERING TREATMENT

Similar documents
ADVANCES IN MANAGEMENT OF HYPERTENSION

ADVANCES IN MANAGEMENT OF HYPERTENSION

JNC 8 -Controversies. Sagren Naidoo Nephrologist CMJAH

Hypertension Update 2009

Treating Hypertension in Individuals with Diabetes

Clinical cases with Coversyl 10 mg

ALLHAT. Major Outcomes in High Risk Hypertensive Patients Randomized to Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor or Calcium Channel Blocker vs Diuretic

In the Literature 1001 BP of 1.1 mm Hg). The trial was stopped early based on prespecified stopping rules because of a significant difference in cardi

Blood Pressure Targets in Diabetes

JNC Evidence-Based Guidelines for the Management of High Blood Pressure in Adults

APPENDIX D: PHARMACOTYHERAPY EVIDENCE

Antihypertensive Trial Design ALLHAT

Hypertension Update Clinical Controversies Regarding Age and Race

Outcomes and Perspectives of Single-Pill Combination Therapy for the modern management of hypertension

Modern Management of Hypertension: Where Do We Draw the Line?

Preventing and Treating High Blood Pressure

Clinical Updates in the Treatment of Hypertension JNC 7 vs. JNC 8. Lauren Thomas, PharmD PGY1 Pharmacy Practice Resident South Pointe Hospital

Modern Management of Hypertension

T. Suithichaiyakul Cardiomed Chula

State of the art treatment of hypertension: established and new drugs. Prof. M. Burnier Service of Nephrology and Hypertension Lausanne, Switzerland

New Lipid Guidelines. PREVENTION OF CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE IN WOMEN: Implications of the New Guidelines for Hypertension and Lipids.

DISCLOSURE PHARMACIST OBJECTIVES 9/30/2014 JNC 8: A REVIEW OF THE LONG-AWAITED/MUCH-ANTICIPATED HYPERTENSION GUIDELINES. I have nothing to disclose.

CHOLESTEROL-LOWERING THERAPHY

ALLHAT Role of Diuretics in the Prevention of Heart Failure - The Antihypertensive and Lipid- Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial

Hypertension in the Elderly. John Puxty Division of Geriatrics Center for Studies in Aging and Health, Providence Care

Hypertension Update Warwick Jaffe Interventional Cardiologist Ascot Hospital

Understanding the importance of blood pressure control An overview of new guidelines: How do they impact daily current management?

Management of Hypertension

This clinical study synopsis is provided in line with Boehringer Ingelheim s Policy on Transparency and Publication of Clinical Study Data.

ADVANCE post trial ObservatioNal Study

HYPERTENSION GUIDELINES WHERE ARE WE IN 2014

How clinically important are the results of the large trials in hypertension?

Managing HTN in the Elderly: How Low to Go

Hypertension Management: A Moving Target

Hypertension Guidelines: Are We Pressured to Change? Oregon Cardiovascular Symposium Portland, Oregon June 6, Financial Disclosures

CANADIAN STROKE BEST PRACTICE RECOMMENDATIONS. Prevention of Stroke Evidence Tables Blood Pressure Management

Combination therapy Giuseppe M.C. Rosano, MD, PhD, MSc, FESC, FHFA St George s Hospitals NHS Trust University of London

The CARI Guidelines Caring for Australasians with Renal Impairment. Blood Pressure Control role of specific antihypertensives

2014 HYPERTENSION GUIDELINES

Abbreviations Cardiology I

Ferrari R, Fox K, Bertrand M, Mourad J.J, Akkerhuis KM, Van Vark L, Boersma E.

By Prof. Khaled El-Rabat

Metoprolol Succinate SelokenZOC

Managing Hypertension in 2016

Talking about blood pressure

MANAGEMENT OF HYPERTENSION: TREATMENT THRESHOLDS AND MEDICATION SELECTION

Hypertension Pharmacotherapy: A Practical Approach

Diagnosis and treatment of hypertension. Kari Nelson, MD MSHS Division of General Internal Medicine VA Puget Sound, University of Washington

The Beneficial Role of Angiotensin- Converting Enzyme Inhibitor in Acute Myocardial Infarction

Difficult to Treat Hypertension

Blood Pressure Targets: Where are We Now?

Hypertension. Does it Matter What Medications We Use? Nishant K. Sekaran, M.D. M.Sc. Intermountain Heart Institute

The hypertensive effects of the renin-angiotensin

2003 World Health Organization (WHO) / International Society of Hypertension (ISH) Statement on Management of Hypertension.

Slide notes: References:

STANDARD treatment algorithm mmHg

egfr > 50 (n = 13,916)

Diabetes and Hypertension

SBP in range of 120 to 140 :no progression or regression of CAD. Sipahi et al., 2006

Hypertension and Cardiovascular Disease

What s In the New Hypertension Guidelines?

Management of Hypertension in Women

Managing Hypertension in Diabetes Sean Stewart, PharmD, BCPS, BCACP, CLS Internal Medicine Park Nicollet Clinic St Louis Park.

Aggressive blood pressure reduction and renin angiotensin system blockade in chronic kidney disease: time for re-evaluation?

VALUE OF ACEI IN THE MANAGEMENT OF HYPERTENSION

Update in Hypertension

KDIGO conference on high CV risk associated with CKD. The role of BP in CKD stage 1-4

2/10/2014. Hypertension: Highlights of Hypertension Guidelines: Making the Most of Limited Evidence. Issues with contemporary guidelines

Should we prescribe aspirin and statins to all subjects over 65? (Or even all over 55?) Terje R.Pedersen Oslo University Hospital Oslo, Norway

Update sulla terapia antiipertensiva e antiaggregante nel paziente cardiometabolico

ACE inhibitors vs ARBs Myths and Facts

RAS Blockade Across the CV Continuum

Should All Patients Be Treated with Ace-inh /ARB after STEMI with Preserved LV Function?

Blood Pressure Treatment Goals

Beta-blockers: Now what? Annemarie Thompson, MD Assistant Professor of Anesthesia and Medicine Vanderbilt University Medical Center

Effect of Blood Pressure Management on Coronary Heart Disease Risk in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

Reducing proteinuria

Caring for Australians with Renal Impairment. BP lowering and CVD

Large therapeutic studies in elderly patients with hypertension

Thiazide or Thiazide Like? Choosing Wisely Academic Detailing Conference Digby Pines October 12-14

The State of Hypertension in NZ in 2010 personal view

Appendix F: Clinical evidence tables

Don t let the pressure get to you:

Management of The Patients with Hypertension and High Risk Cardiovascular Disease

The underestimated risk of

Therapeutic Targets and Interventions

Disclosures. Hypertension: Nationwide Dilemma. Learning Objectives. What s Currently Recommended? Specific Concerns 3/9/2012

Blood Pressure Lowering in Type 2 Diabetes A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

1. Albuminuria an early sign of glomerular damage and renal disease. albuminuria

Hypertension targets: sorting out the confusion. Brian Rayner, Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, University of Cape Town

VA/DoD Clinical Practice Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Hypertension - Pocket Guide Update 2004 Revision July 2005

Online Appendix (JACC )

Management of Difficult or Resistant Hypertension in General Practice

Don t let the pressure get to you:

A factorial randomized trial of blood pressure lowering and intensive glucose control in 11,140 patients with type 2 diabetes

The legally binding text is the original French version TRANSPARENCY COMMITTEE OPINION. 7 January 2009

Effects of a perindopril-based blood pressure lowering regimen on cardiac outcomes among patients with cerebrovascular disease

Causes of death in Diabetes

Impact of recent landmark clinical trials on hypertension treatment

Hypertension Putting the Guidelines into Practice

Transcription:

BLOOD PRESSURE-LOWERING TRIALS NUMBER OF PARTICIPANTS NUMBER OF PERCENTAGE OF MEAN AGE MEAN - (YEARS) TRIALS WITH ANALYSIS BY GENDER N, (%) 69,473 28,008 40.3% 70.2 3.2 3/5 (60%) APPENDIX 2 1

BLOOD PRESSURE-LOWERING ONTARGET (Yusuf et al 50 ) APRIL (Country) In patients with coronary, peripheral, or cerebrovascular disease or diabetes with end-organ damage International trial with significant European component mean ± sd, range 66.4±7.2 RAMIPRI L; 66.4±7.1 TELMISA RTAN; 66.5±7.3 COMBIN ATION THERAPY ( n,%) 25620 (: 6831, 27%) ( 18789) DURATION ( n,%) ( n,%) Median of 56 months RAMIPRIL (10 mg per day) TELMISARTAN (80 mg per day) both drugs (COMBINATION THERAPY) Death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, stroke, or hospitalization for heart failure. 1423 (16.7%) TELMISARTA N 1412 (16.5%) RAMIPRIL 1386 (16.3%) COMBINATIO N-THERAPY OUTCOME IN THE RAMIPRIL GRO 15.8% 16.7% (CI) P ( ( ) RELATIVE RISK (TELMISARTAN VS. RAMIPRIL) = 1.01 0.94-1.09] RELATIVE RISK (COMBINATION- THERAPY VS. RAMIPRIL ) = 0.99 0.92-1.07] TELMISARTAN VS. RAMIPRIL: P INTERACTION = 0.68 COMBINATION- THERAPY VS. RAMIPRIL: P INTERACTION = 0.82 Noninferiority of telmisartan ramipril has been demonstrate d. No significant effect of combination telmisartan alone No gender in the outcome APPENDIX 2 2

BLOOD PRESSURE-LOWERING HYVET (Beckett et al 49 ) ONTARGET (Mann et al 51 ) TRANSC END (Yusuf et al 52 ) MAY AUG SEPT Patients who were 80 years of age or older and had a sustained systolic blood pressure of 160 mm Hg or more International trial with significant European component Patients with established atherosclerotic vascular disease or with diabetes with end-organ damage. International trial with significant European component Patients intolerant to ACE inhibitors with cardiovascular disease or diabetes with end-organ (European 61.1%, Asian (21.3%) 83.6 ± 3.2 ACTIVE TREATM ENT. 83.5 ± 3.1 RANGE: 80 to 105 years 66.4±7.2 RAMIPRI L; 66.4±7.1 TELMISA RTAN; 66.5±7.3 COMBIN ATION THERAPY 66.9 ±7.4 TELMISA RTAN 66.9±7.3 3845 ( 2326, 60.5%) ( 1519) 25620 5926 (: 2547, 43%) : 3379 Median of 1.8 years (mean 2.1 range 0 to 6.5) Median of 56 months Median duration of follow-up was 56months (IQR 51 64) INDAPAMIDE (sustained release, 1.5 mg) with or without 2 to 4 mg of perindopril) (ACTIVE ) MATCHING Ramipril 10 mg a day, telmisartan 80 mg a day, a combination of both drugs After a 3-week run-in period, randomisation to telmisartan 80 mg/day or placebo Fatal or nonfatal stroke Dialysis or doubling of serum creatinine or death. Cardiovascular death or myocardial infarction or stroke,or hospitalization for heart failure : 69 ACTIVE : 51 1147 (13 4%) TELMISARTA N, 1150 (13 5%) RAMIPRIL 1233 (14.5%) COMBINATIO N THERAPY 504 (17.0%) GRO 465 (15.7%) TELMISARTA N GRO GRO: 14.4% 18.9% HR Unadjusted = 0.70 0.49-1.01] P = 0.06 Reduction in the rate of stroke of 30% 1-51] P = 0.06 HR (TELMISARTAN VS. RAMIPRIL) = 1.00 0.92 1.09] HR (COMBINATION- THERAPY VS. RAMIPRIL )= 1.09 1.01 1.18] P=0.037 HR = 0.92 0.81 1.05] P=0.216; P INTERACTION = 0.0842 Results by gender not Percentage of women enrolled not in this publication ( in the primary publication) Results by gender not. The between telmisartan and placebo was not significant. No gender in the outcome. APPENDIX 2 3

BLOOD PRESSURE-LOWERING ACCOMP LISH (Jamerson et al 53 ) DEC Patients with hypertension at high risk for cardiovascular events (International with significant European component) 68.4±6.86 Benazepril + Amlodipin e Group; 68.3±6.86 Benazepril + Hydrochlor othiazide Group: 11.506 ( 4542, 39,5%) ( 6964) Mean of 36 months Benazepril 20 mg and amlodipine 5 mg versus benazepril 20 mg and Hydrochlorothiazi de 12.5 mg, once daily 1 month after randomization Benazepril increased to 40 mg daily in both groups. Death from cardiovascular causes or nonfatal myocardial Infarction or nonfatal stroke or hospitalization for angina or resuscitation after sudden cardiac arrest or coronary revascularization. 552 (9.6%) Benazepril amlodipine group, 679 (11.8%) benazepril hydrochlorothia zide group 187 (8.1%) Benazepril amlodipine group, 218 (9.7%) benazepril hydrochlorothi azide 365 (10.6%) Benazepril amlodipine group 461 (13.1%) benazepril hydrochlorothia zide HR = 0.80 0.72-0.90] P<0.001 HR = 0.83 [95%CI: 0.68 1.01] P=0.06 HR = 0.80 [95%CI: 0.69 0.91] P=0.001 Trial terminated early after a mean follow-up of 36 months, when the boundary of the prespecified stopping rule was exceeded. No significant gender s in the outcome APPENDIX 2 4

BLOOD PRESSURE-LOWERING INVEST analysis (Bangalore et al 54 ) JUNE 2009 Coronary artery disease (CAD) patients with hypertension Mean of 66 ± 9.7 years age 50 22 576 (Women 11762, 52.1%) (Men 10814) 2 years Verapamil-SR atenolol based strategies Predictive value of Pulse Pressure (PP) Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP), Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP), Median Arterial Pressure (MAP) for time to first occurrence of death (all-cause), non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), or non-fatal stroke. PP predictive value weaker than that of SBP, DBP and MAP PP SBP PP DBP PP MAP P<0.0001 Results by gender not APPENDIX 2 5

BLOOD PRESSURE-LOWERING META-ANALYSIS BPLTTC metaanalysis of 31 trials (Turnbull et al 46 ) MAY (Country) mean ± sd, range Patients randomized to a blood pressurelowering agent and control or patients randomized to regimens based on different classes of drug to lower blood pressure Two age groups: <65 mean age 57, 65 years mean age 72 ( n,%) 190606 <65 42% 58% 65 years 49% 51%, DURATION ( n,%) ( n,%) NA Blood pressurelowering treatment: a) angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (ACE-I) placebo, b) calcium antagonist placebo, (c) more intensive less intensive regimens, (d) angiotensin receptor blocker control regimen, (e) ACE-I diuretics/β blockers, (f) calcium antagonist diuretics/β blockers, (g) ACE-I calcium antagonists. Major cardiovascular events Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor placebo Age <65 813/9514 ACTIVE 1087/9640 CONTROL Age 65 1251/8005 ACTIVE 1490/7918CONTROL Calcium antagonist placebo Age <65 43/1310 ACTIVE 49/1287 CONTROL Age 65 130/2220 ACTIVE 170/2134 CONTROL More less intensive blood pressure lowering regimen Age <65 212/5024 ACTIVE 365/9360 CONTROL Age 65 156/2251 ACTIVE 260/4198 CONTROL (CI) P ( ( ) RR= 0.76 [95% CI 0.66 to 0.88] RR= 0.83 [95% CI 0.74 to 0.94] P HOMOGENEITY 0.37 RR= 0.84 [95% CI 0.54 to 1.31] RR= 0.74 [95% CI 0.59 to 0.92] P HOMOGENEITY 0.59 RR= 0.88 [95% CI 0.75 to 1.04] RR= 1.03 [95% CI 0.85 to 1.24] P HOMOGENEITY 0.24 No s between classes of drugs Results by gender not APPENDIX 2 6

BLOOD PRESSURE-LOWERING BPLTTC analysis (Turnbull et al 55 ) NOV Patients randomized to a blood pressurelowering agent and control or patients randomized to regimens based on different classes of drug to lower blood pressure WOME N 63.0 61.7 age 18 for some trials age<84 190617 (: 87349, 45.8%) (: 103268) 2.0 to 8.4 Blood pressurelowering treatment: a) angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (ACE-I) placebo, b) calcium antagonist placebo, (c) more intensive less intensive regimens, (d) angiotensin receptor blocker control regimen, (e) ACE-I diuretics/β blockers, (f) calcium antagonist diuretics/β blockers, (g) ACE-I calcium antagonists. Major cardiovascular events Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor placebo 450/4200 ACTIVE 557/4153 CONTROL 1614/13319 ACTIVE 2020/13405 CONTROL Calcium antagonist placebo 86/1929 ACTIVE 104/1836 CONTROL 87/1601 ACTIVE 115/1585 CONTROL RR= 0.79 [95% CI 0.66 to 0.94] RR= 0.81 [95% CI 0.75 to 0.88] P HOMOGENEITY 0.80 RR= 0.78 [95% CI 0.59 to 1.03] RR= 0.75 [95% CI 0.57 to 0.98] P HOMOGENEITY 0.84 No s between classes of drugs No gender s in the outcomes More less intensive blood pressure lowering regimen 178/3709 ACTIVE 251/6481CONTRO L 331/4325 ACTIVE 479/7467 CONTROL RR= 0.88 [95% CI 0.73 to 1.07] RR= 0.87 [95% CI 0.74 to 1.02] P HOMOGENEITY 0.93 APPENDIX 2 7

BLOOD PRESSURE-LOWERING BP reduction - Congestive heart failure metaanalysis of 31 trials (Verdecchia et al 47 ) MAR 2009 Hypertensive or high-risk subjects without CHF at entry NA 225764 2 to 8.4 years Angiotensinconverting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs). placebo, ACEIs. old drugs, angiotensinreceptor blockers (ARBs). placebo, ARBs. old drugs, calcium-channel blockers CCBs. placebo, and CCBs. old drugs Risk of congestive heart failure (CHF) Total 6469 Risk reduction 21% (P = 0.007) (ACEIs. placebo) OR = 1.02 0.84 1.24] ACEIs and comparators. diuretics/βblockers OR = 1.18 1.00 1.39] P= 0.048 (CCBs) Percentag e of women enrolled not Results by gender not OR = 0.76 [95% CI : 0.69 0.85] P<0.001 for each 5 mmhg reduction in systolic BP OR = 0.81 0.72 0.92] P<,0.001 ACEIs or ARBs OR= 0.84 0.74 0.96)] P=0.009 Studies without multiple risk factors required for entry APPENDIX 2 8

BLOOD PRESSURE-LOWERING Analysis from ADVANC E EUROPA, PROGRES S (Brugts et al 48 ) JUNE 2009 Patients with vascular disease or at a high risk of vascular disease. 63 ± 9 age 18 29 463 : 8367, 28.4% 21096 Mean of 4 years Perindopril-based treatment regimen placebo. Cardiovascular mortality, MI, and stroke. Major cardiovascular events: Placebo 1788 Perindopril 1490 All cause mortality: Placebo 1210 Perindopril 1089 HR = 0.82 0.76 0.87] P<0.001 HR = 0.89 0.82 0.96] P=0.006 Benefit of perindop ril in all subgroup analysis, including gender Subgroup analysis by gender P INTERACTION=0.66 Cardiovascular mortality HR = 0.85 0.76 0.95] P = 0.004 Non-fatal myocardial infarction HR = 0.80 0.71 0.90] P<0.001 Stroke HR = 0.82 0.74 0.92] P =0.002 Heart failure HR = 0.84 0.72 0.96] P = 0.015 APPENDIX 2 9