Comparison of Frequency of Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular and Safety Events With Systolic Blood Pressure <120mm Hg Versus 135-139mm Hg in a Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial Primary Prevention Subgroup.
Pubmed ID: 30115425
Pubmed Central ID: PMC7309297
Journal: The American journal of cardiology
Publication Date: Oct. 1, 2018
MeSH Terms: Humans, Adult, Female, Aged, Risk Factors, United States, Middle Aged, Hypertension, Systole, Incidence, Puerto Rico, Coronary Artery Disease, Antihypertensive Agents, Primary Prevention
Grants: T32 DK007732, L30 AG051250, K23 HL135273, T32 HL007180
Authors: Appel LJ, Miller ER, Cushman M, Juraschek SP, Plante TB, Littenberg B
Cite As: Plante TB, Juraschek SP, Miller ER 3rd, Appel LJ, Cushman M, Littenberg B. Comparison of Frequency of Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular and Safety Events With Systolic Blood Pressure <120mm Hg Versus 135-139mm Hg in a Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial Primary Prevention Subgroup. Am J Cardiol 2018 Oct 1;122(7):1185-1190. Epub 2018 Jul 4.
Studies:
- Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT)
- Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial Primary Outcome Paper (SPRINT-POP) Data
Abstract
Whether the benefit of intensive blood pressure (BP) control reduces atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk without increasing risks of serious adverse events (SAEs) is unknown. We sought to assess differences in incident ASCVD and SAE with intensive BP control across the spectrum of 10-year ASCVD risk in the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT). SPRINT randomized 9,361 participants who were ≥50years old and ≥1 CVD risk factor to standard or intensive BP control (<120 or 130 to 139mm Hg). We excluded adults with clinical ASCVD or age ≥80. We included 6,875 participants. We compared hazard ratios (HR) and risk differences (RD) of incident ASCVD events or SAEs in all and across quartiles of baseline risk. Median predicted ASCVD risk was 15.9%. Intensive BP control significantly reduced ASCVD events (HR 0.75, 95% confidence interval 0.58, 0.97, p = 0.03; RD -0.94; -1.8, -0.1; p = 0.03). There was no difference in effect across quartiles of ASCVD risk. There was a non-significant increase in SAE with intensive BP control (HR 1.08, 1.00, 1.17 p = 0.06; RD 2.1, -0.1, 4.4, p = 0.03), and no difference in this effect across quartiles of risk. In SPRINT participants without baseline clinical ASCVD, the benefit of intensive BP control for primary prevention of ASCVD may extend to lower risk participants without an increase in SAE. In conclusion, lower risk adults with stage 1 hypertension meeting SPRINT eligibility may benefit from initiation of antihypertensives.