Intensive blood pressure lowering in different age categories: insights from the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial.

Pubmed ID: 31529024

Pubmed Central ID: PMC7669324

Journal: European heart journal. Cardiovascular pharmacotherapy

Publication Date: Nov. 1, 2020

Affiliation: Brigham and Women's Hospital Heart & Vascular Center, Harvard Medical School, 75 Francis St, Boston, MA 02115, USA.

Link: https://academic.oup.com/ehjcvp/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/ehjcvp/pvz050/5569884?redirectedFrom=fulltext

MeSH Terms: Humans, Male, Female, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Risk Factors, United States, Age Factors, Middle Aged, Hypertension, Risk Assessment, Heart Failure, Treatment Outcome, Cause of Death, Stroke, Time Factors, Antihypertensive Agents, Arterial Pressure, Clinical Decision-Making, Acute Coronary Syndrome

Grants: T32 HL007604, UL1 TR002541

Authors: Olsen MH, Pandey A, Biering-Sørensen T, Bhatt DL, Vaduganathan M, Pareek M, Qamar A, Byrne C, Olesen TB

Cite As: Byrne C, Pareek M, Vaduganathan M, Biering-Sørensen T, Qamar A, Pandey A, Olesen TB, Olsen MH, Bhatt DL. Intensive blood pressure lowering in different age categories: insights from the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Pharmacother 2020 Nov 1;6(6):356-363.

Studies:

Abstract

AIMS: The 2018 ESC/ESH guidelines for hypertension recommend differential management of patients who are <65, 65-79, and ≥80 years of age. However, it is unclear whether intensive blood pressure lowering is well-tolerated and modifies risk uniformly across the age spectrum. METHODS AND RESULTS: SPRINT randomized 9361 high-risk adults without diabetes and age ≥50 years with systolic blood pressure 130-180 mmHg to either intensive or standard antihypertensive treatment. The primary efficacy endpoint was the composite of acute coronary syndromes, stroke, heart failure, or death from cardiovascular causes. The primary safety endpoint was composite serious adverse events. We assessed whether age modified the efficacy and safety of intensive vs. standard blood pressure lowering using Cox proportional-hazards regression and restricted cubic splines. In all, 3805 (41%), 4390 (47%), and 1166 (12%) were <65, 65-79, and ≥80 years. Mean age was similar between the two study groups (intensive group 67.9 ± 9.4 years vs. standard group 67.9 ± 9.5 years; P = 0.94). Median follow-up was 3.3 years. In multivariable models, age was linearly associated with the risk of stroke (P < 0.001) and non-linearly associated with the risk of primary efficacy events, death from cardiovascular causes, death from any cause, heart failure, and serious adverse events (P < 0.001). The safety and efficacy of intensive blood pressure lowering were not modified by age, whether tested continuously or categorically (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: In SPRINT, the benefits and risks of intensive blood pressure lowering did not differ according to the age categories proposed by the ESC/ESH guidelines for hypertension. TRIAL REGISTRATION: SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial); ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01206062, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01206062.