Starting Antihypertensive Drug Treatment With Combination Therapy

The 2018 European Society of Cardiology/European Society of Hypertension1 and the 2020 International Society of Hypertension2 guidelines for the management of hypertension proposed that initial combination therapy with 2 antihypertensive agents in a single-pill combination (SPC) is preferred in most patients in need of blood pressure (BP) lowering treatment and should replace the long-standing concept of starting treatment with a single agent, rotating through antihypertensive drug classes, and next moving towards combining drug classes. By moving SPCs forward as the initial BP-lowering strategy, the European1 and International2 Societies of Hypertension Guideline Committees overlooked several principles in hypertension management: (1) understanding the pathophysiology of hypertension; (2) prioritizing evidence from randomized clinical trials above observational studies and expert opinion; and (3) giving consideration to the cost-effectiveness of antihypertensive drug treatment and the sustainability of health care. This article addresses these points. Sources of information included (1) guidelines issued by European,1,3,4 American,5–7 International,2,8,9 and British10–12 Expert Committees, published between 19998 and 2020,2 summarized in Table S1 in the Data Supplement; (2) a PubMed search ran on May 5, 2020, without limitations with as search terms in the abstract or title “hypertension” combined with “fixed combination” OR “hypertension” combined with “single” and “costs”; (3) the placebo-controlled trials of antihypertensive drug treatment, as identified from the reference lists of 5 systematic literature reviews,13–17 of which 2 were published by the Blood Pressure Lowering Trialists’ Collaboration14,16; (4) 3 randomized controlled trials of usual versus intensive BP control18–20; and (5) the retail costs of antihypertensive drugs on the Belgian market (https://www.bcfi.be)

Opposing Age-Related Trends in Absolute and Relative Risk of Adverse Health Outcomes Associated with Out-of-Office Blood Pressure

Participant-level meta-analyses assessed the age-specific relevance of office blood pressure to cardiovascular complications, but this information is lacking for out-of-office blood pressure. At baseline, daytime ambulatory (n=12 624) or home (n=5297) blood pressure were measured in 17 921 participants (51.3% women; mean age, 54.2 years) from 17 population cohorts. Subsequently, mortality and cardiovascular events were recorded. Using multivariable Cox regression, floating absolute risk was computed across 4 age bands (≤60, 61-70, 71-80, and \u3e80 years). Over 236 491 person-years, 3855 people died and 2942 cardiovascular events occurred. From levels as low as 110/65 mm Hg, risk log-linearly increased with higher out-of-office systolic/diastolic blood pressure. From the youngest to the oldest age group, rates expressed per 1000 person-years increased (P\u3c0.001) from 4.4 (95% CI, 4.0-4.7) to 86.3 (76.1-96.5) for all-cause mortality and from 4.1 (3.9-4.6) to 59.8 (51.0-68.7) for cardiovascular events, whereas hazard ratios per 20-mm Hg increment in systolic out-of-office blood pressure decreased (P≤0.0033) from 1.42 (1.19-1.69) to 1.09 (1.05-1.12) and from 1.70 (1.51-1.92) to 1.12 (1.07-1.17), respectively. These age-related trends were similar for out-of-office diastolic pressure and were generally consistent in both sexes and across ethnicities. In conclusion, adverse outcomes were directly associated with out-of-office blood pressure in adults. At young age, the absolute risk associated with out-of-office blood pressure was low, but relative risk high, whereas with advancing age relative risk decreased and absolute risk increased. These observations highlight the need of a lifecourse approach for the management of hypertension

Heritability of The Retinal Microcirculation in Flemish Families

BACKGROUND Few population studies have described the heritability and intrafamilial concordance of the retinal microvessels, or the genetic or environmental correlations of the phenotypes of these vessels. METHODS We randomly selected 413 participants from 70 families (mean age, 51.5 years; 50.1% women) from a Flemish population. We postprocessed retinal images using IVAN software to generate the central retinal arteriole equivalent (CRAE), central retinal venule equivalent (CRVE), and arteriole-to-venule-ratio (AVR) from these images. We used SAGE version 6.2 and SAS version 9.2 to compute multivariate-adjusted estimates of heritability and intrafamilial correlations of the CRAE, CRVE, and AVR of the retinal microvessels in the images. RESULTS Sex, age, mean arterial pressure, and smoking explained up to 12.7% of the variance of the phenotypes of the retinal microvessels of the study participants. With adjustments applied for these covariates, the heritability estimates of CRAE, CRVE, and AVR were 0.213 (P = 0.044), 0.339 (P = 0.010), and 0.272 (P = 0.004), respectively. The parent-offspring correlations for CRAE, CRVE, and AVR were 0.118 (NS), 0.225 (P < 0.01), and 0.215 (P < 0.05), respectively. The corresponding values were 0.222 (P < 0.05), 0.213 (P < 0.05), and 0.390 (P < 0.001) for sib-sib correlations, respectively. The genetic and environmental correlations between CRAE and CRVE were 0.360 and 0.545 (P < 0.001 for both). CONCLUSION Our study showed moderate heritability for CRAE, CRVE, and AVR, and a significant genetic correlation of CRAE with CRVE in the Flemish population of our study. These findings suggest that genetic factors influence the diameter of the retinal microvessels, and that CRAE and CRVE share some genetic determinant

Ambulatory Hypertension Subtypes and 24-Hour Systolic and Diastolic Blood Pressure as Distinct Outcome Predictors in 8341 Untreated People Recruited From 12 Populations

Background—Data on risk associated with 24-hour ambulatory diastolic (DBP24) versus systolic (SBP24) blood pressure are scarce. Methods and Results—We recorded 24-hour blood pressure and health outcomes in 8341 untreated people (mean age, 50.8 years; 46.6% women) randomly recruited from 12 populations. We computed hazard ratios (HRs) using multivariable-adjusted Cox regression. Over 11.2 years (median), 927 (11.1%) participants died, 356 (4.3%) from cardiovascular causes, and 744 (8.9%) experienced a fatal or nonfatal cardiovascular event. Isolated diastolic hypertension (DBP24≥80 mm Hg) did not increase the risk of total mortality, cardiovascular mortality, or stroke (HRs≤1.54; P≥0.18), but was associated with a higher risk of fatal combined with nonfatal cardiovascular, cardiac, or coronary events (HRs≥1.75; P≤0.0054). Isolated systolic hypertension (SBP24≥130 mm Hg) and mixed diastolic plus systolic hypertension were associated with increased risks of all aforementioned end points (P≤0.0012). Below age 50, DBP24 was the main driver of risk, reaching significance for total (HR for 1-SD increase, 2.05; P=0.0039) and cardiovascular mortality (HR, 4.07; P=0.0032) and for all cardiovascular end points combined (HR, 1.74; P=0.039) with a nonsignificant contribution of SBP24 (HR≤0.92; P≥0.068); above age 50, SBP24 predicted all end points (HR≥1.19; P≤0.0002) with a nonsignificant contribution of DBP24 (0.96≤HR≤1.14; P≥0.10). The interactions of age with SBP24 and DBP24 were significant for all cardiovascular and coronary events (P≤0.043). Conclusions—The risks conferred by DBP24 and SBP24 are age dependent. DBP24 and isolated diastolic hypertension drive coronary complications below age 50, whereas above age 50 SBP24 and isolated systolic and mixed hypertension are the predominant risk factors

Outcome-Driven Thresholds for Ambulatory Pulse Pressure in 9938 People Recruited from 11 Populations

Evidence-based thresholds for risk stratification based on pulse pressure (PP) are currently unavailable. To derive outcome-driven thresholds for the 24–h ambulatory PP, we analyzed 9938 people randomly recruited from 11 populations (47.3% women). After age stratification (≥60 years) and using average risk as reference, we computed multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) to assess risk by tenths of the PP distribution or risk associated with stepwise increasing (+1 mm Hg) PP levels. All adjustments included mean arterial pressure. Among 6028 younger participants (68,853 person-years), the risk of cardiovascular (HR, 1.58; P=0.011) or cardiac (HR, 1.52; P=0.056) events increased only in the top PP tenth (mean, 60.6 mm Hg). Using stepwise increasing PP levels, the lower boundary of the 95% confidence interval of the successive thresholds did not cross unity. Among 3910 older participants (39,923 person-years), risk increased (P≤0.028) in the top PP tenth (mean, 76.1 mm Hg). HRs were 1.30 and 1.62 for total and cardiovascular mortality, and 1.52, 1.69 and 1.40 for all cardiovascular, cardiac and cerebrovascular events. The lower boundary of the 95% confidence interval of the HRs associated with stepwise increasing PP levels crossed unity at 64 mm Hg. While accounting for all covariables, the top tenth of PP contributed less than 0.3% (generalized R2 statistic) to the overall risk among elderly. Thus, in randomly recruited people, ambulatory PP does not add to risk stratification below age 60; in the elderly, PP is a weak risk factor with levels below 64 mm Hg probably being innocuous

Association of Fatal and Nonfatal Cardiovascular Outcomes With 24-Hour Mean Arterial Pressure

Major adverse cardiovascular events are closely associated with 24-hour blood pressure (BP). We determined outcome-driven thresholds for 24-hour mean arterial pressure (MAP), a BP index estimated by oscillometric devices. We assessed the association of major adverse cardiovascular events with 24-hour MAP, systolic BP (SBP), and diastolic BP (DBP) in a population-based cohort (n=11 596). Statistics included multivariable Cox regression and the generalized R2 statistic to test model fit. Baseline office and 24-hour MAP averaged 97.4 and 90.4 mm Hg. Over 13.6 years (median), 2034 major adverse cardiovascular events occurred. Twenty-four-hour MAP levels of \u3c90 (normotension, n=6183), 90 to \u3c92 (elevated MAP, n=909), 92 to \u3c96 (stage-1 hypertension, n=1544), and ≥96 (stage-2 hypertension, n=2960) mm Hg yielded equivalent 10-year major adverse cardiovascular events risks as office MAP categorized using 2017 American thresholds for office SBP and DBP. Compared with 24-hour MAP normotension, hazard ratios were 0.96 (95% CI, 0.80–1.16), 1.32 (1.15–1.51), and 1.77 (1.59–1.97), for elevated and stage-1 and stage-2 hypertensive MAP. On top of 24-hour MAP, higher 24-hour SBP increased, whereas higher 24-hour DBP attenuated risk (P\u3c0.001). Considering the 24-hour measurements, R2 statistics were similar for SBP (1.34) and MAP (1.28), lower for DBP than for MAP (0.47), and reduced to null, if the base model included SBP and DBP; if the ambulatory BP indexes were dichotomized according to the 2017 American guideline and the proposed 92 mm Hg for MAP, the R2 values were 0.71, 0.89, 0.32, and 0.10, respectively. In conclusion, the clinical application of 24-hour MAP thresholds in conjunction with SBP and DBP refines risk estimates

Setting Thresholds to Varying Blood Pressure Monitoring Intervals Differentially Affects Risk Estimates Associated With White-Coat and Masked Hypertension in the Population

Outcome-driven recommendations about time intervals during which ambulatory blood pressure should be measured to diagnose white-coat or masked hypertension are lacking. We cross-classified 8237 untreated participants (mean age, 50.7 years; 48.4% women) enrolled in 12 population studies, using ≥140/≥90, ≥130/≥80, ≥135/≥85, and ≥120/≥70 mm Hg as hypertension thresholds for conventional, 24-hour, daytime, and nighttime blood pressure. White-coat hypertension was hypertension on conventional measurement with ambulatory normotension, the opposite condition being masked hypertension. Intervals used for classification of participants were daytime, nighttime, and 24 hours, first considered separately, and next combined as 24 hours plus daytime or plus nighttime, or plus both. Depending on time intervals chosen, white-coat and masked hypertension frequencies ranged from 6.3% to 12.5% and from 9.7% to 19.6%, respectively. During 91 046 person-years, 729 participants experienced a cardiovascular event. In multivariable analyses with normotension during all intervals of the day as reference, hazard ratios associated with white-coat hypertension progressively weakened considering daytime only (1.38; P=0.033), nighttime only (1.43; P=0.0074), 24 hours only (1.21; P=0.20), 24 hours plus daytime (1.24; P=0.18), 24 hours plus nighttime (1.15; P=0.39), and 24 hours plus daytime and nighttime (1.16; P=0.41). The hazard ratios comparing masked hypertension with normotension were all significant (

Association of Office and Ambulatory Blood Pressure With Mortality and Cardiovascular Outcomes

Importance Blood pressure (BP) is a known risk factor for overall mortality and cardiovascular (CV)-specific fatal and nonfatal outcomes. It is uncertain which BP index is most strongly associated with these outcomes. Objective To evaluate the association of BP indexes with death and a composite CV event. Design, Setting, and Participants Longitudinal population-based cohort study of 11 135 adults from Europe, Asia, and South America with baseline observations collected from May 1988 to May 2010 (last follow-ups, August 2006-October 2016). Exposures Blood pressure measured by an observer or an automated office machine; measured for 24 hours, during the day or the night; and the dipping ratio (nighttime divided by daytime readings). Main Outcomes and Measures Multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) expressed the risk of death or a CV event associated with BP increments of 20/10 mm Hg. Cardiovascular events included CV mortality combined with nonfatal coronary events, heart failure, and stroke. Improvement in model performance was assessed by the change in the area under the curve (AUC). Results Among 11 135 participants (median age, 54.7 years, 49.3% women), 2836 participants died (18.5 per 1000 person-years) and 2049 (13.4 per 1000 person-years) experienced a CV event over a median of 13.8 years of follow-up. Both end points were significantly associated with all single systolic BP indexes (P \u3c .001). For nighttime systolic BP level, the HR for total mortality was 1.23 (95% CI, 1.17-1.28) and for CV events, 1.36 (95% CI, 1.30-1.43). For the 24-hour systolic BP level, the HR for total mortality was 1.22 (95% CI, 1.16-1.28) and for CV events, 1.45 (95% CI, 1.37-1.54). With adjustment for any of the other systolic BP indexes, the associations of nighttime and 24-hour systolic BP with the primary outcomes remained statistically significant (HRs ranging from 1.17 [95% CI, 1.10-1.25] to 1.87 [95% CI, 1.62-2.16]). Base models that included single systolic BP indexes yielded an AUC of 0.83 for mortality and 0.84 for the CV outcomes. Adding 24-hour or nighttime systolic BP to base models that included other BP indexes resulted in incremental improvements in the AUC of 0.0013 to 0.0027 for mortality and 0.0031 to 0.0075 for the composite CV outcome. Adding any systolic BP index to models already including nighttime or 24-hour systolic BP did not significantly improve model performance. These findings were consistent for diastolic BP. Conclusions and Relevance In this population-based cohort study, higher 24-hour and nighttime blood pressure measurements were significantly associated with greater risks of death and a composite CV outcome, even after adjusting for other office-based or ambulatory blood pressure measurements. Thus, 24-hour and nighttime blood pressure may be considered optimal measurements for estimating CV risk, although statistically, model improvement compared with other blood pressure indexes was small