Sex-Specific Effects of Blood Pressure Lowering Pharmacotherapy for the Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease: An Individual Participant-Level Data Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Whether the relative effects of blood pressure (BP)-lowering treatment on cardiovascular outcomes differ by sex, particularly when BP is not substantially elevated, has been uncertain. METHODS: We conducted an individual participant-level data meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of pharmacological BP lowering. We pooled the data and categorized participants by sex, systolic BP categories in 10-mm Hg increments from <120 to ≥170 mm Hg, and age categories spanning from <55 to ≥85 years. We used fixed-effect one-stage individual participant-level data meta-analyses and applied Cox proportional hazard models, stratified by trial, to analyze the data. RESULTS: We included data from 51 randomized controlled trials involving 358 636 (42% women) participants. Over 4.2 years of median follow-up, a 5-mm Hg reduction in systolic BP decreased the risk of major cardiovascular events both in women and men (hazard ratio [95% CI], 0.92 [0.89-0.95] for women and 0.90 [0.88-0.93] for men; P for interaction, 1). There was no evidence for heterogeneity of relative treatment effects by sex for the major cardiovascular disease, its components, or across the different baseline BP categories (all P for interaction, ≥0.57). The effects in women and men were consistent across age categories and the types of antihypertensive medications (all P for interaction, ≥0.14). CONCLUSIONS: The effects of BP reduction were similar in women and men across all BP and age categories at randomization and with no evidence to suggest that drug classes had differing effects by sex. This study does not substantiate sex-based differences in BP-lowering treatment

Low utilization of health care services following screening for hypertension in Dar es Salaam (Tanzania): a prospective population-based study

Drug therapy in high-risk individuals has been advocated as an important strategy to reduce cardiovascular disease in low income countries. We determined, in a low-income urban population, the proportion of persons who utilized health services after having been diagnosed as hypertensive and advised to seek health care for further hypertension management. A population-based survey of 9254 persons aged 25-64 years was conducted in Dar es Salaam. Among the 540 persons with high blood pressure (defined here as BP >or= 160/95 mmHg) at the initial contact, 253 (47%) had high BP on a 4th visit 45 days later. Among them, 208 were untreated and advised to attend health care in a health center of their choice for further management of their hypertension. One year later, 161 were seen again and asked about their use of health services during the interval. Among the 161 hypertensive persons advised to seek health care, 34% reported to have attended a formal health care provider during the 12-month interval (63% public facility; 30% private; 7% both). Antihypertensive treatment was taken by 34% at some point of time (suggesting poor uptake of health services) and 3% at the end of the 12-month follow-up (suggesting poor long-term compliance). Health services utilization tended to be associated with older age, previous history of high BP, being overweight and non-smoking, but not with education or wealth. Lack of symptoms and cost of treatment were the reasons reported most often for not attending health care. Low utilization of health services after hypertension screening suggests a small impact of a patient-centered screen-and-treat strategy in this low-income population. These findings emphasize the need to identify and address barriers to health care utilization for non-communicable diseases in this setting and, indirectly, the importance of public health measures for primary prevention of these diseases

An integrated general practice and pharmacy-based intervention to promote the use of appropriate preventive medications among individuals at high cardiovascular disease risk: protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial

Background: Cardiovascular diseases (CVD) are responsible for significant morbidity, premature mortality, and economic burden. Despite established evidence that supports the use of preventive medications among patients at high CVD risk, treatment gaps remain. Building on prior evidence and a theoretical framework, a complex intervention has been designed to address these gaps among high-risk, under-treated patients in the Australian primary care setting. This intervention comprises a general practice quality improvement tool incorporating clinical decision support and audit/feedback capabilities; availability of a range of CVD polypills (fixed-dose combinations of two blood pressure lowering agents, a statin ± aspirin) for prescription when appropriate; and access to a pharmacy-based program to support long-term medication adherence and lifestyle modification. Methods: Following a systematic development process, the intervention will be evaluated in a pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial including 70 general practices for a median period of 18 months. The 35 general practices in the intervention group will work with a nominated partner pharmacy, whereas those in the control group will provide usual care without access to the intervention tools. The primary outcome is the proportion of patients at high CVD risk who were inadequately treated at baseline who achieve target blood pressure (BP) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels at the study end. The outcomes will be analyzed using data from electronic medical records, utilizing a validated extraction tool. Detailed process and economic evaluations will also be performed. Discussion: The study intends to establish evidence about an intervention that combines technological innovation with team collaboration between patients, pharmacists, and general practitioners (GPs) for CVD prevention. Trial registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN1261600023342

Aspirin for Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Events in People With Diabetes: A position statement of the American Diabetes Association, a scientific statement of the American Heart Association, and an expert consensus document of the American College of Cardiology Foundation

The burden of cardiovascular disease (CVD) among patients with diabetes is substantial. Individuals with diabetes are at two- to fourfold increased risk of cardiovascular events compared with age- and sex-matched individuals without diabetes. In diabetic patients over the age of 65 years, 68% of deaths are from coronary heart disease (CHD) and 16% are from stroke (1). A number of mechanisms for the increased cardiovascular risk with diabetes have been proposed, including increased tendency toward intracoronary thrombus formation (2), increased platelet reactivity (3), and worsened endothelial dysfunction (4). The increased risk for cardiovascular events and mortality in patients with diabetes has led to considerable interest in identifying effective means for cardiovascular risk reduction. Aspirin has been shown to be effective in reducing cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in high-risk patients with myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke (secondary prevention) (5). The Food and Drug Administration has not approved aspirin for use in primary prevention, and its net benefit among patients with no previous cardiovascular events is more controversial, for both patients with and without a history of diabetes (5). The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recently updated its recommendation about aspirin use for primary prevention. The Task Force recommended encouraging aspirin use in men age 45–79 years and women age 55–79 years and not encouraging aspirin use in younger adults. They did not differentiate their recommendations based on the presence or absence of diabetes (6,7). In 2007, the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the American Heart Association (AHA) jointly recommended that aspirin therapy (75–162 mg/day) be used as a primary prevention strategy in those with diabetes at increased cardiovascular risk, including those who are over 40 years of age or who have additional risk factors (family history of CVD, hypertension, smoking, dyslipidemia, or albuminuria) (8). These recommendations were

Different distribution of cardiovascular risk factors according to ethnicity: A study in a high risk population

This study compares the distribution of cardiovascular risk factors in different ethnic groups at high risk of developing cardiovascular diseases within general practices. A total of 430 patients (179 Dutch, 126 Turks, 50 Surinamese, 23 Moroccans, 23 Antilleans and 29 from other ethnic groups) were included in the study. Data collection consisted of questionnaires and physical and clinical examinations. 54% was female. The mean age was 53.1 (sd 9.9) years. There were important ethnic differences in the distribution of cardiovascular risk factors. Compared to the Dutch, ethnic minorities had significantly greater odds of being diabetic (OR = 3.2-19.4); but were less likely to smoke (OR = 0.10-0.53). Turkish individuals had a lower prevalence of hypercholesterolemia but were 2.4 times more likely to be obese than the Dutch. Hypertension was very common in all ethnic groups and no significant ethnic differences were found. These findings provide additional evidence of the need for tailored interventions for different ethnic groups in general practices

Individualised therapy of angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors in stable coronary artery disease: overview of the primary results of the PERindopril GENEtic association (PERGENE) study

In patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD) without overt heart failure, ACE inhibitors are among the most commonly used drugs as these agents have been proven effective in reducing the risk of cardiovascular events. Considerable individual variations in the blood pressure response to ACE inhibitors are observed and as such heterogeneity in clinical treatment effect would be likely as well. Assessing the consistency of treatment benefit is essential for the rational and cost-effective prescription of ACE inhibitors. Information on heterogeneities in treatment effect between subgroups of patients could be used to develop an evidence-based guidance for the installation of ACE-inhibitor therapy. Obviously, therapy should only be applied in those patients who most likely will benefit. Attempts to develop such treatment guidance by using clinical characteristics have been unsuccessful. No heterogeneity in risk reduction by ACE inhibitors has been observed in relation to relevant clinical characteristics. A new approach to such ‘guided-therapy’ could be to integrate more patient-specific characteristics such as the patients’ genetic information. If proven feasible, pharmacogenetic profiling could optimise patients’ benefit of treatment and reduce unnecessary treatment of patients. Cardiovascular pharmacogenetic research of ACE inhibitors in coronary artery disease patients is in a formative stage and studies are limited. The PERGENE study is a large pharmacogenetic substudy of the EUROPA trial, aimed to assess the achievability of pharmacogenetic profiling. We provide an overview of the main results of the PERGENE study in terms of the genetic determinants of treatment benefit and blood pressure response. The main results of the PERGENE study show a pharmacogenetic profile related to the treatment benefit of perindopril identifying responders and non-responders to treatment

Interventions for reducing sedentary behaviour in people with stroke

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows: To determine whether interventions primarily intended to reduce time spent in sedentary behaviour after stroke reduce sedentary time, and whether they modify cardiovascular risk, and reduce the risk of death or secondary vascular events. We will also include interventions intended to reduce the length of prolonged uninterrupted periods of sedentary behaviour (i.e. interventions to fragment or interrupt). Primary objectives To determine whether interventions to reduce or interrupt sedentary time influence: mortality; recurrent cerebrovascular or cardiovascular events. Secondary objectives To determine whether interventions to reduce or interrupt sedentary time influence: amount of sedentary time; cardiometabolic risk profile (e.g. glucose tolerance, arterial function, blood cholesterol and blood pressure); adverse events (in addition to recurrent events, for example falls). Other objectives In addition, we will as a scoping exercise, describe the range of all outcome measures reported in all trials. By definition, any included study interventions will fall within the umbrella of physical activity.Therefore, it may be that multiple plausible benefits could emerge that are common to other energy-expending interventions