Hypothetical blood-pressure-lowering interventions and risk of stroke and dementia

We aimed to study the effects of hypothetical interventions on systolic blood pressure (SBP) and smoking on risk of stroke and dementia using data from 15 years of follow-up in the Rotterdam Study. We used data from 4930 individuals, aged 55–80 years, with no prior history of stroke, dementia or cognitive impairment, followed for 15 years within the Rotterdam Study, a population-based cohort. We defined the following sustained interventions on SBP: (1) maintaining SBP below 120 mmHg, (2) maintaining SBP below 140 mmHg, (3) reducing SBP by 10% if above 140 mmHg, (4) reducing SBP by 20% if above 140 mmHg, and a combined intervention of quitting smoking with each of these SBP-lowering strategies. We considered incident stroke and incident dementia diagnoses as outcomes. We applied the parametric g-formula to adjust for baseline and time-varying confounding. The observed 15-year risk for stroke was 10.7%. Compared to no specified intervention (i.e., the “natural course”), all interventions that involved reducing SBP were associated with a stroke risk reduction of about 10% (e.g., reducing SBP by 20% if above 140 mmHg risk ratio: 0.89; 95% CI 0.76, 1). Jointly

Hypothetical blood-pressure-lowering interventions and risk of stroke and dementia

We aimed to study the effects of hypothetical interventions on systolic blood pressure (SBP) and smoking on risk of stroke and dementia using data from 15 years of follow-up in the Rotterdam Study. We used data from 4930 individuals, aged 55–80 years, with no prior history of stroke, dementia or cognitive impairment, followed for 15 years within the Rotterdam Study, a population-based cohort. We defined the following sustained interventions on SBP: (1) maintaining SBP below 120 mmHg, (2) maintaining SBP below 140 mmHg, (3) reducing SBP by 10% if above 140 mmHg, (4) reducing SBP by 20% if above 140 mmHg, and a combined intervention of quitting smoking with each of these SBP-lowering strategies. We considered incident stroke and incident dementia diagnoses as outcomes. We applied the parametric g-formula to adjust for baseline and time-varying confounding. The observed 15-year risk for stroke was 10.7%. Compared to no specified intervention (i.e., the “natural course”), all interventions that involved reducing SBP were associated with a stroke risk reduction of about 10% (e.g., reducing SBP by 20% if above 140 mmHg risk ratio: 0.89; 95% CI 0.76, 1). Jointly intervening on SBP and smoking status further decreased the risk of stroke (e.g., risk ratio: 0.83; 95% CI 0.71, 0.94). None of the specified interventions were associated with a substantive change in dementia risk. Our study suggests that a joint intervention on SBP and smoking cessation during later life may reduce stroke risk, while the potential for reducing dementia risk were not observed

Emulating a target trial of statin use and risk of dementia using cohort data

OBJECTIVE: Observational data can be used to attempt to emulate a target trial of statin use and estimate analogues of intention-to-treat and per protocol effects on dementia risk. METHODS: Using data from a prospective cohort study in the Netherlands, we conceptualized a sequence of “trials” in which eligible individuals ages 55–80 years were classified as statin initiators or noninitiators for every consecutive month between 1993 and 2007 and were followed until diagnosis of dementia, death, loss to follow-up, or the end of follow-up. We estimated 2 types of effects of statin use on dementia and a combined endpoint of dementia or death: the effect of initiation vs no initiation and the effect of sustained use vs no use. We estimated risk by statin treatment strategy over time via pooled logistic regression. We used inverse-probability weighting to account for treatment-confounder feedback in estimation of per-protocol effects. RESULTS: Of 233,526 eligible person-trials (6,373 individuals), there were 622 initiators and 232,904 noninitiators. Comparing statin initiation with no initiation, the 10-year risk differences (95% confidence interval) were −0.1% (−2.3% to 1.8%) for dementia and 0.3% (−2.7% to 3.3%) for dementia or death. Comparing sustained statin use vs no use, the 10-year risk differences were −2.2% (−5.2% to 1.6%) for dementia and −5.1% (−10.5% to −1.1%) for dementia or death. CONCLUSIONS: Individuals with sustained statin use, but not statin initiation alone, had reduced 10-year risks of dementia and dementia or death. Our results should be interpreted with caution due to the small number of initiators and events and potential for residual confounding