The Benefits of High-Intensity Interval Training on Cognition and Blood Pressure in Older Adults With Hypertension and Subjective Cognitive Decline: Results From the Heart & Mind Study

Background: The impact of exercise on cognition in older adults with hypertension and subjective cognitive decline (SCD) is unclear. Objectives: We determined the influence of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) combined with mind-motor training on cognition and systolic blood pressure (BP) in older adults with hypertension and SCD. Methods: We randomized 128 community-dwelling older adults [age mean (SD): 71.1 (6.7), 47.7% females] with history of hypertension and SCD to either HIIT or a moderate-intensity continuous training (MCT) group. Both groups received 15 min of mind-motor training followed by 45 min of either HIIT or MCT. Participants exercised in total 60 min/day, 3 days/week for 6 months. We assessed changes in global cognitive functioning (GCF), Trail-Making Test (TMT), systolic and diastolic BP, and cardiorespiratory fitness. Results: Participants in both groups improved diastolic BP [F(1, 87.32) = 4.392, p = 0.039], with greatest effect within the HIIT group [estimated mean change (95% CI): −2.64 mmHg, (−4.79 to −0.48), p = 0.017], but no between-group differences were noted (p = 0.17). Both groups also improved cardiorespiratory fitness [F(1, 69) = 34.795, p \u3c 0.001], and TMT A [F(1, 81.51) = 26.871, p \u3c 0.001] and B [F(1, 79.49) = 23.107, p \u3c 0.001]. There were, however, no within- or between-group differences in GCF and systolic BP at follow-up. Conclusion: Despite improvements in cardiorespiratory fitness, exercise of high- or moderate-intensity, combined with mind-motor training, did not improve GCF or systolic BP in individuals with hypertension and SCD. Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03545958)

The Benefits of High-Intensity Interval Training on Cognition and Blood Pressure in Older Adults With Hypertension and Subjective Cognitive Decline: Results From the Heart & Mind Study

Background: The impact of exercise on cognition in older adults with hypertension and subjective cognitive decline (SCD) is unclear. Objectives: We determined the influence of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) combined with mind-motor training on cognition and systolic blood pressure (BP) in older adults with hypertension and SCD. Methods: We randomized 128 community-dwelling older adults [age mean (SD): 71.1 (6.7), 47.7% females] with history of hypertension and SCD to either HIIT or a moderate-intensity continuous training (MCT) group. Both groups received 15 min of mind-motor training followed by 45 min of either HIIT or MCT. Participants exercised in total 60 min/day, 3 days/week for 6 months. We assessed changes in global cognitive functioning (GCF), Trail-Making Test (TMT), systolic and diastolic BP, and cardiorespiratory fitness. Results: Participants in both groups improved diastolic BP [F(1, 87.32) = 4.392, p = 0.039], with greatest effect within the HIIT group [estimated mean change (95% CI): −2.64 mmHg, (−4.79 to −0.48), p = 0.017], but no between-group differences were noted (p = 0.17). Both groups also improved cardiorespiratory fitness [F(1, 69) = 34.795, p \u3c 0.001], and TMT A [F(1, 81.51) = 26.871, p \u3c 0.001] and B [F(1, 79.49) = 23.107, p \u3c 0.001]. There were, however, no within- or between-group differences in GCF and systolic BP at follow-up. Conclusion: Despite improvements in cardiorespiratory fitness, exercise of high- or moderate-intensity, combined with mind-motor training, did not improve GCF or systolic BP in individuals with hypertension and SCD. Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03545958)

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK.

BACKGROUND: A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. METHODS: This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. FINDINGS: Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0-75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4-97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8-80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3-4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. INTERPRETATION: ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Lemann Foundation, Rede D'Or, Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK

Background A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. Methods This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. Findings Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0–75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4–97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8–80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3–4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. Interpretation ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials