Thiazide-type diuretics are superior in preventing 1 or more major forms of CVD and are less expensive. They should be preferred for first-step antihypertensive therapy.

No abstract

Abstract-The Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering treatment to prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT) provides a unique opportunity to compare the long-term relative safety and efficacy of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and calcium channel blocker-initiated therapy in older hypertensive individuals. Patients were randomized to amlodipine (nϭ9048) or lisinopril (nϭ9054). The primary outcome was combined fatal coronary heart disease or nonfatal myocardial infarction, analyzed by intention-to-treat. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality, stroke, combined cardiovascular disease (CVD), end-stage renal disease (ESRD), cancer, and gastrointestinal bleeding. Mean follow-up was 4.9 years. Blood pressure control was similar in nonblacks, but not in blacks. No significant differences were found between treatment groups for the primary outcome, all-cause mortality, ESRD, or cancer. Stroke rates were higher on lisinopril in blacks (RRϭ1.51, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.86) but not in nonblacks (RRϭ1.07, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.28), and in women (RRϭ1.45, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.79), but not in men (RRϭ1.10, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.31). Rates of combined CVD were higher (RRϭ1.06, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.12) because of higher rates for strokes, peripheral arterial disease, and angina, which were partly offset by lower rates for heart failure (RRϭ0.87, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.96) on lisinopril compared with amlodipine. Gastrointestinal bleeds and angioedema were higher on lisinopril. Patients with and without baseline coronary heart disease showed similar outcome patterns. We conclude that in hypertensive patients, the risks for coronary events are similar, but for stroke, combined CVD, gastrointestinal bleeding, and angioedema are higher and for heart failure are lower for lisinopril-based compared with amlodipine-based therapy. Some, but not all, of these differences may be explained by less effective blood pressure control in the lisinopril arm. Key Words: antihypertensive therapy Ⅲ hypertension, detection and control Ⅲ calcium channel blockers Ⅲ angiotensin-converting enzyme Ⅲ cardiovascular diseases Ⅲ stroke Ⅲ heart failure T he success in the management of hypertension and prevention of its sequelae is owed, in part, to the many antihypertensive drugs available to physicians and patients. By the early 1990s, all of the classes of antihypertensive drugs were shown effective in lowering blood pressure (BP), but few morbidity and mortality efficacy data were available except for thiazide-type diuretics and ␤-blockers. Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhib-

Context. Blood pressure control (<140/90 mm

No abstract

In hypertensive patients with reduced GFR, neither amlodipine nor lisinopril was superior to chlorthalidone in reducing the rate of development of ESRD or a 50% or greater decrement in GFR. Participants assigned to receive amlodipine had a higher GFR than those assigned to receive chlorthalidone, but rates of development of ESRD were not different between the groups.

No abstract

BackgroundPlatelet activation has been implicated in the pathogenesis of sickle cell disease (SCD) suggesting antiplatelet agents may be therapeutic. To evaluate the safety of prasugrel, a thienopyridine antiplatelet agent, in adult patients with SCD, we conducted a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study.MethodsThe primary endpoint, safety, was measured by hemorrhagic events requiring medical intervention. Patients were randomized to prasugrel 5 mg daily (n = 41) or placebo (n = 21) for 30 days. Platelet function by VerifyNow® P2Y12 and vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein assays at days 10 and 30 were significantly inhibited in prasugrel- compared with placebo-treated SCD patients.ResultsThere were no hemorrhagic events requiring medical intervention in either study arm. Mean pain rate (percentage of days with pain) and intensity in the prasugrel arm were decreased compared with placebo. However, these decreases did not reach statistical significance. Platelet surface P-selectin and plasma soluble P-selectin, biomarkers of in vivo platelet activation, were significantly reduced in SCD patients receiving prasugrel compared with placebo. In sum, prasugrel was well tolerated and not associated with serious hemorrhagic events.ConclusionsDespite the small size and short duration of this study, there was a decrease in platelet activation biomarkers and a trend toward decreased pain.