No additional benefit of slowing progression of hypertensive nephrosclerosis was observed with the lower BP goal. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors appear to be more effective than beta-blockers or dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers in slowing GFR decline.

Background The effects of pharmacological blood pressure lowering at normal or high-normal blood pressure ranges in people with or without pre-existing cardiovascular disease remains uncertain. We analysed individual participant data from randomised trials to investigate the effects of blood pressure lowering treatment on the risk of major cardiovascular events by baseline levels of systolic blood pressure. MethodsWe did a meta-analysis of individual participant-level data from 48 randomised trials of pharmacological blood pressure lowering medications versus placebo or other classes of blood pressure-lowering medications, or between more versus less intensive treatment regimens, which had at least 1000 persons-years of follow-up in each group. Trials exclusively done with participants with heart failure or short-term interventions in participants with acute myocardial infarction or other acute settings were excluded. Data from 51 studies published between 1972 and 2013 were obtained by the Blood Pressure Lowering Treatment Trialists' Collaboration (Oxford University, Oxford, UK). We pooled the data to investigate the stratified effects of blood pressure-lowering treatment in participants with and without prevalent cardiovascular disease (ie, any reports of stroke, myocardial infarction, or ischaemic heart disease before randomisation), overall and across seven systolic blood pressure categories (ranging from <120 to ≥170 mm Hg). The primary outcome was a major cardiovascular event (defined as a composite of fatal and non-fatal stroke, fatal or non-fatal myocardial infarction or ischaemic heart disease, or heart failure causing death or requiring admission to hospital), analysed as per intention to treat.Findings Data for 344 716 participants from 48 randomised clinical trials were available for this analysis. Pre-randomisation mean systolic/diastolic blood pressures were 146/84 mm Hg in participants with previous cardiovascular disease (n=157 728) and 157/89 mm Hg in participants without previous cardiovascular disease (n=186 988). There was substantial spread in participants' blood pressure at baseline, with 31 239 (19•8%) of participants with previous cardiovascular disease and 14 928 (8•0%) of individuals without previous cardiovascular disease having a systolic blood pressure of less than 130 mm Hg. The relative effects of blood pressure-lowering treatment were proportional to the intensity of systolic blood pressure reduction. After a median 4•15 years' follow-up (Q1-Q3 2•97-4•96), 42 324 participants (12•3%) had at least one major cardiovascular event. In participants without previous cardiovascular disease at baseline, the incidence rate for developing a major cardiovascular event per 1000 person-years was 31•9 (95% CI 31•3-32•5) in the comparator group and 25•9 (25•4-26•4) in the intervention group. In participants with previous cardiovascular disease at baseline, the corresponding rates were 39•7 (95% CI 39•0-40•5) and 36•0 (95% CI 35•3-36•7), in the comparator and intervention groups, respectively. Haz...

No abstract

No abstract

Background The effects of pharmacological blood-pressure-lowering on cardiovascular outcomes in individuals aged 70 years and older, particularly when blood pressure is not substantially increased, is uncertain. We compared the effects of blood-pressure-lowering treatment on the risk of major cardiovascular events in groups of patients stratified by age and blood pressure at baseline. MethodsWe did a meta-analysis using individual participant-level data from randomised controlled trials of pharmacological blood-pressure-lowering versus placebo or other classes of blood-pressure-lowering medications, or between more versus less intensive treatment strategies, which had at least 1000 persons-years of follow-up in each treatment group. Participants with previous history of heart failure were excluded. Data were obtained from the Blood Pressure Lowering Treatment Triallists' Collaboration. We pooled the data and categorised participants into baseline age groups (<55 years, 55-64 years, 65-74 years, 75-84 years, and ≥85 years) and blood pressure categories (in 10 mm Hg increments from <120 mm Hg to ≥170 mm Hg systolic blood pressure and from <70 mm Hg to ≥110 mm Hg diastolic). We used a fixed effects one-stage approach and applied Cox proportional hazard models, stratified by trial, to analyse the data. The primary outcome was defined as either a composite of fatal or non-fatal stroke, fatal or non-fatal myocardial infarction or ischaemic heart disease, or heart failure causing death or requiring hospital admission. FindingsWe included data from 358 707 participants from 51 randomised clinical trials. The age of participants at randomisation ranged from 21 years to 105 years (median 65 years [IQR 59-75]), with 42 960 (12•0%) participants younger than 55 years, 128 437 (35•8%) aged 55-64 years, 128 506 (35•8%) 65-74 years, 54 016 (15•1%) 75-84 years, and 4788 (1•3%) 85 years and older. The hazard ratios for the risk of major cardiovascular events per 5 mm Hg reduction in systolic blood pressure for each age group were 0•82 (95% CI 0•76-0•88) in individuals younger than 55 years, 0•91 (0•88-0•95) in those aged 55-64 years, 0•91 (0•88-0•95) in those aged 65-74 years, 0•91 (0•87-0•96) in those aged 75-84 years, and 0•99 (0•87-1•12) in those aged 85 years and older (adjusted p interaction =0•050). Similar patterns of proportional risk reductions were observed for a 3 mm Hg reduction in diastolic blood pressure. Absolute risk reductions for major cardiovascular events varied by age and were larger in older groups (adjusted p interaction =0•024). We did not find evidence for any clinically meaningful heterogeneity of relative treatment effects across different baseline blood pressure categories in any age group.Interpretation Pharmacological blood pressure reduction is effective into old age, with no evidence that relative risk reductions for prevention of major cardiovascular events vary by systolic or diastolic blood pressure levels at randomisation, down to less than 120/70 mm Hg. Pharmacological blood pressure reduction ...

Among those with moderate-to-advanced chronic kidney disease, the relationship between blood pressure (BP) and cardiovascular disease seems U shaped but is loglinear in apparently healthy adults. The SHARP (Study of Heart and Renal Protection) randomized 9270 patients with chronic kidney disease to ezetimibe/simvastatin versus matching placebo and measured BP at each follow-up visit. Cox regression was used to assess the association between BP and risk of cardiovascular disease among (1) those with a self-reported history of cardiovascular disease and (2) those with no such history and, based on plasma troponin-I concentration, a low probability of subclinical cardiac disease. A total of 8666 participants had a valid baseline BP and troponin-I measurement, and 2188 had at least 1 cardiovascular event during follow-up. After adjustment for relevant confounders, the association between systolic BP and cardiovascular events was U shaped, but among participants without evidence of previous cardiovascular disease, there was a positive loglinear association throughout the range of values studied. Among those with the lowest probability of subclinical cardiac disease, each 10 mm Hg higher systolic BP corresponded to a 27% increased risk of cardiovascular disease (hazard ratio, 1.27; 95% confidence interval, 1.11–1.44). In contrast, the relationship between diastolic BP and cardiovascular risk remained U shaped irrespective of cardiovascular disease history or risk of subclinical disease. In conclusion, the lack of a clear association between systolic BP and cardiovascular risk in this population seems attributable to confounding, suggesting that more intensive systolic BP reduction may be beneficial in such patients. Clinical Trial Registration URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00125593.

No abstract

Background: To address the myriad of health problems and disparities that affect the United States (US) population, the mix of health care professionals and researchers must reflect the full diversity of the nation. There continues to be discrepancy between the number of trained scientists and bio­medical researchers from underrepresented populations relative to the overall popula­tion. A scarcity of formal and informal net­working opportunities for minority research­ers and health care providers contribute to this lack of diversity.Objective: The purpose of this article is to report the outcomes of an established junior minority faculty mentoring program. The Network of Minority Health Research Investigators (NMRI) was established by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) in 2002. We present outcome data from 2008 to the present.Methods: The Oversight and Planning Committees of the NMRI developed an 18-question survey. The NMRI program analyst conducted a pilot test of the survey and made modifications to ensure readabil­ity and understanding. From 2008 – 2018, we administered the survey in both paper and electronic versions to junior and senior members of NMRI. Descriptive results identified the participants. We used open coding to extrapolate recurring statements, words, and themes that were organized into four final categories: reasons for attending NMRI; mentoring; career development; and social support.Results: Participants were primarily post-doctoral researchers or assistant professors seeking promotion to instructor or associ­ate professor with tenure (64%). Consistent reasons for participating in the Network included: career development; emotional support; mentorship for research; devel­oping or refining skills for grant writing; lab management; poster presentations; and applying for tenure. Areas of research interest included diabetes, kidney diseases, nutrition, obesity, and bioinformatics.Conclusions: While the number of respons­es to the survey varied annually, the qualita­tive results suggest that career development and social support provided through the Network were the largest motivators for participation. Ethn Dis. 2019;29(Suppl 1):119-122; doi:10.18865/ed.29.S1.119.