TY - JOUR
T1 - Impact of Cardiovascular Risk on the Relative Benefit and Harm of Intensive Treatment of Hypertension
AU - Phillips, Robert A.
AU - Xu, Jiaqiong
AU - Peterson, Leif E.
AU - Arnold, Ryan M.
AU - Diamond, Joseph A.
AU - Schussheim, Adam E.
N1 - Copyright © 2018 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
PY - 2018/4/17
Y1 - 2018/4/17
N2 - Background: The lower rate of primary outcome events in the intensive treatment group in SPRINT (Systolic Pressure Intervention Trial) was associated with increased clinically significant serious adverse events (SAEs). In 2017, the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association issued risk-based blood pressure treatment guidelines. The authors hypothesized that stratification of the SPRINT population by degree of future cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk might identify a group which could benefit the most from intensive treatment. Objectives: This study investigated the effect of baseline 10-year CVD risk on primary outcome events and all-cause SAEs in SPRINT. Methods: Stratifying by quartiles of baseline 10-year CVD risk, Cox proportional hazards models were used to examine the associations of treatment group with the primary outcome events and SAEs. Using multiplicative Poisson regression, a predictive model was developed to determine the benefit-to-harm ratio as a function of CVD risk. Results: Within each quartile, there was a lower rate of primary outcome events in the intensive treatment group, with no differences in all-cause SAEs. From the first to fourth quartiles, the number needed to treat to prevent primary outcomes decreased from 91 to 38. The number needed to harm for all-cause SAEs increased from 62 to 250. The predictive model demonstrated significantly increasing benefit-to-harm ratios (± SE) of 0.50 ± 0.15, 0.78 ± 0.26, 2.13 ± 0.73, and 4.80 ± 1.86, for the first, second, third, and fourth quartile, respectively (p for trend <0.001). All possible pairwise comparisons of between-quartile mean values of benefit-to-harm ratios were significantly different (p < 0.001). Conclusions: In SPRINT, those with lower baseline CVD risk had more harm than benefit from intensive treatment, whereas those with higher risk had more benefit. With the 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association blood pressure treatment guidelines, this analysis may help providers and patients make decisions regarding the intensity of blood pressure treatment.
AB - Background: The lower rate of primary outcome events in the intensive treatment group in SPRINT (Systolic Pressure Intervention Trial) was associated with increased clinically significant serious adverse events (SAEs). In 2017, the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association issued risk-based blood pressure treatment guidelines. The authors hypothesized that stratification of the SPRINT population by degree of future cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk might identify a group which could benefit the most from intensive treatment. Objectives: This study investigated the effect of baseline 10-year CVD risk on primary outcome events and all-cause SAEs in SPRINT. Methods: Stratifying by quartiles of baseline 10-year CVD risk, Cox proportional hazards models were used to examine the associations of treatment group with the primary outcome events and SAEs. Using multiplicative Poisson regression, a predictive model was developed to determine the benefit-to-harm ratio as a function of CVD risk. Results: Within each quartile, there was a lower rate of primary outcome events in the intensive treatment group, with no differences in all-cause SAEs. From the first to fourth quartiles, the number needed to treat to prevent primary outcomes decreased from 91 to 38. The number needed to harm for all-cause SAEs increased from 62 to 250. The predictive model demonstrated significantly increasing benefit-to-harm ratios (± SE) of 0.50 ± 0.15, 0.78 ± 0.26, 2.13 ± 0.73, and 4.80 ± 1.86, for the first, second, third, and fourth quartile, respectively (p for trend <0.001). All possible pairwise comparisons of between-quartile mean values of benefit-to-harm ratios were significantly different (p < 0.001). Conclusions: In SPRINT, those with lower baseline CVD risk had more harm than benefit from intensive treatment, whereas those with higher risk had more benefit. With the 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association blood pressure treatment guidelines, this analysis may help providers and patients make decisions regarding the intensity of blood pressure treatment.
KW - blood pressure
KW - cardiovascular disease risk
KW - predictive model
KW - SPRINT
KW - treatment guidelines
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85042661536&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85042661536&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jacc.2018.01.074
DO - 10.1016/j.jacc.2018.01.074
M3 - Article
C2 - 29525494
AN - SCOPUS:85042661536
SN - 0735-1097
VL - 71
SP - 1601
EP - 1610
JO - Journal of the American College of Cardiology
JF - Journal of the American College of Cardiology
IS - 15
ER -