Harold W. Schnaper

Protective effects of aspirin against acute myocardial infarction and death in men with unstable angina. Results of a Veterans Administration Cooperative Study.

We conducted a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial of aspirin treatment (324 mg in buffered solution daily) for 12 weeks in 1266 men with unstable angina (625 taking aspirin and 641 placebo). The principal end points were death and acute myocardial infarction diagnosed by the presence of creatine kinase MB or pathologic Q-wave changes on electrocardiograms. The incidence of death or acute myocardial infarction was 51 per cent lower in the aspirin group than in the placebo group: 31 patients (5.0 per cent) as compared with 65 (10.1 per cent); P = 0.0005. Nonfatal acute myocardial infarction was 51 per cent lower in the aspirin group: 21 patients (3.4 per cent) as compared with 44 (6.9 per cent); P = 0.005. The reduction in mortality in the aspirin group was also 51 per cent--10 patients (1.6 per cent) as compared with 21 (3.3 per cent)--although it was not statistically significant; P = 0.054. There was no difference in gastrointestinal symptoms or evidence of blood loss between the treatment and control groups. Our data show that aspirin has a protective effect against acute myocardial infarction in men with unstable angina, and they suggest a similar effect on mortality.

Systolic Hypertension in the Elderly Program (SHEP): Antihypertensive efficacy of chlorthalidone

The Systolic Hypertension in the Elderly Program (SHEP) is a randomized, blinded test of the efficacy of antihypertensive drug treatment. In a large feasibility trial, 551 men and women who had isolated systolic hypertension and were at least 60 years old received chlorthalidone (25 to 50 mg/day) or matching placebo as the step I drug. After 1 year, 83% of the chlorthalidone group and 80% of the placebo group were still taking SHEP medications. Of those still taking chlorthalidone, 88% had reached goal blood pressure (BP) without requiring a step II drug, and most had responded to the lower dose (25 mg/day). The BP response was similar in all age, sex and race subgroups, with an overall mean difference between randomized groups of 17 mm Hg for systolic BP (p less than 0.001) and 6 mm Hg for diastolic BP (p less than 0.001). The only common adverse effects were asymptomatic changes in the serum levels of potassium (0.5 mEq/liter lower in the chlorthalidone group, p less than 0.001), uric acid (0.9 mg/dl higher, p less than 0.001) and creatinine (0.08 mg/dl higher, p = 0.02). This study indicates that chlorthalidone is effective for lowering BP in elderly patients with systolic hypertension and sets the stage for a larger trial of the effects of such treatment on the incidence of cardiovascular disease.

Expanded Clinical Evaluation of Lovastatin (EXCEL) study results: two-year efficacy and safety follow-up.

The Expanded Clinical Evaluation of Lovastatin study, a randomized, double-blind, placebo- and diet-controlled multicenter trial, evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of lovastatin over 48 weeks in 8,245 patients with moderately severe hypercholesterolemia. During year 1 of follow-up of the full cohort, lovastatin at 20 or 40 mg/day, or 20 or 40 mg twice daily, produced dose-dependent decreases in low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol (24% to 40%) and triglyceride levels (10% to 19%), and increases in high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol (6.6% to 9.5%). In all, 977 patients continued their original blinded treatment for an additional year. In year 2, the LDL cholesterol response to lovastatin was maintained, the triglyceride reductions were somewhat less, and the increases in HDL cholesterol were moderately greater than in year 1. Successive transaminase elevations > 3 times the upper limit of normal were observed in only 1 patient in year 2, yielding a cumulative 2-year incidence of from 0.1% (placebo or lovastatin 20 mg/day) to 1.9% (lovastatin 80 mg/day). Myopathy occurred in only 1 patient during year 2, and over the 2-year study was observed rarely and only at lovastatin dosages of 40 and 80 mg/day. This study indicates that lovastatin maintains its efficacy over long-term follow-up, particularly in effectively lowering LDL cholesterol, is generally well tolerated, and has a favorable safety profile.

EVALUATION OF DRUG TREATMENT IN MILD HYPERTENSION: VA-NHLBI FEASIBILITY TRIAL*

A feasibility trial to investigate the practicality of determining the advantages and disadvantages of prompt pharmacologic treatment for mild hypertension was jointly funded by the Veterans Administration and the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute. Its clinical phase has been completed, and it demonstrated 1. that the required relatively young asymptomatic population could be enrolled in the study and 2. that it could be persuaded to adhere to the protocol for 2 years; however, it was evident that intensive efforts would be required in both areas. The feasibility trial screened almost 120,000 potential subjects over a period of 16 months to randomize about 1,000 subjects at four clinical centers. These men and women were 21 to 50 years old, had diastolic pressures from 85 to 105 mm Hg as outpatients, and had no evidence of cardiovascular renal abnormalities. They were randomized in double-blind fashion into active drug therapy and placebo groups. Stepped care therapy involved 50 mg chlorthalidone (Step 1), 100 mg chlorthalidone (Step 2) and 100 chlorthalidone plus 0.25 mg reserpine (Step 3). Death, myocardial infarction, stroke, angina pectoris, and congestive heart failure were the major morbid events that were looked for; also recorded were minor morbid events consisting primarily of electrocardiographic arrhythmias. The development of significant hypertension was considered a treatment failure. Side effects were carefully tabulated in both active drug and placebo groups. The study revealed an average drop in diastolic pressure of almost 12 mm Hg for active drug group and less than half of that for the placebo group; once established 6 months after randomization, the new pressure levels persisted almost without change throughout the study. Although the feasibility trial was not designed to answer the primary question regarding the benefits of treatment, the events were tabulated for each group. A total of 12 placebo-treated subjects developed significant hypertension and were put on active drug. There was not a significant difference between the two groups in the incidence of major morbid events; a total of eight active and five placebo patients developed myocardial infarction or died suddenly. There, however, was an excess of arrhythmias among the active drug subjects (17 in the active group versus 8 in the placebo group on the basis of preliminary data). Finally, there were twice as many side effects and 20 times as many chemical abnormalities among the active as among the placebo subjects. A protocol for a full scale study of the benefits of pharmacologic therapy in mild hypertensives has been prepared and is ready for implementation as needed; it involves relatively minor modifications of the protocol tested in the feasibility trial.

Effect of Recombinant Human Erythropoietin on Transfusion Risk in Coronary Bypass Patients

BACKGROUNDnPatients having a cardiac operation frequently require allogeneic blood transfusions despite surgical blood-conservation techniques. Recombinant human erythropoietin (Epoetin alfa) may augment this conservation by stimulating erythropoiesis. The safety and efficacy of perioperative use of Epoetin alfa to reduce the need of allogeneic transfusion was studied.nnnMETHODSnA multicenter double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study involved 182 patients having coronary artery bypass grafting and randomized to receive Epoetin alfa (300 or 150 IU/kg) or placebo subcutaneously for 5 days before, on the day of, and for 2 days after operation.nnnRESULTSnPerioperative Epoetin alfa resulted in greater increases in baseline to preoperative hemoglobin levels and hematocrit (300 IU/kg) and in presurgery to postsurgical day 1 reticulocyte counts versus placebo (p < or = 0.05). However, there was no significant difference in transfusion requirements. Incidences of adverse events were similar in all study groups.nnnCONCLUSIONSnLower incidences of allogeneic blood exposure were observed in both Epoetin alfa-treated groups; however, the differences between all treatment groups were not significant. This was probably due to the relatively short 5-day preoperative course of Epoetin alfa therapy. There were no significant differences between the three groups relative to safety. Epoetin alfa was well tolerated in this population.

Background and design of the new U.S. trial on diet and drug treatment of “mild” hypertension (TOMHS)

A multicenter, randomized, controlled, double-blind U.S. trial is comparing the combined effects of diet treatment and 1 of 5 active drug regimens with diet treatment alone, for the long-term management of middle-aged adults with mild hypertension. Factors stimulating this trial are data documenting the high prevalence of mild hypertension in the adult population; mild hypertensions responsibility for a high proportion of morbidity and mortality attributable to hypertension overall; data from long-term hypertension intervention trials showing reduced morbidity and mortality of people with mild hypertension with use of either diuretics or beta blockers as step-1 therapy, and other trials that failed to demonstrate beneficial impact on morbidity and mortality, possibly due to residual questions concerning aspects of benefit to risk ratios with these medications; recent data from trials showing long-term control of mild hypertension and other risk factors by nutritional means; lack of data from long-term trials on benefit to risk ratios with newer drugs such as selective alpha 1 inhibitors, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and calcium channel blockers; paucity of data from trials on long-term combined effects of diet and drug therapy, and of diet alone, for people with mild hypertension. During the next few years, phase 1 of the trial will study 6 groups of drugs. The step-1 drugs are angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (enalapril), alpha 1 inhibitor (doxazosin), beta blocker (acebutolol), calcium channel blocker (amlodipine), diuretic (chlorthalidone) and placebo. All participants are to receive vigorous sustained nutritional counseling to reduce obesity, moderate sodium intake and avoid heavy use of alcohol. Key endpoints for phase 1 of the study are the need for additional medication to control mild hypertension, side effects (i.e., clinical and biochemical) and consequent need to discontinue drug and quality of life. Phase-1 data are to be used to complete the phase-2 design, with the ultimate aim to assess effects on morbidity and mortality.

The multiple risk factor intervention trial (MRFIT)

Abstract The beginnings of the Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial (MRFIT) for the primary prevention of coronary heart disease (CHD) are chronicled. Over the period 1960–1970, various scientific panels had urged the undertaking of primary CHD prevention trials but with limited consensus on the specific type of study needed. The Task Force on Arteriosclerosis convened by the National Heart and Lung Institute (NHLI) in 1971 recommended that a national diet-heart trial not be supported but, instead, that the NHLI undertake multiple risk factor intervention trials in individuals at high risk of CHD due to combinations of elevated serum lipids, hypertension, and cigarette smoking. Late in 1971, the NHLI invited proposals for MRFIT. Its primary purpose was to determine whether a special risk factor intervention program directed at the reduction of elevated serum cholesterol, elevated diastolic blood pressure, and cigarette smoking in men at high risk of death from CHD (but still free of clinical evidence of CHD) would result in a significant reduction in CHD mortality; nonfatal myocardial infarction or CHD mortality; cardiovascular mortality; and mortality from all causes—over a 6-year period. In 1972–1973, funds to conduct such a study among 12,000 randomized men were awarded to 22 clinical centers, a coordinating center, central laboratory, standardization laboratory, ECG centers, and a drug distribution center. The evolution of the organization of this research undertaking is described.

Hemodynamic alterations in hypertensive patients due to chlorothiazide.

ONLY two studies have been published that detail the changes in cardiac output after chlorothiazide.1 , 2 Other reports3 , 4 have alluded to the changes in cardiac output without tabulating any data. In the studies in which results were reported in detail, cardiac output was performed by the dye-dilution technic. Aleksandrow and his co-workers1 reported variable results in 7 hypertensive patients whereas Dustan and her associates2 demonstrated a consistent decrease. This communication reports on a series of hypertensive patients in whom cardiac output was measured before and after administration of chlorothiazide. In the majority of patients the direct Fick method was used, the .xa0.xa0.

Comparison of hydrochlorothiazide and sustained-release diltiazem for mild-to-moderate systemic hypertension.

The safety and efficacy of sustained-release diltiazem, 120 to 180 mg twice daily, was compared with those of hydrochlorothiazide, 25 to 50 mg twice daily, in 207 patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension (supine diastolic blood pressure [BP] 95 to 114 mm Hg) using a baseline, placebo, parallel-design study protocol. All patients received placebo for 2 to 4 weeks, followed by either study drug during the double-blind phase, titrated over 8 weeks to achieve a goal of supine diastolic BP reduction of at least 10 mm Hg and/or a diastolic BP of less than 90 mm Hg. Patients not achieving the treatment goal with either drug alone received the other drug in combination. Both drugs produced significant decreases in supine and upright BP throughout the 26-week study. The magnitude of decrease in mean supine diastolic BP was similar for both drugs as monotherapy at week 14 (-11.4 and -12.1 mm Hg, respectively). Hydrochlorothiazide produced significantly greater reductions at week 14 in mean supine systolic BP than sustained-release diltiazem (-19.5 and -12.7 mm Hg, respectively). The difference in mean supine diastolic BP reduction with the 2 drugs diminished when hydrochlorothiazide (50 mg/day) was compared with sustained-release diltiazem. The BP effects were sustained for 6 months with both drugs. The 2 drugs appeared to lower BP more in patients older than 60 years and more in black than in white patients. The combination of the 2 drugs decreased supine diastolic BP to goal levels in about 56% of the patients not achieving goal with either drug alone. Adverse effects were minimal with either drug alone and in combination, except for hypokalemia, which increased with thiazide alone and in combination.

Expanded clinical evaluation of lovastatin (EXCEL) study : design and patient characteristics of a double-blind, placebo-controlled study in patients with moderate hypercholesterolemia

The randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial described in this report was undertaken to clarify the dose-response relation of lovastatin therapy to lipid-modifying efficacy (lipid/lipoprotein modification) and drug-related adverse events in a population with moderately elevated fasting plasma total cholesterol (240 to 300 mg/dl) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (greater than or equal to 160 mg/dl). Men or women (postmenopausal or surgically sterile), aged 18 to 70 years, were entered into the trial with minimal exclusion criteria. After 4 to 6 weeks of an American Heart Association phase I diet or a more stringent diet, 8,245 patients from 362 sites were randomized to 1 of 5 parallel diet and drug treatment groups: placebo (n = 1,663) or lovastatin, 20 mg (n = 1,642) and 40 mg (n = 1,645) with the evening meal, and 20 mg (n = 1,646) or 40 mg twice daily (n = 1,649). The regimen of diet and lovastatin (or placebo) was followed for 48 weeks. The 5 treatment groups were similar at baseline. The total cohort had the following characteristics: 59% were men (mean age 56 years); 92% were white; 59% had completed at least 1 year of education beyond high school; 57% had a history of cardiovascular and associated disease; 40% had a history of hypertension; and 29% had coronary artery disease. Health habits were similar among groups, with 18% of patients reporting cigarette smoking, 14% reporting that they consume greater than 1 alcoholic beverage daily and 67% reporting no strenous exercise. Mean lipid/lipoprotein levels were also similar among groups, with the following average levels: total cholesterol (258 mg/dl), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (180 mg/dl), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (45 mg/dl) and triglycerides (median = 155 mg/dl). The large size of this trial, its placebo-controlled, double-blind design and the similarity of treatment groups at baseline should allow clear documentation of the long-term effects of lovastatin treatment and generalization of the results to a substantial portion of patients who may be candidates for lipid-modifying therapy.