Jeff D. Williamson

A Randomized Trial of Intensive versus Standard Blood-Pressure Control.

BACKGROUND The most appropriate targets for systolic blood pressure to reduce cardiovascular morbidity and mortality among persons without diabetes remain uncertain. METHODS We randomly assigned 9361 persons with a systolic blood pressure of 130 mm Hg or higher and an increased cardiovascular risk, but without diabetes, to a systolic blood-pressure target of less than 120 mm Hg (intensive treatment) or a target of less than 140 mm Hg (standard treatment). The primary composite outcome was myocardial infarction, other acute coronary syndromes, stroke, heart failure, or death from cardiovascular causes. RESULTS At 1 year, the mean systolic blood pressure was 121.4 mm Hg in the intensive-treatment group and 136.2 mm Hg in the standard-treatment group. The intervention was stopped early after a median follow-up of 3.26 years owing to a significantly lower rate of the primary composite outcome in the intensive-treatment group than in the standard-treatment group (1.65% per year vs. 2.19% per year; hazard ratio with intensive treatment, 0.75; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64 to 0.89; P<0.001). All-cause mortality was also significantly lower in the intensive-treatment group (hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.60 to 0.90; P=0.003). Rates of serious adverse events of hypotension, syncope, electrolyte abnormalities, and acute kidney injury or failure, but not of injurious falls, were higher in the intensive-treatment group than in the standard-treatment group. CONCLUSIONS Among patients at high risk for cardiovascular events but without diabetes, targeting a systolic blood pressure of less than 120 mm Hg, as compared with less than 140 mm Hg, resulted in lower rates of fatal and nonfatal major cardiovascular events and death from any cause, although significantly higher rates of some adverse events were observed in the intensive-treatment group. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01206062.).

Effect of Structured Physical Activity on Prevention of Major Mobility Disability in Older Adults: The LIFE Study Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE In older adults reduced mobility is common and is an independent risk factor for morbidity, hospitalization, disability, and mortality. Limited evidence suggests that physical activity may help prevent mobility disability; however, there are no definitive clinical trials examining whether physical activity prevents or delays mobility disability. OBJECTIVE To test the hypothesis that a long-term structured physical activity program is more effective than a health education program (also referred to as a successful aging program) in reducing the risk of major mobility disability. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS The Lifestyle Interventions and Independence for Elders (LIFE) study was a multicenter, randomized trial that enrolled participants between February 2010 and December 2011, who participated for an average of 2.6 years. Follow-up ended in December 2013. Outcome assessors were blinded to the intervention assignment. Participants were recruited from urban, suburban, and rural communities at 8 centers throughout the United States. We randomized a volunteer sample of 1635 sedentary men and women aged 70 to 89 years who had physical limitations, defined as a score on the Short Physical Performance Battery of 9 or below, but were able to walk 400 m. INTERVENTIONS Participants were randomized to a structured, moderate-intensity physical activity program (n = 818) conducted in a center (twice/wk) and at home (3-4 times/wk) that included aerobic, resistance, and flexibility training activities or to a health education program (n = 817) consisting of workshops on topics relevant to older adults and upper extremity stretching exercises. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was major mobility disability objectively defined by loss of ability to walk 400 m. RESULTS Incident major mobility disability occurred in 30.1% (246 participants) of the physical activity group and 35.5% (290 participants) of the health education group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.82 [95% CI, 0.69-0.98], P = .03).Persistent mobility disability was experienced by 120 participants (14.7%) in the physical activity group and 162 participants (19.8%) in the health education group (HR, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.57-0.91]; P = .006). Serious adverse events were reported by 404 participants (49.4%) in the physical activity group and 373 participants (45.7%) in the health education group (risk ratio, 1.08 [95% CI, 0.98-1.20]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE A structured, moderate-intensity physical activity program compared with a health education program reduced major mobility disability over 2.6 years among older adults at risk for disability. These findings suggest mobility benefit from such a program in vulnerable older adults. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01072500.

2017 ACC/AHA/AAPA/ABC/ACPM/AGS/APhA/ASH/ASPC/NMA/PCNA Guideline for the Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Management of High Blood Pressure in Adults: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines

Glenn N. Levine, MD, FACC, FAHA, Chair Patrick T. O’Gara, MD, MACC, FAHA, Chair-Elect Jonathan L. Halperin, MD, FACC, FAHA, Immediate Past Chair Sana M. Al-Khatib, MD, MHS, FACC, FAHA Joshua A. Beckman, MD, MS, FAHA Kim K. Birtcher, MS, PharmD, AACC Biykem Bozkurt, MD, PhD, FACC, FAHA

Ginkgo biloba for Prevention of Dementia: A Randomized Controlled Trial

CONTEXT Ginkgo biloba is widely used for its potential effects on memory and cognition. To date, adequately powered clinical trials testing the effect of G. biloba on dementia incidence are lacking. OBJECTIVE To determine effectiveness of G. biloba vs placebo in reducing the incidence of all-cause dementia and Alzheimer disease (AD) in elderly individuals with normal cognition and those with mild cognitive impairment (MCI). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial conducted in 5 academic medical centers in the United States between 2000 and 2008 with a median follow-up of 6.1 years. Three thousand sixty-nine community volunteers aged 75 years or older with normal cognition (n = 2587) or MCI (n = 482) at study entry were assessed every 6 months for incident dementia. INTERVENTION Twice-daily dose of 120-mg extract of G. biloba (n = 1545) or placebo (n = 1524). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Incident dementia and AD determined by expert panel consensus. RESULTS Five hundred twenty-three individuals developed dementia (246 receiving placebo and 277 receiving G. biloba) with 92% of the dementia cases classified as possible or probable AD, or AD with evidence of vascular disease of the brain. Rates of dropout and loss to follow-up were low (6.3%), and the adverse effect profiles were similar for both groups. The overall dementia rate was 3.3 per 100 person-years in participants assigned to G. biloba and 2.9 per 100 person-years in the placebo group. The hazard ratio (HR) for G. biloba compared with placebo for all-cause dementia was 1.12 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.94-1.33; P = .21) and for AD, 1.16 (95% CI, 0.97-1.39; P = .11). G. biloba also had no effect on the rate of progression to dementia in participants with MCI (HR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.85-1.50; P = .39). CONCLUSIONS In this study, G. biloba at 120 mg twice a day was not effective in reducing either the overall incidence rate of dementia or AD incidence in elderly individuals with normal cognition or those with MCI. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00010803.

Health outcomes associated with calcium antagonists compared with other first-line antihypertensive therapies: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND Several observational studies and individual randomised trials in hypertension have suggested that, compared with other drugs, calcium antagonists may be associated with a higher risk of coronary events, despite similar blood-pressure control. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the effects of calcium antagonists and other antihypertensive drugs on major cardiovascular events. METHODS We undertook a meta-analysis of trials in hypertension that assessed cardiovascular events and included at least 100 patients, who were randomly assigned intermediate-acting or long-acting calcium antagonists or other antihypertensive drugs and who were followed up for at least 2 years. FINDINGS The nine eligible trials included 27,743 participants. Calcium antagonists and other drugs achieved similar control of both systolic and diastolic blood pressure. Compared with patients assigned diuretics, beta-blockers, angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors, or clonidine (n=15,044), those assigned calcium antagonists (n=12,699) had a significantly higher risk of acute myocardial infarction (odds ratio 1.26 [95% CI 1.11-1.43], p=0.0003), congestive heart failure (1.25 [1.07-1.46], p=0.005), and major cardiovascular events (1.10 [1.02-1.18], p=0.018). The treatment differences were within the play of chance for the outcomes of stroke (0.90 [0.80-1.02], p=0.10) and all-cause mortality (1.03 [0.94-1.13], p=0.54). INTERPRETATION In randomised controlled trials, the large available database suggests that calcium antagonists are inferior to other types of antihypertensive drugs as first-line agents in reducing the risks of several major complications of hypertension. On the basis of these data, the longer-acting calcium antagonists cannot be recommended as first-line therapy for hypertension.

Intensive vs Standard Blood Pressure Control and Cardiovascular Disease Outcomes in Adults Aged ≥75 Years: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE The appropriate treatment target for systolic blood pressure (SBP) in older patients with hypertension remains uncertain. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the effects of intensive (<120 mm Hg) compared with standard (<140 mm Hg) SBP targets in persons aged 75 years or older with hypertension but without diabetes. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS A multicenter, randomized clinical trial of patients aged 75 years or older who participated in the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT). Recruitment began on October 20, 2010, and follow-up ended on August 20, 2015. INTERVENTIONS Participants were randomized to an SBP target of less than 120 mm Hg (intensive treatment group, n = 1317) or an SBP target of less than 140 mm Hg (standard treatment group, n = 1319). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary cardiovascular disease outcome was a composite of nonfatal myocardial infarction, acute coronary syndrome not resulting in a myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, nonfatal acute decompensated heart failure, and death from cardiovascular causes. All-cause mortality was a secondary outcome. RESULTS Among 2636 participants (mean age, 79.9 years; 37.9% women), 2510 (95.2%) provided complete follow-up data. At a median follow-up of 3.14 years, there was a significantly lower rate of the primary composite outcome (102 events in the intensive treatment group vs 148 events in the standard treatment group; hazard ratio [HR], 0.66 [95% CI, 0.51-0.85]) and all-cause mortality (73 deaths vs 107 deaths, respectively; HR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.49-0.91]). The overall rate of serious adverse events was not different between treatment groups (48.4% in the intensive treatment group vs 48.3% in the standard treatment group; HR, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.89-1.11]). Absolute rates of hypotension were 2.4% in the intensive treatment group vs 1.4% in the standard treatment group (HR, 1.71 [95% CI, 0.97-3.09]), 3.0% vs 2.4%, respectively, for syncope (HR, 1.23 [95% CI, 0.76-2.00]), 4.0% vs 2.7% for electrolyte abnormalities (HR, 1.51 [95% CI, 0.99-2.33]), 5.5% vs 4.0% for acute kidney injury (HR, 1.41 [95% CI, 0.98-2.04]), and 4.9% vs 5.5% for injurious falls (HR, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.65-1.29]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Among ambulatory adults aged 75 years or older, treating to an SBP target of less than 120 mm Hg compared with an SBP target of less than 140 mm Hg resulted in significantly lower rates of fatal and nonfatal major cardiovascular events and death from any cause. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01206062.

Relationship Between Baseline Glycemic Control and Cognitive Function in Individuals With Type 2 Diabetes and Other Cardiovascular Risk Factors: The Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes-Memory in Diabetes (ACCORD-MIND) trial

OBJECTIVE—Diabetes is associated with cognitive decline and dementia. However, the relationship between the degree of hyperglycemia and cognitive status remains unclear. This was explored using baseline cognitive measures collected in the ongoing Memory in Diabetes (MIND) substudy of the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) trial. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS—The relationship of A1C and fasting plasma glucose (FPG) levels to performance on four cognitive tests was assessed, adjusting for age and other determinants of cognitive status. The tests were the Digit Symbol Substitution Test (DSST), Mini Mental Status Examination (MMSE), Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test, and Stroop Test. RESULTS—A statistically significant age-adjusted association was observed between the A1C level and the score on all four cognitive tests. Specifically, a 1% higher A1C value was associated with a significant 1.75-point lower DSST score (95% CI −1.22 to −2.28; P < 0.0001), a 0.20-point lower MMSE score (−0.11 to −0.28; P < 0.0001), a 0.11-point lower memory score (−0.02 to −0.19, P = 0.0142), and a worse score (i.e., 0.75 s more) on the Stroop Test (1.31–0.19, P = 0.0094). The association between the DSST score and A1C persisted in all multiple linear regression models. FPG was not associated with test performance. CONCLUSIONS—Higher A1C levels are associated with lower cognitive function in individuals with diabetes. The effect of glucose lowering on cognitive function will be determined by the ongoing ACCORD-MIND trial.

Effects of intensive diet and exercise on knee joint loads, inflammation, and clinical outcomes among overweight and obese adults with knee osteoarthritis: the IDEA randomized clinical trial.

IMPORTANCE Knee osteoarthritis (OA), a common cause of chronic pain and disability, has biomechanical and inflammatory origins and is exacerbated by obesity. OBJECTIVE To determine whether a ≥10% reduction in body weight induced by diet, with or without exercise, would improve mechanistic and clinical outcomes more than exercise alone. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Single-blind, 18-month, randomized clinical trial at Wake Forest University between July 2006 and April 2011. The diet and exercise interventions were center-based with options for the exercise groups to transition to a home-based program. Participants were 454 overweight and obese older community-dwelling adults (age ≥55 years with body mass index of 27-41) with pain and radiographic knee OA. INTERVENTIONS Intensive diet-induced weight loss plus exercise, intensive diet-induced weight loss, or exercise. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Mechanistic primary outcomes: knee joint compressive force and plasma IL-6 levels; secondary clinical outcomes: self-reported pain (range, 0-20), function (range, 0-68), mobility, and health-related quality of life (range, 0-100). RESULTS Three hundred ninety-nine participants (88%) completed the study. Mean weight loss for diet + exercise participants was 10.6 kg (11.4%); for the diet group, 8.9 kg (9.5%); and for the exercise group, 1.8 kg (2.0%). After 18 months, knee compressive forces were lower in diet participants (mean, 2487 N; 95% CI, 2393 to 2581) compared with exercise participants (2687 N; 95% CI, 2590 to 2784, pairwise difference [Δ](exercise vs diet )= 200 N; 95% CI, 55 to 345; P = .007). Concentrations of IL-6 were lower in diet + exercise (2.7 pg/mL; 95% CI, 2.5 to 3.0) and diet participants (2.7 pg/mL; 95% CI, 2.4 to 3.0) compared with exercise participants (3.1 pg/mL; 95% CI, 2.9 to 3.4; Δ(exercise vs diet + exercise) = 0.39 pg/mL; 95% CI, -0.03 to 0.81; P = .007; Δ(exercise vs diet )= 0.43 pg/mL; 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.85, P = .006). The diet + exercise group had less pain (3.6; 95% CI, 3.2 to 4.1) and better function (14.1; 95% CI, 12.6 to 15.6) than both the diet group (4.8; 95% CI, 4.3 to 5.2) and exercise group (4.7; 95% CI, 4.2 to 5.1, Δ(exercise vs diet + exercise) = 1.02; 95% CI, 0.33 to 1.71; P(pain) = .004; 18.4; 95% CI, 16.9 to 19.9; Δ(exercise vs diet + exercise), 4.29; 95% CI, 2.07 to 6.50; P(function )< .001). The diet + exercise group (44.7; 95% CI, 43.4 to 46.0) also had better physical health-related quality of life scores than the exercise group (41.9; 95% CI, 40.5 to 43.2; Δ(exercise vs diet + exercise) = -2.81; 95% CI, -4.76 to -0.86; P = .005). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Among overweight and obese adults with knee OA, after 18 months, participants in the diet + exercise and diet groups had more weight loss and greater reductions in IL-6 levels than those in the exercise group; those in the diet group had greater reductions in knee compressive force than those in the exercise group. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00381290.

Effects of intensive glucose lowering on brain structure and function in people with type 2 diabetes (ACCORD MIND): a randomised open-label substudy

Background Persons with type 2 diabetes (T2D) are at risk for cognitive impairment and brain atrophy. The ACCORD Memory in Diabetes (MIND) Study investigated whether persons randomized to an intensive glycaemic therapeutic strategy targeting HbA1c to <6% had better cognitive function and a larger brain volume at 40 months than persons randomized to a standard strategy targeting HbA1c to 7%–7.9%.BACKGROUND People with type 2 diabetes are at risk of cognitive impairment and brain atrophy. We aimed to compare the effects on cognitive function and brain volume of intensive versus standard glycaemic control. METHODS The Memory in Diabetes (MIND) study was done in 52 clinical sites in North America as part of Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD), a double two-by-two factorial parallel group randomised trial. Participants (aged 55-80 years) with type 2 diabetes, high glycated haemoglobin A(1c) (HbA(1c)) concentrations (>7·5%; >58 mmol/mol), and a high risk of cardiovascular events were randomly assigned to receive intensive glycaemic control targeting HbA(1c) to less than 6·0% (42 mmol/mol) or a standard strategy targeting HbA(1c) to 7·0-7·9% (53-63 mmol/mol). Randomisation was via a centralised web-based system and treatment allocation was not masked from clinic staff or participants. We assessed our cognitive primary outcome, the Digit Symbol Substitution Test (DSST) score, at baseline and at 20 and 40 months. We assessed total brain volume (TBV), our primary brain structure outcome, with MRI at baseline and 40 months in a subset of participants. We included all participants with follow-up data in our primary analyses. In February, 2008, raised mortality risk led to the end of the intensive treatment and transition of those participants to standard treatment. We tested our cognitive function hypotheses with a mixed-effects model that incorporated information from both the 20 and 40 month outcome measures. We tested our MRI hypotheses with an ANCOVA model that included intracranial volume and factors used to stratify randomisation. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00182910. FINDINGS We consecutively enrolled 2977 patients (mean age 62·5 years; SD 5·8) who had been randomly assigned to treatment groups in the ACCORD study. Our primary cognitive analysis was of patients with a 20-month or 40-month DSST score: 1378 assigned to receive intensive treatment and 1416 assigned to receive standard treatment. Of the 614 patients with a baseline MRI, we included 230 assigned to receive intensive treatment and 273 assigned to receive standard treatment in our primary MRI analysis at 40 months. There was no significant treatment difference in mean 40-month DSST score (difference in mean 0·32, 95% CI -0·28 to 0·91; p=0·2997). The intensive-treatment group had a greater mean TBV than the standard-treatment group (4·62, 2·0 to 7·3; p=0·0007). INTERPRETATION Although significant differences in TBV favoured the intensive treatment, cognitive outcomes were not different. Combined with the non-significant effects on other ACCORD outcomes, and increased mortality in participants in the intensive treatment group, our findings do not support the use of intensive therapy to reduce the adverse effects of diabetes on the brain in patients with similar characteristics to those of our participants. FUNDING US National Institute on Aging and US National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.

Relation between use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and muscle strength and physical function in older women: an observational study

BACKGROUND Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors prevent decline in physical function in patients with congestive heart failure (CHF). We aimed to see whether ACE inhibitors also prevent reduction in physical performance and in muscle strength in older women who do not have CHF. METHODS We assessed 3-year rates of decline in both knee extensor muscle strength and walking speed in 641 women with hypertension who had participated in the Womens Health and Aging Study. Women were stratified into four groups according to type and duration of antihypertensive drug treatment. 61 had used ACE inhibitors continuously, 133 intermittently, 146 never, and 301 had used other hypertensive drugs either continuously or intermittently. FINDINGS Participants who had taken ACE inhibitors continuously had a lower mean 3-year decline in muscle strength of -1.0 kg (SE 1.1) compared with -3.7 (0.5) kg in continuous/intermittent users of other antihypertensive drugs (p=0.016) and with -3.9 kg in those who had never used antihypertensives (p=0.026). Muscle strength fell by 3.0 kg in 3 years in both continuous and intermittent users of ACE inhibitors (p=0.096). Mean 3-year decline in walking speed in continuous ACE inhibitor users was -1.7 cm/s compared with -13.6 cm/s in intermittent users of ACE inhibitors (p=0.015), -15.7 cm/s in continuous/intermittent users of other antihypertensive drugs (p=0.002), and -17.9 cm/s in never users of antihypertensive drugs (p=0.001). INTERPRETATION ACE inhibitor treatment may halt or slow decline in muscle strength in elderly women with hypertension and without CHF.