CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

推荐文献

科研文章

荐读文献

Screening for Atrial Fibrillation With Electrocardiography US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement In-Hospital Costs and Costs of Complications of Chronic Total Occlusion Angioplasty Insights From the OPEN-CTO Registry Mortality Differences Associated With Treatment Responses in CANTOS and FOURIER: Insights and Implications Rare Genetic Variants Associated With Sudden Cardiac Death in Adults Know Diabetes by Heart: A Partnership to Improve Cardiovascular Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Coronary Angiography after Cardiac Arrest — The Right Timing or the Right Patients? Catheterization Laboratory Considerations During the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic: From the ACC’s Interventional Council and SCAI PCI and CABG for Treating Stable Coronary Artery Disease Antiinflammatory Therapy with Canakinumab for Atherosclerotic Disease 2020 AHA/ACC Key Data Elements and Definitions for Coronary Revascularization A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Data Standards (Writing Committee to Develop Clinical Data Standards for Coronary Revascularization)

Original ResearchVolume 72, Issue 11, September 2018

JOURNAL:J Am Coll Cardiol. Article Link

Generalizing Intensive Blood Pressure Treatment to Adults With Diabetes Mellitus

SA Berkowitz, JB Sussman, DE Jonas et al. Keywords: diabetes mellitus; generalizability; hypertension transportability

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUND - Controversy over blood pressure (BP) treatment targets for individuals with diabetes is in part due to conflicting perspectives about generalizability of available trial data.


OBJECTIVES - The authors sought to estimate how results from the largest clinical trial of intensive BP treatment among adults with diabetes would generalize to the U.S. population.

METHODS - The authors used transportability methods to reweight individual patient data from the ACCORD (Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes) BP trial (N = 4,507) of intensive (goal systolic BP <120 mm Hg) versus standard (goal systolic BP <140 mm Hg) treatment to better represent the demographic and clinical risk factors of the U.S. population of adults with diabetes (data from NHANES [National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey] 2005 to 2014, n = 1,943). The primary outcome was the first occurrence of nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or cardiovascular death. Analysis used weighted Cox proportional hazards regression models with robust standard errors.

RESULTS - The ACCORD BP sample had less racial/ethnic diversity and more elevated cardiovascular risk factors than the NHANES participants. Weighted results significantly favored intensive BP treatment, unlike unweighted results (hazard ratio for primary outcome in intensive versus standard treatment in weighted analyses: 0.67, 95% confidence interval: 0.49 to 0.91; in unweighted analyses: hazard ratio: 0.88, 95% confidence interval: 0.73 to 1.07). Over 5 years, the weighted results estimate a number needed to treat of 34, and number needed to harm of 55.

CONCLUSIONS - After reweighting to better reflect the U.S. adult population with diabetes, intensive BP therapy was associated with significantly lower risk for cardiovascular events. However, data were limited among racial/ethnic minorities and those with lower cardiovascular risk.