Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12556657›Full record

SynthesisJournal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.)

Benefits of antihypertensive pharmacologic therapy and blood pressure reduction in outcome trials.

Ji-Guang Wang, Jan A Staessen

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Hypertension management in the high cardiovascular risk population.International journal of hypertension · 2013
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Hypertension and the elderly: more than just blood pressure control.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2004
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Meta-analysis, meta-regression, and meta-physics.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.)
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Ji-Guang WangDepartement Moleculair en Cardiovasculair Onderzoek, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, B-3000 Leuven, Belgium.
Jan A Staessen

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In a quantitative overview of published trials, we investigated whether pharmacologic properties of antihypertensive drugs, as opposed to reduction in blood pressure, explain cardiovascular outcomes in hypertensive or high-risk patients. We used meta-regression to investigate the association between the odds ratios of outcome (experimental vs. reference treatment) and the corresponding blood pressure differences between study groups. Thus, we correlated odds ratios with between-group differences in systolic pressure. We then compared odds ratios of benefit observed in recent trials with those predicted by meta-regression on the basis of the differences in systolic pressure between randomized groups. Among nine actively-controlled trials in hypertension, significant differences in systolic pressure (follow-up minus baseline) between randomized groups (experimental minus reference) were observed in the ALLHAT, CAPPP, MIDAS, and NORDIL trials. Furthermore, the differences in achieved systolic and/or diastolic pressure between study groups were also significant in the hypertension trials and studies in high-risk patients, which involved untreated control patients. The differences between the observed odds ratios and those predicted by meta-regression did not reach statistical significance except for NORDIL and the single-drug therapy subgroup of the PROGRESS trial. In NORDIL, the risk of stroke was lower on diltiazem than on the older drug classes despite a 3.1 mm Hg higher systolic pressure on the calcium channel blocker. In PROGRESS, perindopril alone reduced blood pressure by 5/3 mm Hg, but did not affect the incidence of all cardiovascular events or the recurrence of stroke. In conclusion, the finding that in the reviewed trials blood pressure reduction largely accounted for outcome emphasizes the desirability of tight blood pressure control. The hypothesis that blood pressure-lowering medications might influence cardiovascular prognosis over and beyond their antihypertensive effect remains to a large extent unproved.

Indexed as

Antihypertensive AgentsBlood PressureCardiovascular DiseasesHumansHypertensionOdds RatioRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRegression AnalysisRisk FactorsSystoleTreatment OutcomeAntihypertensive Agents

Identifiers

PMID12556657
PMCPMC8101815

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.