Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25002161›Full record

Trial reportJournal of general internal medicine2014

Characteristics and long-term follow-up of participants with peripheral arterial disease during ALLHAT.

Linda B Piller, Lara M Simpson, Sarah Baraniuk, Gabriel B Habib, Mahboob Rahman, Jan N Basile, Richard A Dart, Allan J Ellsworth, Herbert Fendley, Jeffrey L Probstfield and 3 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of general internal medicine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Guideline
  3. Guideline
  4. Guideline
  5. Guideline
  6. Trial
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Global Vascular Guidelines on the Management of Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia.European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery : the official journal of the European Society for Vascular Surgery · 2019
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.

Linda B PillerThe University of Texas School of Public Health, 1200 Herman Pressler St., W-906, Houston, TX, 77030, USA, Linda.b.piller@uth.tmc.edu.
Lara M Simpson
Sarah Baraniuk
Gabriel B Habib
Mahboob Rahman
Jan N Basile
Richard A Dart
Allan J Ellsworth
Herbert Fendley
Jeffrey L Probstfield
Paul K Whelton
Barry R Davis
ALLHAT Collaborative Research Group
The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston · USUniversity of Washington · USLouis Stokes Cleveland VA Medical Center · USMarshfield Clinic · USMichael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center · USRalph H. Johnson VA Medical Center · USTulane University · USUniversity of Arkansas at Pine Bluff · US

Funding

CLINICAL TRIALS CENTER FOR ALLHAT-N01HC35130-268035130N01HC035130 · HC · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HLTH SCI CTR HOUSTON · 1993 to 2005
$6.3M
NHLBI NIH HHS HHSN268201100036CNHLBI NIH HHS N01 HC035130NHLBI NIH HHS N01-HC-35130
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHypertension is a major risk factor for peripheral artery disease (PAD). Little is known about relative efficacy of antihypertensive treatments for preventing PAD.

objectivesTo compare, by randomized treatment groups, hospitalized or revascularized PAD rates and subsequent morbidity and mortality among participants in the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lower Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT).

designRandomized, double-blind, active-control trial in high-risk hypertensive participants.

participantsEight hundred thirty participants with specified secondary outcome of lower extremity PAD events during the randomized phase of ALLHAT. INTERVENTIONS/EVENTS: In-trial PAD events were reported during ALLHAT (1994-2002). Post-trial mortality data through 2006 were obtained from administrative databases. Mean follow-up was 8.8 years. MAIN MEASURES: Baseline characteristics and intermediate outcomes in three treatment groups, using the Kaplan-Meier method to calculate cumulative event rates and post-PAD mortality rates, Cox proportional hazards regression model for hazard ratios and 95 % confidence intervals, and multivariate Cox regression models to examine risk differences among treatment groups. KEY

resultsFollowing adjustment for baseline characteristics, neither participants assigned to the calcium-channel antagonist amlodipine nor to the ACE-inhibitor lisinopril showed a difference in risk of clinically advanced PAD compared with those in the chlorthalidone arm (HR, 0.86; 95 % CI, 0.72-1.03 and HR, 0.98; 95 % CI, 0.83-1.17, respectively). Of the 830 participants with in-trial PAD events, 63 % died compared to 34 % of those without PAD; there were no significant treatment group differences for subsequent nonfatal myocardial infarction, coronary revascularizations, strokes, heart failure, or mortality.

conclusionsNeither amlodipine nor lisinopril showed superiority over chlorthalidone in reducing clinically advanced PAD risk. These findings reinforce the compelling need for comparative outcome trials examining treatment of PAD in high-risk hypertensive patients. Once PAD develops, cardiovascular event and mortality risk is high, regardless of type of antihypertensive treatment.

Indexed as

AgedAmlodipineAntihypertensive AgentsChlorthalidoneDouble-Blind MethodFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansHypertensionKaplan-Meier EstimateLisinoprilMaleMiddle AgedPeripheral Arterial DiseaseUnited StatesAmlodipineAntihypertensive AgentsChlorthalidoneLisinopril

Identifiers

PMID25002161
PMCPMC4238201
OpenAlexW2034364991

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.