Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25432898›Full record

ReviewCurrent hypertension reports2015

Plasma renin testing to guide antihypertensive therapy.

Anthony J Viera, Curt D Furberg

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current hypertension reports, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Anthony J VieraHypertension Research Program, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC, USA, anthony_viera@med.unc.edu.
Curt D Furberg

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Plasma renin activity (PRA)-guided therapy has been proposed as a strategy for selecting antihypertensive medications matched to the patient's underlying pathophysiology. To date, there are only a few studies that have sought to compare a PRA-guided strategy to usual care. In one trial of 363 untreated patients, based on home blood pressure (BP) averages, PRA was predictive of responses to beta-blocker and thiazide diuretic as monotherapy and add-on therapy. In another trial of 77 treated but uncontrolled patients, a PRA-guided strategy was superior to clinical hypertension specialist care for guiding add-on or subtraction (stopping an agent that might cause a paradoxical pressor response) therapy. In the ValVET study, PRA-guided therapy was not superior to fixed-dose therapy consisting of an angiotensin receptor blocker and hydrochlorothiazide. One modeling study found a PRA-guided strategy may be cost-effective compared to standard care for younger patients and those with a greater number of cardiovascular risk factors. We conclude that additional, well-designed randomized trials with sufficient sample sizes comparing PRA-guided management to usual care are needed to clarify whether this strategy should be adopted broadly.

Indexed as

Blood PressureHypertensionAntihypertensive AgentsHumansReninRenin-Angiotensin SystemAntihypertensive AgentsRenin

Identifiers

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.