ArticleBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2017
Incremental effects of antihypertensive drugs: instrumental variable analysis.
Article in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Treatment of obstructive sleep apnea in high risk pregnancy: a multicenter randomized controlled trial.Respiratory research · 2023Trial
- Adherence to Triple Single-Pill Combination of Perindopril/Indapamide/Amlodipine: Findings from Real-World Analysis in Italy.Advances in therapy · 2023Observational
- PTML modeling for peptide discovery: in silico design of non-hemolytic peptides with antihypertensive activity.Molecular diversity · 2022Article
- Vasodilation Elicited by Isoxsuprine, Identified by High-Throughput Virtual Screening of Compound Libraries, Involves Activation of the NO/cGMP and H₂S/KMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on byFrom the Editor.2018
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo assess the incremental effects of adding extra antihypertensive drugs from a new class to a patient's regimen.
designInstrumental variable analysis of data from SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial). To account for confounding by indication-when treatments seem less effective if they are administered to sicker patients-randomization status was used as the instrumental variable. Patients' randomization status was either intensive (systolic blood pressure target <120 mm Hg) or standard (systolic blood pressure target <140 mm Hg) treatment. Results from instrumental variable models were compared with those from standard multivariable models.
settingSecondary data analysis of a randomized clinical trial conducted at 102 sites in 2010-15.
participants9092 SPRINT participants with hypertension and increased cardiovascular risk but no history of diabetes or stroke. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: Systolic blood pressure, major cardiovascular events, and serious adverse events.
resultsIn standard multivariable models not adjusted for confounding by indication, addition of an antihypertensive drug from a new class was associated with modestly lower systolic blood pressure (-1.3 mm Hg, 95% confidence interval -1.6 to -1.0) and no change in major cardiovascular events (absolute risk of events per 1000 patient years, 0.5, 95% confidence interval -1.5 to 2.3). In instrumental variable models, the addition of an antihypertensive drug from a new class led to clinically important reductions in systolic blood pressure (-14.4 mm Hg, -15.6 to -13.3) and fewer major cardiovascular events (absolute risk -6.2, -10.9 to -1.3). Incremental reductions in systolic blood pressure remained large and similar in magnitude for patients already taking drugs from zero, one, two, or three or more drug classes. This finding was consistent across all subgroups of patients. The addition of another antihypertensive drug class was not associated with adverse events in either standard or instrumental variable models.
conclusionsAfter adjustment for confounding by indication, the addition of a new antihypertensive drug class led to large reductions in systolic blood pressure and major cardiovascular events among patients at high risk for cardiovascular events but without diabetes. Effects on systolic blood pressure persisted across all levels of baseline drug use and all subgroups of patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.