Trial reportJAMA cardiology2020
Assessment of Long-term Benefit of Intensive Blood Pressure Control on Residual Life Span: Secondary Analysis of the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT).
Trial report in JAMA cardiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01206062 (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 31 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial
Who cites it
31 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Hypertension Canada guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of hypertension in adults in primary care.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2025Guideline
- Guideline
- Hypertension Canada guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of hypertension in adults in primary care.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2025Guideline
- [Elevated blood pressure and hypertension : Focus of the 2024 ESC guidelines on risk reduction].Herz · 2025Guideline
- 2022 ACC/AHA guideline for the diagnosis and management of aortic disease: A report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines.The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2023Guideline
- Guideline
- 2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines.Journal of the American College of Cardiology · 2022Guideline
- Guide de pratique clinique en soins de première ligne d'Hypertension Canada pour le diagnostic et le traitement de l'hypertension artérielle chez les adultes.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadienGuideline
- Determinants and prognostic relevance of aortic stiffness in patients with recent ST-elevation myocardial infarction.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2022Trial
- Effects of empagliflozin on insulin initiation or intensification in patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease: Findings from the EMPA-REG OUTCOME trial.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2021Trial
- Trial
- Review
- Prognostic Impact of Renin-Angiotensin System Inhibitors in Revascularized Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction and Preserved or Mildly Reduced Ejection Fraction: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- European Hypertension Guidelines: Similarities and What the Practicing Physician Should Keep in Mind.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Subcutaneous and continuous blood pressure monitoring in an ambulatory sheep by piezoelectric micromachined ultrasonic transducers.Microsystems & nanoengineering · 2025Article
- Article
- Community-Based Evaluation of Hypertension Awareness and Knowledge Among Underserved Bateyes in the Dominican Republic.Clinical Medicine Insights. Cardiology · 2025Article
- Tackling the Disproportionate Burden of Resistant Hypertension in US Black Adults.Current cardiology reports · 2024Review
- Effectiveness of Hypertension Management Strategies in SPRINT-Eligible US Adults: A Simulation Study.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2024Article
- The correlation between different antihypertensive treatments and prognosis of cardiovascular disease in hypertensive patients.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: High blood pressure (BP) is a leading contributor to premature mortality worldwide. The Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) demonstrated a 27% reduction in all-cause death with intensive (vs standard) BP control. However, traditional reporting of survival benefits is not readily interpretable outside medical communities. Objective: To estimate residual life span and potential survival gains with intensive compared with standard BP control in the SPRINT trial using validated nonparametric age-based methods. Design, Setting, and Participants: This secondary analysis of data from an open-label randomized clinical trial included data from 102 enrolling clinical sites in the United States. Adults who were 50 years or older, were at high cardiovascular risk but without diabetes, and had a screening systolic BP between 130 and 180 mm Hg were enrolled between November 2010 and March 2013. Data analysis occurred from May 2019 to December 2019. Interventions: A 1:1 randomization to intensive (target, <120 mm Hg) or standard (target, <140 mm Hg) systolic BP targets. Main Outcomes and Measures: We calculated age-based estimates of projected survival (at a given age) using baseline age rather than time from randomization as the time axis. In each treatment arm at every year of age, residual life span was estimated using the area under the survival curve, up to a maximum of 95 years. Differences in areas under the survival curves reflect the estimated treatment benefits on projected survival. Results: A total of 9361 adults were enrolled (mean [SD] age at randomization, 68 [9] years; 6029 [64.4%] were men; 5399 [57.7%] were non-Hispanic white individuals). Mean survival benefits with intensive vs standard BP control ranged from 6 months to up to 3 years. At age 50 years, the estimated residual survival was 37.3 years with intensive treatment and 34.4 years with standard treatment (difference, 2.9 years [95% CI, 0.9-5.0 years]; P = .008). At age 65 years, residual survival was 24.5 years with intensive treatment and 23.3 years with standard treatment (difference, 1.1 years [95% CI, 0.1-2.1 years]; P = .03). Absolute survival gains with intensive vs standard BP control decreased with age, but the relative benefits were consistent (4% to 9%). Conclusions and Relevance: Intensive BP control improves projected survival by 6 months to 3 years among middle-aged and older adults at high cardiovascular risk but without diabetes mellitus. These post hoc actuarial analyses from SPRINT support the survival benefits of intensive BP control, especially among middle-aged adults at risk. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01206062.
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.