Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34240062›Full record

Observational studyThe lancet. Healthy longevity2021

Observed and expected serious adverse event rates in randomised clinical trials for hypertension: an observational study comparing trials that do and do not focus on older people.

Peter Hanlon, Neave Corcoran, Guy Rughani, Anoop S V Shah, Frances S Mair, Bruce Guthrie, Joanne P Renton, David A McAllister

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in The lancet. Healthy longevity, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect of intravitreal VEGF inhibitors on cardiorenal outcomes.Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation : official publication of the European Dialysis and Transplant Association - European Renal Association · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Observational
  13. Multimorbidity.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2022
    Review
  14. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Peter HanlonGeneral Practice and Primary Care, Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Neave CorcoranGeneral Practice and Primary Care, Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Guy RughaniGeneral Practice and Primary Care, Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Anoop S V ShahDepartment of Non-communicable Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Frances S MairGeneral Practice and Primary Care, Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Bruce GuthrieUsher Institute for Population Health Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Joanne P RentonPublic Health, Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
David A McAllisterPublic Health, Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.

Funding

British Heart Foundation FS/19/17/34172Medical Research Council MR/S021949/1Wellcome Trust 201492/Z/16/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRepresentativeness of antihypertensive drug trials is uncertain, as many trials recruit few or no older people. Some trials specifically recruit older participants to address this. Here, we assess the representativeness of trials focusing on older people by comparing the rates of serious adverse events in these trials with the rates in trials of a general adult population (ie, standard trials), and comparing these findings to the rate of hospitalisations and deaths in people with hypertension starting a similar treatment in routine clinical practice.

methodsFor this observational study, we identified randomised controlled trials (phase 2/3, 3, or 4) of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) drugs for hypertension registered from 1999 onwards with ClinicalTrials.gov. Serious adverse events are routinely included in trial reports and are predominantly accounted for by all-cause hospitalisations and deaths. We compared serious adverse event rates in older-people trials (minimum inclusion age ≥60 years) and standard trials (minimum inclusion age <60 years) using Poisson regression models adjusted for trial characteristics (drug type, comparison type, phase, and outcome type). We identified a community cohort of 56 036 adults with hypertension commencing similar drugs to obtain an expected rate of emergency or urgent hospitalisations or deaths, and compared this rate to observed serious adverse event rates in each trial, adjusted for age and sex. For standard trials and for older-people trials, we calculated the standardised ratio of the expected to the observed rate of serious adverse events using Poisson regression models.

findingsWe included 110 trials, of which 11 (10%) were older-people trials and 99 (90%) were standard trials. Older-people trials had a higher rate of serious adverse events than did standard trials (median events per person per year 0·18 [IQR 0·12-0·29]

interpretationTrials report substantially fewer serious adverse events than expected from rates of hospitalisations and deaths among similar-aged people receiving equivalent treatments in the community. Serious adverse event rates might be a useful metric to assess trial representativeness. Clinicians should be cautious when applying trial recommendations to older people, even when trials focus on older participants.

fundingWellcome Trust, Medical Research Council.

Indexed as

HypertensionAdultAgedAntihypertensive AgentsHospitalizationHumansMiddle AgedRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAntihypertensive Agents

Identifiers

PMID34240062
PMCPMC8245327

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.