Trial reportJournal of hypertension2026
Patient-profiled treatment responses in a large hypertension trial: a posthoc analysis of the INSIGHT study.
Trial report in Journal of hypertension, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveGuidelines on the treatment of hypertensive patients usually refer to 'average' patients. However, in clinical practice, individual patient characteristics may differ substantially from the average. Thus, it seems worthwhile to examine the relationship between comprehensive patient profiles and blood pressure responses.
methodsWe divided the patient population from the INSIGHT trial into exploration and validation cohorts and constructed composite patient profiles based on predictors of blood pressure control (age, severity of hypertension, comorbidities, and previous treatment status). Next, we tested in the exploration cohort whether blood pressure control rates and adverse effects after 6 months of therapy across these profiles differed from those in the entire patient group. Finally, we explored whether the results from the exploration cohort could be validated using another cohort.
resultsLogistic regression analysis showed that the odds of achieving blood pressure control differed substantially between patient profiles but not between treatment modalities. Patients with a less favorable profile (e.g. the combination of age above 60 years, baseline systolic pressure above 160 mmHg, and the presence of diabetes) did less well than patients with a low-risk profile (e.g. absence of organ damage). These results were confirmed in the validation cohort.
conclusionWe conclude that responses to antihypertensive treatment vary in a clinically important manner depending on the composite patient profiles. When found in other trials as well, a priori knowledge about response rates of various patient-profile treatment regimens may help choose the best treatment in individual patients and improve overall blood pressure control rates.
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.