ArticleHypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension2026
Metabolic syndrome severity and the effects of intensive blood pressure lowering: Results from the STEP randomized trial.
Article in Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Intensive blood pressure lowering across metabolic syndrome severity: balancing absolute benefits and relative effects.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Several clinical trials have shown that intensive systolic blood pressure (SBP) lowering confers cardiovascular benefits. However, whether baseline metabolic syndrome (MetS) severity modifies these benefits and risks remains unclear. This post hoc analysis of the STEP trial included 8231 participants with complete MetS severity data. Baseline MetS severity was quantified using an age-, sex-, and ethnicity-specific MetS scoring model and analyzed as tertiles and continuously. The primary outcome was a composite of stroke, acute coronary syndrome, acute decompensated heart failure, coronary revascularization, atrial fibrillation, and cardiovascular death. Cox models and restricted cubic spline analyses were used to assess treatment-effect heterogeneity. During a median follow-up of 3.32 years, intensive SBP lowering reduced the risk of the primary outcome compared with standard treatment. The absolute incidence of the primary outcome and major adverse cardiac events was highest in the highest MetS tertile. Across MetS tertiles, event rates were lower in the intensive-treatment group, with the largest reduction in the middle tertile for the primary outcome (Q2: HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.44-0.99). No significant treatment-by-MetS interaction was observed in tertile-based or spline analyses. For safety outcomes, no significant treatment-by-MetS tertile interaction was observed, although hypotension was numerically more frequent with intensive treatment among participants in the highest MetS tertile. These findings suggest that baseline MetS severity identifies patients with higher absolute cardiovascular risk but does not significantly modify the relative efficacy of intensive SBP lowering. Careful monitoring for treatment-related hypotension may be warranted, particularly among patients with higher metabolic burden.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42749883What 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.