Explore the vast range of titles available.

The apparent shortfall in prevention of coronary heart disease (CHD) noted in early hypertension trials has been attributed to disadvantages of the diuretics and β blockers used. For a given reduction in blood pressure, some suggested that newer agents would confer advantages over diuretics and β blockers. Our aim, therefore, was to compare the effect on non-fatal myocardial infarction and fatal CHD of combinations of atenolol with a thiazide versus amlodipine with perindopril. We did a multicentre, prospective, randomised controlled trial in 19 257 patients with hypertension who were aged 40–79 years and had at least three other cardiovascular risk factors. Patients were assigned either amlodipine 5–10 mg adding perindopril 4–8 mg as required (amlodipine-based regimen; n=9639) or atenolol 50–100 mg adding bendroflumethiazide 1·25–2·5 mg and potassium as required (atenolol-based regimen; n=9618). Our primary endpoint was non-fatal myocardial infarction (including silent myocardial infaction) and fatal CHD. Analysis was by intention to treat. The study was stopped prematurely after 5·5 years' median follow-up and accumulated in total 106 153 patient-years of observation. Though not significant, compared with the atenolol-based regimen, fewer individuals on the amlodipine-based regimen had a primary endpoint (429 vs 474; unadjusted HR 0·90, 95% CI 0·79–1·02, p=0·1052), fatal and non-fatal stroke (327 vs 422; 0·77, 0·66–0·89, p=0·0003), total cardiovascular events and procedures (1362 vs 1602; 0·84, 0·78–0·90, p<0·0001), and all-cause mortality (738 vs 820; 0·89, 0·81–0·99, p=0·025). The incidence of developing diabetes was less on the amlodipine-based regimen (567 vs 799; 0·70, 0·63–0·78, p<0·0001). The amlodipine-based regimen prevented more major cardiovascular events and induced less diabetes than the atenolol-based regimen. On the basis of previous trial evidence, these effects might not be entirely explained by better control of blood pressure, and this issue is addressed in the accompanying article. Nevertheless, the results have implications with respect to optimum combinations of antihypertensive agents.

Drug-Drug Interactions between Non Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs (NSAIDs) and Angiotensin Converting Enzyme Inhibitors (ACEIs), Angiotensin Receptor Blocker (ARBs) or diuretics can lead to renal failure and hyperkalemia. Thus, monitoring of serum creatinine and potassium is recommended when a first dispensing of NSAID occur in patients treated with these drugs. We conducted a pharmacoepidemiological retrospective cohort study using data from the French Health Insurance Reimbursement Database to evaluate the proportion of serum creatinine and potassium laboratory monitoring in patients treated with ACEI, ARB or diuretic and receiving a first dispensing of NSAID. We described the first dispensing of NSAID among 3,500 patients of a 4-year cohort (6,633 patients treated with antihypertensive drugs) and analyzed serum creatinine and potassium laboratory monitoring within the 3 weeks after the first NSAID dispensing. General Practitioners were the most frequent prescribers of NSAIDs (85.5%, 95% CI: 84.3-86.6). The more commonly prescribed NSAIDs were ibuprofen (20%), ketoprofen (15%), diclofenac (15%) and piroxicam (12%). Serum creatinine and potassium monitoring was 10.7% (95% CI: 9.5-11.8) in patients treated by ACEIs, ARBs or diuretics. Overall, monitoring was more frequently performed to women aged over 60, treated with digoxin or glucose lowering drugs, but not to patients treated with ACEIs, ARBs or diuretics. Monitoring was more frequent when NSAIDs' prescribers were cardiologists or anesthesiologists. Monitoring of serum creatinine and potassium of patients treated with ACEIs, ARBs or diuretics and receiving a first NSAID dispensing is insufficiently performed and needs to be reinforced through specific interventions.

There is concern that patients taking renin–angiotensin–aldosterone system inhibitors have an increased risk of Covid-19, because angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 is a receptor for the virus. This study showed no increase in likelihood of a positive Covid-19 test or severe Covid-19 in patients taking any of five common classes of antihypertensive drugs.

This population-based case–control study from northern Italy shows that the use of ACE inhibitors and ARBs was more frequent among patients with Covid-19 because of a higher prevalence of cardiovascular disease. However, there was no evidence that ACE inhibitors and ARBs affected the risk of Covid-19.

In this trial in persons with chronic kidney disease and type 2 diabetes, combination therapy with finerenone and empagliflozin led to a greater reduction in the urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio than either drug alone.

ObjectiveTo compare the effect of exercise regimens and medications on systolic blood pressure (SBP).Data sourcesMedline (via PubMed) and the Cochrane Library.Eligibility criteriaRandomised controlled trials (RCTs) of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE-I), angiotensin-2 receptor blockers (ARBs), β-blockers, calcium channel blockers (CCBs) and diuretics were identified from existing Cochrane reviews. A previously published meta-analysis of exercise interventions was updated to identify recent RCTs that tested the SBP-lowering effects of endurance, dynamic resistance, isometric resistance, and combined endurance and resistance exercise interventions (up to September 2018).DesignRandom-effects network meta-analysis.OutcomeDifference in mean change from baseline SBP between comparator treatments (change from baseline in one group minus that in the other group) and its 95% credible interval (95% CrI), measured in mmHg.ResultsWe included a total of 391 RCTs, 197 of which evaluated exercise interventions (10 461 participants) and 194 evaluated antihypertensive medications (29 281 participants). No RCTs compared directly exercise against medications. While all medication trials included hypertensive populations, only 56 exercise trials included hypertensive participants (≥140 mmHg), corresponding to 3508 individuals. In a 10% random sample, risk of bias was higher in exercise RCTs, primarily due to lack of blinding and incomplete outcome data. In analyses that combined all populations, antihypertensive medications achieved higher reductions in baseline SBP compared with exercise interventions (mean difference −3.96 mmHg, 95% CrI −5.02 to −2.91). Compared with control, all types of exercise (including combination of endurance and resistance) and all classes of antihypertensive medications were effective in lowering baseline SBP. Among hypertensive populations, there were no detectable differences in the SBP-lowering effects of ACE-I, ARB, β-blocker and diuretic medications when compared with endurance or dynamic resistance exercise. There was no detectable inconsistency between direct and indirect comparisons. Although there was evidence of small-study effects, this affected both medication and exercise trials.ConclusionsThe effect of exercise interventions on SBP remains under-studied, especially among hypertensive populations. Our findings confirm modest but consistent reductions in SBP in many studied exercise interventions across all populations but individuals receiving medications generally achieved greater reductions than those following structured exercise regimens. Assuming equally reliable estimates, the SBP-lowering effect of exercise among hypertensive populations appears similar to that of commonly used antihypertensive medications. Generalisability of these findings to real-world clinical settings should be further evaluated.

In coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), hypertension and cardiovascular diseases are major risk factors for critical disease progression. However, the underlying causes and the effects of the main anti-hypertensive therapies—angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs)—remain unclear. Combining clinical data ( n  = 144) and single-cell sequencing data of airway samples ( n  = 48) with in vitro experiments, we observed a distinct inflammatory predisposition of immune cells in patients with hypertension that correlated with critical COVID-19 progression. ACEI treatment was associated with dampened COVID-19-related hyperinflammation and with increased cell intrinsic antiviral responses, whereas ARB treatment related to enhanced epithelial–immune cell interactions. Macrophages and neutrophils of patients with hypertension, in particular under ARB treatment, exhibited higher expression of the pro-inflammatory cytokines CCL3 and CCL4 and the chemokine receptor CCR1 . Although the limited size of our cohort does not allow us to establish clinical efficacy, our data suggest that the clinical benefits of ACEI treatment in patients with COVID-19 who have hypertension warrant further investigation. Single-cell analysis reveals how anti-hypertensive drugs affect the risk of severe disease in patients with COVID-19 who have hypertension.

The global coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has led to unprecedented social and economic consequences. The risk of morbidity and mortality due to COVID-19 increases dramatically in the presence of coexisting medical conditions, while the underlying mechanisms remain unclear. Furthermore, there are no approved therapies for COVID-19. This study aims to identify SARS-CoV-2 pathogenesis, disease manifestations, and COVID-19 therapies using network medicine methodologies along with clinical and multi-omics observations. We incorporate SARS-CoV-2 virus–host protein–protein interactions, transcriptomics, and proteomics into the human interactome. Network proximity measurement revealed underlying pathogenesis for broad COVID-19-associated disease manifestations. Analyses of single-cell RNA sequencing data show that co-expression of ACE2 and TMPRSS2 is elevated in absorptive enterocytes from the inflamed ileal tissues of Crohn disease patients compared to uninflamed tissues, revealing shared pathobiology between COVID-19 and inflammatory bowel disease. Integrative analyses of metabolomics and transcriptomics (bulk and single-cell) data from asthma patients indicate that COVID-19 shares an intermediate inflammatory molecular profile with asthma (including IRAK3 and ADRB2 ). To prioritize potential treatments, we combined network-based prediction and a propensity score (PS) matching observational study of 26,779 individuals from a COVID-19 registry. We identified that melatonin usage (odds ratio [OR] = 0.72, 95% CI 0.56–0.91) is significantly associated with a 28% reduced likelihood of a positive laboratory test result for SARS-CoV-2 confirmed by reverse transcription–polymerase chain reaction assay. Using a PS matching user active comparator design, we determined that melatonin usage was associated with a reduced likelihood of SARS-CoV-2 positive test result compared to use of angiotensin II receptor blockers (OR = 0.70, 95% CI 0.54–0.92) or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (OR = 0.69, 95% CI 0.52–0.90). Importantly, melatonin usage (OR = 0.48, 95% CI 0.31–0.75) is associated with a 52% reduced likelihood of a positive laboratory test result for SARS-CoV-2 in African Americans after adjusting for age, sex, race, smoking history, and various disease comorbidities using PS matching. In summary, this study presents an integrative network medicine platform for predicting disease manifestations associated with COVID-19 and identifying melatonin for potential prevention and treatment of COVID-19.

This study assessed the long-term renoprotective effect of intensified blood-pressure control among children receiving a fixed high dose of an angiotensin-converting–enzyme inhibitor. Intensified blood-pressure control, achieved with additional medication, to reach a targeted 24-hour blood pressure in the low range of normal appeared to confer a substantial benefit with respect to a delay in the progression of renal disease among children with chronic kidney disease. However, reappearance of proteinuria after initial successful pharmacologic control was common. Intensified blood-pressure control to reach a targeted 24-hour blood pressure in the low range of normal appeared to confer a substantial benefit with respect to a delay in the progression of renal disease among children with chronic kidney disease. However, reappearance of proteinuria was common. Among both adults and children, chronic kidney disease tends to progress to end-stage renal failure, which is a major clinical problem. Systemic hypertension and glomerular hyperfiltration lead to progressive nephron damage. 1 – 3 Effective blood-pressure control delays the progression of renal disease in adults with chronic kidney disease, and antihypertensive agents that inhibit the renin–angiotensin system provide superior renoprotection, owing to their additional antiproteinuric, antiinflammatory, and antifibrotic properties. 4 – 7 Children comprise less than 1% of the total population with chronic kidney disease and often have congenital kidney malformations, urinary tract disorders, or genetic disorders that affect nephron formation or function. Hypertension . . .

Hyperlipidemia and hypertension are modifiable risk factors for Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD). Approximately 25% of adults over age 65 use both antihypertensives (AHTs) and statins for these conditions. While a growing body of evidence found statins and AHTs are independently associated with lower ADRD risk, no evidence exists on simultaneous use for different drug class combinations and ADRD risk. Our primary objective was to compare ADRD risk associated with concurrent use of different combinations of statins and antihypertensives. In a retrospective cohort study (2007-2014), we analyzed 694,672 Medicare beneficiaries in the United States (2,017,786 person-years) who concurrently used both statins and AHTs. Using logistic regression adjusting for age, socioeconomic status and comorbidities, we quantified incident ADRD diagnosis associated with concurrent use of different statin molecules (atorvastatin, pravastatin, rosuvastatin, and simvastatin) and AHT drug classes (two renin-angiotensin system (RAS)-acting AHTs, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin-II receptor blockers (ARBs), vs non-RAS-acting AHTs). Pravastatin or rosuvastatin combined with RAS-acting AHTs reduce risk of ADRD relative to any statin combined with non-RAS-acting AHTs: ACEI+pravastatin odds ratio (OR) = 0.942 (CI: 0.899-0.986, p = 0.011), ACEI+rosuvastatin OR = 0.841 (CI: 0.794-0.892, p<0.001), ARB+pravastatin OR = 0.794 (CI: 0.748-0.843, p<0.001), ARB+rosuvastatin OR = 0.818 (CI: 0.765-0.874, p<0.001). ARBs combined with atorvastatin and simvastatin are associated with smaller reductions in risk, and ACEI with no risk reduction, compared to when combined with pravastatin or rosuvastatin. Among Hispanics, no combination of statins and RAS-acting AHTs reduces risk relative to combinations of statins and non-RAS-acting AHTs. Among blacks using ACEI+rosuvastatin, ADRD odds were 33% lower compared to blacks using other statins combined with non-RAS-acting AHTs (OR = 0.672 (CI: 0.548-0.825, p<0.001)). Among older Americans, use of pravastatin and rosuvastatin to treat hyperlipidemia is less common than use of simvastatin and atorvastatin, however, in combination with RAS-acting AHTs, particularly ARBs, they may be more effective at reducing risk of ADRD. The number of Americans with ADRD may be reduced with drug treatments for vascular health that also confer effects on ADRD.