Explore the vast range of titles available.

High systolic blood pressure after successful endovascular therapy for acute ischaemic stroke is associated with increased risk of intraparenchymal haemorrhage. However, no randomised controlled trials are available to guide optimal management. We therefore aimed to assess whether an intensive systolic blood pressure target resulted in reduced rates of intraparenchymal haemorrhage compared with a standard systolic blood pressure target. We did a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial at four academic hospital centres in France. Eligible individuals were adults (aged ≥18 years) with an acute ischaemic stroke due to a large-vessel occlusion that was successfully treated with endovascular therapy. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either an intensive systolic blood pressure target group (100–129 mm Hg) or a standard care systolic blood pressure target group (130–185 mm Hg), by means of a central web-based procedure, stratified by centre and intravenous thrombolysis use before endovascular therapy. In both groups, the target systolic blood pressure had to be achieved within 1 h after randomisation and maintained for 24 h with intravenous blood pressure lowering treatments. The primary outcome was the rate of radiographic intraparenchymal haemorrhage at 24–36 h and the primary safety outcome was the occurrence of hypotension. Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. BP-TARGET is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT03160677, and the trial is closed at all participating sites. Between June 21, 2017, and Sept 27, 2019, 324 patients were enrolled in the four participating stroke centres: 162 patients were randomly assigned to the intensive target group and 162 to the standard target group. Four (2%) of 162 patients were excluded from the intensive target group and two (1%) of 162 from the standard target group for withdrawal of consent or legal reasons. The mean systolic blood pressure during the first 24 h after reperfusion was 128 mm Hg (SD 11) in the intensive target group and 138 mm Hg (17) in the standard target group. The primary outcome was observed in 65 (42%) of 154 patients in the intensive target group and 68 (43%) of 157 in the standard target group on brain CT within 24–36 h after reperfusion] (adjusted odds ratio 0·96, 95% CI 0·60–1·51; p=0·84). Hypotensive events were not significantly different between both groups and occurred in 12 (8%) of 158 patients in the intensive target and five (3%) of 160 in the standard target group. Mortality within the first week after randomisation occurred in 11 (7%) of 158 patients in the intensive target group and in seven (4%) of 160 in the standard target group. An intensive systolic blood pressure target of 100–129 mm Hg after successful endovascular therapy did not reduce radiographic intraparenchymal haemorrhage rates at 24–36 h as compared with a standard care systolic blood pressure target of 130–185 mm Hg. Notably, these results are applicable to patients with successful reperfusion and systolic blood pressures of more than 130 mm Hg at the end of procedure. Further studies are needed to understand the association between blood pressure and outcomes after reperfusion. French Health Ministry.

Aldosterone synthase controls the synthesis of aldosterone and has been a pharmacologic target for the treatment of hypertension for several decades. Selective inhibition of aldosterone synthase is essential but difficult to achieve because cortisol synthesis is catalyzed by another enzyme that shares 93% sequence similarity with aldosterone synthase. In preclinical and phase 1 studies, baxdrostat had 100:1 selectivity for enzyme inhibition, and baxdrostat at several dose levels reduced plasma aldosterone levels but not cortisol levels. In this multicenter, placebo-controlled trial, we randomly assigned patients who had treatment-resistant hypertension, with blood pressure of 130/80 mm Hg or higher, and who were receiving stable doses of at least three antihypertensive agents, including a diuretic, to receive baxdrostat (0.5 mg, 1 mg, or 2 mg) once daily for 12 weeks or placebo. The primary end point was the change in systolic blood pressure from baseline to week 12 in each baxdrostat group as compared with the placebo group. A total of 248 patients completed the trial. Dose-dependent changes in systolic blood pressure of -20.3 mm Hg, -17.5 mm Hg, -12.1 mm Hg, and -9.4 mm Hg were observed in the 2-mg, 1-mg, 0.5-mg, and placebo groups, respectively. The difference in the change in systolic blood pressure between the 2-mg group and the placebo group was -11.0 mm Hg (95% confidence interval [CI], -16.4 to -5.5; P<0.001), and the difference in this change between the 1-mg group and the placebo group was -8.1 mm Hg (95% CI, -13.5 to -2.8; P = 0.003). No deaths occurred during the trial, no serious adverse events were attributed by the investigators to baxdrostat, and there were no instances of adrenocortical insufficiency. Baxdrostat-related increases in the potassium level to 6.0 mmol per liter or greater occurred in 2 patients, but these increases did not recur after withdrawal and reinitiation of the drug. Patients with treatment-resistant hypertension who received baxdrostat had dose-related reductions in blood pressure. (Funded by CinCor Pharma; BrigHTN ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04519658.).

In 8511 Chinese patients 60 to 80 years of age with hypertension, intensive treatment (systolic blood-pressure target, 110 to <130 mm Hg) resulted in a lower incidence of cardiovascular events than standard treatment (target, 130 to <150 mm Hg). The two groups had similar incidences of adverse events, except for hypotension, which occurred more frequently with intensive treatment.

Background Multiple modifiable risk factors for late complications in patients with diabetic kidney disease (DKD), including hyperglycemia, hypertension and dyslipidemia, increase the risk of a poor outcome. DKD is associated with a very high cardiovascular risk, which requires simultaneous treatment of these risk factors by implementing an intensified multifactorial treatment approach. However, the efficacy of a multifactorial intervention on major fatal/non-fatal cardiovascular events (MACEs) in DKD patients has been poorly investigated. Methods Nephropathy in Diabetes type 2 (NID-2) study is a multicentre, cluster-randomized, open-label clinical trial enrolling 395 DKD patients with albuminuria, diabetic retinopathy (DR) and negative history of CV events in 14 Italian diabetology clinics. Centres were randomly assigned to either Standard-of-Care (SoC) (n = 188) or multifactorial intensive therapy (MT, n = 207) of main cardiovascular risk factors (blood pressure < 130/80 mmHg, glycated haemoglobin < 7%, LDL, HDL and total cholesterol < 100 mg/dL, > 40/50 mg/dL for men/women and < 175 mg/dL, respectively). Primary endpoint was MACEs occurrence by end of follow-up phase. Secondary endpoints included single components of primary endpoint and all-cause death. Results At the end of intervention period (median 3.84 and 3.40 years in MT and SoC group, respectively), targets achievement was significantly higher in MT. During 13.0 years (IQR 12.4–13.3) of follow-up, 262 MACEs were recorded (116 in MT vs. 146 in SoC). The adjusted Cox shared-frailty model demonstrated 53% lower risk of MACEs in MT arm (adjusted HR 0.47, 95%CI 0.30–0.74, P  =  0.001 ). Similarly, all-cause death risk was 47% lower (adjusted HR 0.53, 95%CI 0.29–0.93, P  =  0.027 ). Conclusion MT induces a remarkable benefit on the risk of MACEs and mortality in high-risk DKD patients. Clinical Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00535925. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00535925

In this phase 1 study involving persons with hypertension, zilebesiran (an RNA interference therapeutic agent) was associated with decreases in angiotensin levels and systolic and diastolic blood pressure.

Patients with pulmonary hypertension due to interstitial lung disease were randomly assigned to inhaled treprostinil or placebo. At 16 weeks, there was a significant improvement in exercise capacity with inhaled treprostinil as compared with placebo as assessed by a 6-minute walk test.

Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus were evaluated for progression of diabetic retinopathy after being randomly assigned to receive several medical therapies. At 4 years, the rate of progression was significantly lower with intensive glycemia therapy than with standard glycemia therapy and significantly lower with simvastatin plus fenofibrate than with simvastatin plus placebo. Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus were evaluated for progression of diabetic retinopathy after being randomly assigned to receive several medical therapies. At 4 years, the rate of progression was significantly lower with intensive glycemia therapy than with standard glycemia therapy and significantly lower with simvastatin plus fenofibrate than with simvastatin plus placebo. Diabetic retinopathy, an important microvascular complication of diabetes, is a leading cause of blindness in the United States. 1 Randomized, controlled clinical trials in cohorts of patients with type 1 diabetes and those with type 2 diabetes have shown the beneficial effects of intensive glycemic control 2 – 5 and intensive treatment of elevated blood pressure 6 on the progression of diabetic retinopathy. Elevated serum cholesterol and triglyceride levels have been implicated, in observational studies and small trials, as additional risk factors for the development of diabetic retinopathy and visual loss. 7 – 14 The Fenofibrate Intervention and Event Lowering in Diabetes (FIELD) study (Current Controlled . . .

Uncertainty exists about whether lowering systolic blood pressure to less than 120 mm Hg is superior to that of less than 140 mm Hg, particularly in patients with diabetes and patients with previous stroke. In this open-label, blinded-outcome, randomised controlled trial, participants with high cardiovascular risk were enrolled from 116 hospitals or communities in China. We used minimised randomisation to assign participants to intensive treatment targeting standard office systolic blood pressure of less than 120 mm Hg or standard treatment targeting less than 140 mm Hg. The primary outcome was a composite of myocardial infarction, revascularisation, hospitalisation for heart failure, stroke, or death from cardiovascular causes, assessed by the intention-to-treat principle. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04030234. Between Sept 17, 2019, and July 13, 2020, 11 255 participants (4359 with diabetes and 3022 with previous stroke) were assigned to intensive treatment (n=5624) or standard treatment (n=5631). Their mean age was 64·6 years (SD 7·1). The mean systolic blood pressure throughout the follow-up (except the first 3 months of titration) was 119·1 mm Hg (SD 11·1) in the intensive treatment group and 134·8 mm Hg (10·5) in the standard treatment group. During a median of 3·4 years of follow-up, the primary outcome event occurred in 547 (9·7%) participants in the intensive treatment group and 623 (11·1%) in the standard treatment group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·88, 95% CI 0·78–0·99; p=0·028). There was no heterogeneity of effects by diabetes status, duration of diabetes, or history of stroke. Serious adverse events of syncope occurred more frequently in the intensive treatment group (24 [0·4%] of 5624) than in standard treatment group (eight [0·1%] of 5631; HR 3·00, 95% CI 1·35–6·68). There was no significant between-group difference in the serious adverse events of hypotension, electrolyte abnormality, injurious fall, or acute kidney injury. For hypertensive patients at high cardiovascular risk, regardless of the status of diabetes or history of stroke, the treatment strategy of targeting systolic blood pressure of less than 120 mm Hg, as compared with that of less than 140 mm Hg, prevents major vascular events, with minor excess risk. The Ministry of Science and Technology of China and Fuwai Hospital. For the Mandarin translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Studies have suggested that evening dosing with antihypertensive therapy might have better outcomes than morning dosing. The Treatment in Morning versus Evening (TIME) study aimed to investigate whether evening dosing of usual antihypertensive medication improves major cardiovascular outcomes compared with morning dosing in patients with hypertension. The TIME study is a prospective, pragmatic, decentralised, parallel-group study in the UK, that recruited adults (aged ≥18 years) with hypertension and taking at least one antihypertensive medication. Eligible participants were randomly assigned (1:1), without restriction, stratification, or minimisation, to take all of their usual antihypertensive medications in either the morning (0600–1000 h) or in the evening (2000–0000 h). Participants were followed up for the composite primary endpoint of vascular death or hospitalisation for non-fatal myocardial infarction or non-fatal stroke. Endpoints were identified by participant report or record linkage to National Health Service datasets and were adjudicated by a committee masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was assessed as the time to first occurrence of an event in the intention-to-treat population (ie, all participants randomly assigned to a treatment group). Safety was assessed in all participants who submitted at least one follow-up questionnaire. The study is registered with EudraCT (2011-001968-21) and ISRCTN (18157641), and is now complete. Between Dec 17, 2011, and June 5, 2018, 24 610 individuals were screened and 21 104 were randomly assigned to evening (n=10 503) or morning (n=10 601) dosing groups. Mean age at study entry was 65·1 years (SD 9·3); 12 136 (57·5%) participants were men; 8968 (42·5%) were women; 19 101 (90·5%) were White; 98 (0·5%) were Black, African, Caribbean, or Black British (ethnicity was not reported by 1637 [7·8%] participants); and 2725 (13·0%) had a previous cardiovascular disease. By the end of study follow-up (March 31, 2021), median follow-up was 5·2 years (IQR 4·9–5·7), and 529 (5·0%) of 10 503 participants assigned to evening treatment and 318 (3·0%) of 10 601 assigned to morning treatment had withdrawn from all follow-up. A primary endpoint event occurred in 362 (3·4%) participants assigned to evening treatment (0·69 events [95% CI 0·62–0·76] per 100 patient-years) and 390 (3·7%) assigned to morning treatment (0·72 events [95% CI 0·65–0·79] per 100 patient-years; unadjusted hazard ratio 0·95 [95% CI 0·83–1·10]; p=0·53). No safety concerns were identified. Evening dosing of usual antihypertensive medication was not different from morning dosing in terms of major cardiovascular outcomes. Patients can be advised that they can take their regular antihypertensive medications at a convenient time that minimises any undesirable effects. British Heart Foundation.

In this trial, 947 patients with renal-artery stenosis were assigned to renal-artery stenting or medical therapy. At a median of 43 months, there was no significant between-group difference in the rate of a composite end point of adverse cardiovascular and renal events. Renal-artery stenosis, which is present in 1 to 5% of people with hypertension, 1 , 2 often occurs in combination with peripheral arterial or coronary artery disease. 3 , 4 Results of community-based screening suggest that the prevalence among persons older than 65 years of age may be as high as 7%. 5 Renal-artery stenosis may result in hypertension, ischemic nephropathy, and multiple long-term complications. 6 Uncontrolled studies performed in the 1990s suggested that renal-artery angioplasty or stenting resulted in significant reductions in systolic blood pressure 7 , 8 and in the stabilization of chronic kidney disease. 9 , 10 Subsequently, there were rapid increases in the rate of renal-artery . . .