| 1. |
- Kizer, J. R., et al.
(author)
-
Stroke reduction in hypertensive adults with cardiac hypertrophy randomized to losartan versus atenolol: the Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension study
- 2005
-
In: Hypertension. - 1524-4563. ; 45:1, s. 46-52
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension (LIFE) study showed that treatment with the angiotensin II type-1 receptor antagonist losartan reduces overall stroke risk compared with conventional therapy with the beta-blocker atenolol. We conducted secondary analyses in LIFE to determine the extent to which the cerebrovascular benefits of losartan apply to different clinical subgroups and stroke subtypes and to assess the dependence of these benefits on baseline and time-varying covariates. Among 9193 hypertensive patients with electrocardiographic evidence of left ventricular hypertrophy, random allocation to losartan-based treatment lowered the risk of fatal (hazard ratio [HR], 0.65; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.43 to 0.96; P=0.032) and atherothrombotic stroke (HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.88; P=0.001) compared with atenolol-based therapy. Although comparable risk reductions occurred for hemorrhagic and embolic stroke, these were not statistically significant. The number of neurological deficits per stroke was similar, but there were fewer strokes in the losartan group for nearly every level of stroke severity. Effects were consistent in all clinical subgroups except for those defined by age and ethnicity. The benefits of losartan on all strokes were independent of baseline and time-varying risk factors, including blood pressure. The number needed to treat for 5 years to prevent 1 stroke was 54 for the average participant, declining to 25, 24, and 9 for patients with cerebrovascular disease, isolated systolic hypertension, and atrial fibrillation, respectively. In conclusion, substantial cerebrovascular benefit could be realized with the institution of losartan-based therapy over conventional therapy among hypertensive patients with left ventricular hypertrophy across the spectrum of cardiovascular risk.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Gerdts, E., et al.
(author)
-
Left atrial size and risk of major cardiovascular events during antihypertensive treatment: losartan intervention for endpoint reduction in hypertension trial
- 2007
-
In: Hypertension. - 1524-4563. ; 49:2, s. 311-6
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The influence of left atrial size on cardiovascular events during antihypertensive treatment has not been reported previously from a long-term, prospective, randomized hypertension treatment trial. We recorded left atrial diameter by annual echocardiography and cardiovascular events in 881 hypertensive patients (41% women) with electrocardiographic left ventricular hypertrophy aged 55 to 80 (mean: 66) years during a mean of 4.8 years of randomized losartan- or atenolol-based treatment in the Losartan Intervention for Endpoint Reduction in Hypertension Study. During follow-up, a total of 88 primary end points (combined cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) occurred. In Cox regression, baseline left atrial diameter/height predicted incidence of cardiovascular events (hazard ratio: 1.98 per cm/m [95% CI: 1.02 to 3.83 per cm/m]; P=0.042) adjusted for significant effects of Framingham risk score and history of atrial fibrillation. Greater left atrial diameter reduction during follow-up was associated with greater reduction in left ventricular hypertrophy, absence of new-onset atrial fibrillation or mitral regurgitation during follow-up, and losartan-based treatment (B=-0.13+/-0.03 cm/m; P<0.001) in multiple linear regression, adjusting for baseline left atrial diameter/height. However, in time-varying Cox regression analysis, left atrial diameter reduction was not independent of left ventricular hypertrophy regression in predicting cardiovascular events during follow-up. In conclusion, left atrial diameter/height predicts risk of cardiovascular events independent of other clinical risk factors in hypertensive patients with left ventricular hypertrophy and may be useful in pretreatment clinical assessment of cardiovascular risk in these patients.
|
|
| 6. |
- Ibsen, H., et al.
(author)
-
Does albuminuria predict cardiovascular outcome on treatment with losartan versus atenolol in hypertension with left ventricular hypertrophy? A LIFE substudy
- 2004
-
In: J Hypertens. - : Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health). - 0263-6352. ; 22:9, s. 1805-11
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- OBJECTIVES: To examine a possible relationship between baseline albuminuria and effect of losartan versus atenolol on cardiovascular (CV) events in hypertensive patients with left ventricular hypertrophy, the effect of losartan versus atenolol on albuminuria, and whether the benefits of losartan versus atenolol could be explained by influence of losartan on albuminuria. DESIGN: Double-blind, randomized, controlled trial of 4.8 years. SETTING: Out-patient setting. PATIENTS: A total of 8206 with hypertension and left ventricular hypertrophy. INTERVENTIONS: Losartan or atenolol, supplemented with diuretics and/or calcium antagonists to reach blood pressure < 140/90 mmHg MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The urine albumin/creatinine ratio, and the primary composite endpoint (CEP) of CV death, myocardial infarction, and stroke. RESULTS: The blood pressure was reduced similarly on losartan (30.2/16.6 mmHg) versus atenolol (29.1/16.8 mmHg). The risk of a primary CEP increased linearly from the lowest to the highest decile of baseline albuminuria. The benefits of losartan versus atenolol for the primary CEP and for stroke tended to be more pronounced among patients above the median value for baseline albuminuria (urine albumin/creatinine ratio, 1.28 mg/mmol). The decrease in albuminuria was significantly greater with losartan versus atenolol throughout the study (a decrease from baseline to year 2 of 33% losartan versus 25% atenolol). One-fifth of the difference in favor of losartan on the primary CEP was explained by the greater reduction in albuminuria on losartan. CONCLUSIONS: Baseline albuminuria is a powerful risk factor for CV events. Baseline albuminuria did not identify the group of patients with greatest benefit on losartan versus atenolol in LIFE. Reduction in albuminuria explained one-fifth of the benefits of losartan versus atenolol.
|
|
| 7. |
- Ibsen, H., et al.
(author)
-
Reduction in albuminuria translates to reduction in cardiovascular events in hypertensive patients: losartan intervention for endpoint reduction in hypertension study
- 2005
-
In: Hypertension. - 1524-4563. ; 45:2, s. 198-202
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Few data are available to clarify whether changes in albuminuria over time translate to changes in cardiovascular risk. The aim of the present study was to examine whether changes in albuminuria during 4.8 years of antihypertensive treatment were related to changes in risk in 8206 patients with hypertension and left ventricular hypertrophy in the Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension (LIFE) study. Urinary albumin/creatinine ratio (UACR) was measured at baseline and annually. Time-varying albuminuria was closely related to risk for the primary composite end point (ie, when UACR decreased during treatment, risk was reduced accordingly). When the population was divided according to median baseline value (1.21 mg/mmol) and median year 1 UACR (0.67 mg/mmol), risk increased stepwise and significantly for the primary composite end point from those with low baseline/low year 1 (5.5%), to low baseline/high year 1 (8.6%), to high baseline/low year 1 (9.4%), and to high baseline/high year 1 (13.5%) values. Similar significant, stepwise increases in risk were seen for the components of the primary composite end point (cardiovascular mortality, stroke, and myocardial infarction). The observation that changes in UACR during antihypertensive treatment over time translated to changes in risk for cardiovascular morbidity and mortality was not explained by in-treatment level of blood pressure. We propose that monitoring of albuminuria should be an integrated part of the management of hypertension. If albuminuria is not decreased by the patient's current antihypertensive and other treatment, further intervention directed toward blood pressure control and other modifiable risks should be considered.
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
- de Simone, G., et al.
(author)
-
Body build and risk of cardiovascular events in hypertension and left ventricular hypertrophy: the LIFE (Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension) study
- 2005
-
In: Circulation. - 1524-4539. ; 111:15, s. 1924-31
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Obesity may independently increase the risk of adverse events in hypertension with target-organ damage. We investigated whether body build was independently associated with higher cardiovascular risk and whether treatment with losartan relative to atenolol influenced the impact of body build on the primary composite end point of cardiovascular death, stroke, and myocardial infarction and on cardiovascular death in patients with hypertension and left ventricular hypertrophy in the Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension (LIFE) study. METHODS AND RESULTS: The population of 9079 patients was divided as follows: thin (body mass index [BMI] <20 kg/m2, 2%), normal weight (BMI 20 to 24.9, 24%), overweight (BMI 25 to 29.9, 45%), and obese (class I: BMI 30 to 34.9, 21%; class II: BMI 35 to 39.9, 6%; class III: BMI > or =40, 2%). Incident diabetes increased progressively with BMI and was somewhat higher in the atenolol arm. Differences in gender and race were detected among the body build groups. Rates (Cox proportional hazard analysis) of the primary composite end point did not differ among body build groups after adjustment for age, gender, race, smoking habit, prevalent cardiovascular disease, and left ventricular hypertrophy. Cardiovascular death was more frequent among thin (P<0.05) and pooled class II-III obesity (both P<0.04) than normal-weight groups. Risk was not attenuated significantly by losartan treatment, nor did it interfere with the greater benefit of losartan- as opposed to atenolol-based treatment. CONCLUSIONS: In the LIFE study, stratification for classes of body build identified increased risk of cardiovascular mortality in both thin and moderately-to-severely obese individuals. This risk was not attenuated significantly by losartan treatment, nor did it interfere with the greater benefit of losartan-based treatment as opposed to atenolol-based treatment.
|
|
