| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Kizer, J. R., et al.
(författare)
-
Stroke reduction in hypertensive adults with cardiac hypertrophy randomized to losartan versus atenolol: the Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension study
- 2005
-
Ingår i: Hypertension. - 1524-4563. ; 45:1, s. 46-52
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)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.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
- Kjeldsen, S. E., et al.
(författare)
-
The effects of losartan compared to atenolol on stroke in patients with isolated systolic hypertension and left ventricular hypertrophy. The LIFE study
- 2005
-
Ingår i: J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). - 1524-6175. ; 7:3, s. 152-8
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension (LIFE) study reported that a losartan-based antihypertensive regimen reduced cardiovascular morbidity and mortality (composite of cardiovascular death, stroke, and myocardial infarction) more than therapy based on atenolol in patients with left ventricular hypertrophy and isolated systolic hypertension (ISH). Patients aged 55-80 years with blood pressures 160-200/<90 mm Hg were followed for a mean of 4.7 years. Blood pressure was similarly reduced in the losartan (n=660) and atenolol (n=666) ISH groups. There were 88 (6.6%) patients who experienced a stroke, 18 of which were fatal. Of patients experiencing strokes, 72.7% had an ischemic stroke. ISH patients in LIFE compared to the non-ISH group had a higher incidence of any stroke and embolic stroke, and similar incidences of fatal, atherosclerotic, and hemorrhagic/other strokes. The incidence of any stroke (40% risk reduction [RR], p=0.02), fatal stroke (70% RR, p=0.035), and atherothrombotic stroke (45% RR, p=0.022) was significantly lower in losartan-treated compared to the atenolol-treated patients. The 36% RR for embolic strokes in the losartan group was not statistically significantly (p=0.33) different from the atenolol group. These data suggest that losartan-based treatment is more effective than an atenolol-based treatment for patients with ISH and a high risk for stroke.
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
| 11. |
|
|
| 12. |
- Pedersen, T.R., et al.
(författare)
-
Follow-up study of patients randomized in The Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study (4S) of cholesterol lowering
- 2000
-
Ingår i: American Journal of Cardiology. - 0002-9149 .- 1879-1913. ; 86:3, s. 257-262
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study (4S) and other randomized clinical trials have demonstrated that cholesterol-lowering treatment with statins improves prognosis in patients with coronary atherosclerosis compared with placebo. The effect of therapy with statins beyond the typical 5 to 6 years' duration of the trials, in particular regarding the risk of cancer, has not been investigated. This study examines the long-term effects of simvastatin for up to 8 years on cause-specific mortality in patients with coronary heart disease (CHD). We performed an observational, government registry-based study of mortality in the groups originally randomized to simvastatin or placebo in the 4S over an additional 2-year follow-up period, so that the median total follow-up period was 7.4 years (range 6.9 to 8.3 in surviving patients). Randomization took place at outpatient clinics at 94 clinical centers in Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden from 1988 to 1989. Of 4,444 patients with CHD, 2,223 and 2,221 were randomized to treatment with placebo or simvastatin therapy, respectively. Patients received treatment with simvastatin, starting at 20 mg/day, with titration to 40 mg/day at 12 or 24 weeks if total cholesterol was >5.2 mmol/L (200 mg/dl), or placebo. After the double-blind period, most patients in both treatment groups received simvastatin as open-label prescription. Of the 1,967 patients originally treated with placebo and surviving the double-blind period, 97 (4.9%) died during the following 2 years. In the group randomized to simvastatin the corresponding number was 74 of the 2,039 survivors (3.6%). Adding these deaths to those occurring during the original trial, the total was 353 (15.9%) and 256 (11.5%) deaths in the groups originally randomized to placebo and simvastatin, respectively. The relative risk was 0.70 (95% confidence interval 0.60 to 0.82, p = 0.00002). The total number of cancer deaths was 68 (3.1%) in the placebo group and 52 (2.3%) in the simvastatin group (relative risk 0.73, 95% confidence interval 0.51 to 0.05, p = 0.087), and the numbers of noncardiovascular and other deaths were similar in both groups. We therefore conclude that treatment with simvastatin for up to 8 years in patients with CHD is safe and yields continued survival benefit. Copyright (C) 2000 Excerpta Medica Inc.
|
|
| 13. |
|
|
| 14. |
|
|
| 15. |
|
|
| 16. |
- Fossum, E., et al.
(författare)
-
The effect of losartan versus atenolol on cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in patients with hypertension taking aspirin: the Losartan Intervention for Endpoint Reduction in hypertension (LIFE) study
- 2005
-
Ingår i: J Am Coll Cardiol. - : Elsevier BV. - 0735-1097. ; 46:5, s. 770-5
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- OBJECTIVES: We conducted a subgroup analysis in the Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension (LIFE) study to determine whether aspirin interacted with the properties of losartan, an angiotensin-II receptor antagonist. BACKGROUND: Negative interactions between angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and aspirin have been reported. There are no data reported from clinical trials about possible interactions between angiotensin-II receptor antagonists and aspirin. METHODS: The LIFE study assigned 9,193 patients with hypertension and left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) to losartan- or atenolol-based therapy for a mean of 4.7 years, with 1,970 (21.4%) taking aspirin at baseline. The primary composite end point (CEP) included cardiovascular death, stroke, and myocardial infarction (MI). The present cohort was stratified by aspirin use at baseline. RESULTS: Blood pressures were reduced similarly in the losartan with aspirin (n = 1,004) and atenolol with aspirin (n = 966) groups. The CEP was reduced by 32% (95% confidence interval 0.55 to 0.86, p = 0.001) with losartan with aspirin compared to atenolol with aspirin, adjusted for Framingham risk score and LVH. The test for treatment versus aspirin interaction, excluding other covariates, was significant for the CEP (p = 0.016) and MI (p = 0.037). CONCLUSIONS: There was a statistical interaction between treatment and aspirin in the LIFE study, with significantly greater reductions for the CEP and MI with losartan in patients using aspirin than in patients not using aspirin at baseline. Further studies are needed to clarify whether this represents a pharmacologic interaction or a selection by aspirin use of patients more likely to respond to losartan treatment.
|
|
| 17. |
- Fyhrquist, F., et al.
(författare)
-
Pulse pressure and effects of losartan or atenolol in patients with hypertension and left ventricular hypertrophy
- 2005
-
Ingår i: Hypertension. - 1524-4563. ; 45:4, s. 580-5
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- In the Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension (LIFE) study, the primary composite end point of cardiovascular death, stroke, and myocardial infarction was reduced by losartan versus atenolol in patients with hypertension and left ventricular hypertrophy. The objective of this post hoc analysis was to determine the influence of pulse pressure on outcome. Patients were divided into quartiles of baseline pulse pressure. Cox regression, including baseline Framingham risk score as a covariate, was used to compare risk in the quartiles. In the atenolol group, there were significantly higher risks in the highest versus lowest quartile for the composite end point 28% (confidence interval [CI], 2% to 62%; P=0.035), stroke 84% (CI, 32% to 157%; P<0.001), and total mortality 41% (CI, 7% to 84%; P=0.013). Risk for myocardial infarction was 44% higher (CI, -5% to 120%; P=0.089). The risks in the losartan group also increased with increasing quartile, but were lower than in the atenolol group, and differences between the highest and lowest quartiles were not significant: composite end point 12% (CI, -13% to 44%; P>0.2), stroke -5% (CI, -34% to 37%; P>0.2), myocardial infarction 30% (CI, -13% to 94%; P>0.2), and total mortality 32% (CI, -1% to 76%; P=0.062). In patients with hypertension and left ventricular hypertrophy in the LIFE study, there were significantly higher risks, adjusted for the Framingham risk score, for the primary composite end point, stroke, and total mortality in the highest versus lowest quartile of pulse pressure with atenolol-based treatment. The risks in the losartan group also increased with increasing pulse pressure quartile, but were lower than those in the atenolol group, and were not significant.
|
|
| 18. |
|
|
| 19. |
|
|
| 20. |
- Hoieggen, A., et al.
(författare)
-
The impact of serum uric acid on cardiovascular outcomes in the LIFE study
- 2004
-
Ingår i: Kidney Int. - 0085-2538. ; 65:3, s. 1041-9
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: The Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension (LIFE) study demonstrated the superiority of a losartan-based regimen over atenolol-based regimen for reduction of cardiovascular (CV) morbidity and mortality. It has been suggested that the LIFE study results may be related to the effects of losartan on serum uric acid (SUA). SUA has been proposed as an independent risk factor for CV morbidity and death. METHODS: Cox regression analysis was used to assess relationship of SUA and treatment regimens with the LIFE primary composite outcome (CV death, fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction, fatal or nonfatal stroke). RESULTS: Baseline SUA was significantly associated with increased CV events [hazard ratio (HR) 1.024 (95% CI 1.017-1.032) per 10 micromol/L, P < 0.0001] in the entire study population. The association was significant in women [HR = 1.025 (1.013-1.037), P < 0.0001], but not in men [HR = 1.009 (0.998-1.019), P= 0.108]. After adjustment for Framingham risk score (FRS), SUA was no longer significant in the entire study population [HR = 1.006 (0.998-1.014), P= 0.122] or in men [HR = 1.006 (0.995-1.017), P= 0.291], but was significant in women [HR = 1.013 (1-1.025), P= 0.0457]. The baseline-to-end-of-study increase in SUA (standard deviation, SD) was greater (P < 0.0001) in atenolol-treated subjects (44.4 +/- 72.5 micromol/L) than in losartan-treated subjects (17.0 +/- 69.8 micromol/L). SUA as a time-varying covariate was strongly associated with events (P < 0.0001) in the entire population. The contribution of SUA to the treatment effect of losartan on the primary composite end point was 29% (14%-107%), P= 0.004. The association between time-varying SUA and increased CV risk tended to be stronger in women (P < 0.0001) than in men (P= 0.0658), although the gender-outcome interaction was not significant (P= 0.079). CONCLUSION: The increase in SUA over 4.8 years in the LIFE study was attenuated by losartan compared with atenolol treatment, appearing to explain 29% of the treatment effect on the primary composite end point. The association between SUA and events was stronger in women than in men with or without adjustment of FRS.
|
|
| 21. |
|
|
| 22. |
- Kjeldsen, S. E., et al.
(författare)
-
Targeting the renin-angiotensin system for the reduction of cardiovascular outcomes in hypertension: angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers
- 2005
-
Ingår i: Expert Opin Emerg Drugs. - 1744-7623. ; 10:4, s. 729-45
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Agents that counteract the negative impact of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) are effective antihypertensives and reduce the risk of developing Type 2 diabetes. Contrary to common perception, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors do not share the apparent benefit of angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) in reducing risk of cardiovascular-disease outcomes, particularly stroke, in randomised clinical trials. RAAS agents, especially ARBs, are well tolerated. Use of ARBs alone or in combination with other classes of antihypertensive agents to lower blood pressure and/or medications to control other conditions (e.g., insulin sensitivity) reduces risk of cardiovascular disease outcomes and Type 2 diabetes with excellent tolerability. Selected issues related to use of RAAS agents as antihypertensive therapies (e.g., Type 2 diabetes, global risk management, multiple drug therapy and coronary heart disease) are addressed.
|
|
| 23. |
|
|
| 24. |
|
|
| 25. |
|
|
