4.7 Article

Monitoring Initial Response to Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor-Based Regimens An Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis From Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trials

Journal

HYPERTENSION
Volume 56, Issue 3, Pages 533-U429

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.110.152421

Keywords

blood pressure; angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors; treatment outcome; models; statistical; reproducibility of results; cardiovascular disease; stroke

Funding

  1. Australian National Health and Medical Research Council [457212, 402764, 358395]
  2. Servier, France
  3. National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia
  4. Health Research Council of New Zealand
  5. Dutch Kidney Foundation
  6. Netherlands Heart Foundation
  7. Bristol- Myers Squibb
  8. Hoechst AG
  9. Abbott GmbH Co.
  10. Medical Research Council of Canada
  11. Merck Frosst Canada Inc.
  12. Pfizer
  13. Roche
  14. Takeda
  15. Amgen
  16. AstraZeneca
  17. GlaxoSmithKline
  18. Sanofi Aventis
  19. Tanabe
  20. Johnson Johnson
  21. Merck Schring Plough
  22. United Healthcare Group
  23. Novartis CV Therapeutics
  24. Daiichi-Sankyo
  25. Tanabe-Mistubishi
  26. CV Therapeutics
  27. Servier Laboratories
  28. Astra Zeneca
  29. Boehringer Ingelheim

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Most clinicians monitor blood pressure to estimate a patient's response to blood pressure-lowering therapy. However, the apparent change may not actually reflect the effect of the treatment, because a person's blood pressure varies considerably even without the administration of drug therapy. We estimated random background within-person variation, apparent between-person variation, and true between-person variation in blood pressure response to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors after 3 months. We used meta-analytic mixed models to analyze individual patient data from 28 281 participants in 7 randomized, controlled trials from the Blood Pressure Lowering Trialists Collaboration. The apparent between-person variation in response was large, with SDs for change in systolic blood pressure/diastolic blood pressure of 15.2/8.5 mm Hg. Within-person variation was also large, with SDs for change in systolic blood pressure/diastolic blood pressure of 14.9/8.45 mm Hg. The true between-person variation in response was small, with SDs for change in systolic blood pressure/diastolic blood pressure of 2.6/1.0 mm Hg. The proportion of the apparent between-person variation in response that was attributed to true between-person variation was only 3% for systolic blood pressure and 1% for diastolic blood pressure. In conclusion, most of the apparent variation in response is not because of true variation but is a consequence of background within-person fluctuation in day-to-day blood pressure levels. Instead of monitoring an individual's blood pressure response, a better approach may be to simply assume the mean treatment effect. (Hypertension. 2010; 56: 533-539.)

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available