Showing papers by "Henry R. Black published in 2003"

The Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure: the JNC 7 report.

Abstract: "The Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure" provides a new guideline for hypertension prevention and management. The following are the key messages(1) In persons older than 50 years, systolic blood pressure (BP) of more than 140 mm Hg is a much more important cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factor than diastolic BP; (2) The risk of CVD, beginning at 115/75 mm Hg, doubles with each increment of 20/10 mm Hg; individuals who are normotensive at 55 years of age have a 90% lifetime risk for developing hypertension; (3) Individuals with a systolic BP of 120 to 139 mm Hg or a diastolic BP of 80 to 89 mm Hg should be considered as prehypertensive and require health-promoting lifestyle modifications to prevent CVD; (4) Thiazide-type diuretics should be used in drug treatment for most patients with uncomplicated hypertension, either alone or combined with drugs from other classes. Certain high-risk conditions are compelling indications for the initial use of other antihypertensive drug classes (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin-receptor blockers, β-blockers, calcium channel blockers); (5) Most patients with hypertension will require 2 or more antihypertensive medications to achieve goal BP (<140/90 mm Hg, or <130/80 mm Hg for patients with diabetes or chronic kidney disease); (6) If BP is more than 20/10 mm Hg above goal BP, consideration should be given to initiating therapy with 2 agents, 1 of which usually should be a thiazide-type diuretic; and (7) The most effective therapy prescribed by the most careful clinician will control hypertension only if patients are motivated. Motivation improves when patients have positive experiences with and trust in the clinician. Empathy builds trust and is a potent motivator. Finally, in presenting these guidelines, the committee recognizes that the responsible physician's judgment remains paramount.

Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure

Abstract: The National High Blood Pressure Education Program presents the complete Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. Like its predecessors, the purpose is to provide an evidence-based approach to the prevention and management of hypertension. The key messages of this report are these: in those older than age 50, systolic blood pressure (BP) of greater than 140 mm Hg is a more important cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factor than diastolic BP; beginning at 115/75 mm Hg, CVD risk doubles for each increment of 20/10 mm Hg; those who are normotensive at 55 years of age will have a 90% lifetime risk of developing hypertension; prehypertensive individuals (systolic BP 120-139 mm Hg or diastolic BP 80-89 mm Hg) require health-promoting lifestyle modifications to prevent the progressive rise in blood pressure and CVD; for uncomplicated hypertension, thiazide diuretic should be used in drug treatment for most, either alone or combined with drugs from other classes; this report delineates specific high-risk conditions that are compelling indications for the use of other antihypertensive drug classes (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin-receptor blockers, beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers); two or more antihypertensive medications will be required to achieve goal BP (<140/90 mm Hg, or <130/80 mm Hg) for patients with diabetes and chronic kidney disease; for patients whose BP is more than 20 mm Hg above the systolic BP goal or more than 10 mm Hg above the diastolic BP goal, initiation of therapy using two agents, one of which usually will be a thiazide diuretic, should be considered; regardless of therapy or care, hypertension will be controlled only if patients are motivated to stay on their treatment plan. Positive experiences, trust in the clinician, and empathy improve patient motivation and satisfaction. This report serves as a guide, and the committee continues to recognize that the responsible physician's judgment remains paramount.

The seventh report of the joint National Committee on prevention, detection, evaluation and treatment of high blood pressure. The JNC 7 report

Abstract: The Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure" provides a new guideline for hypertension prevention and management. The following are the key messages(1) In persons older than 50 years, systolic blood pressure (BP) of more than 140 mm Hg is a much more important cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factor than diastolic BP; (2) The risk of CVD, beginning at 115/75 mm Hg, doubles with each increment of 20/10 mm Hg; individuals who are normotensive at 55 years of age have a 90% lifetime risk for developing hypertension; (3) Individuals with a systolic BP of 120 to 139 mm Hg or a diastolic BP of 80 to 89 mm Hg should be considered as prehypertensive and require health-promoting lifestyle modifications to prevent CVD; (4) Thiazide-type diuretics should be used in drug treatment for most patients with uncomplicated hypertension, either alone or combined with drugs from other classes. Certain high-risk conditions are compelling indications for the initial use of other antihypertensive drug classes (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin-receptor blockers, beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers); (5) Most patients with hypertension will require 2 or more antihypertensive medications to achieve goal BP (<140/90 mm Hg, or <130/80 mm Hg for patients with diabetes or chronic kidney disease); (6) If BP is more than 20/10 mm Hg above goal BP, consideration should be given to initiating therapy with 2 agents, 1 of which usually should be a thiazide-type diuretic; and (7) The most effective therapy prescribed by the most careful clinician will control hypertension only if patients are motivated. Motivation improves when patients have positive experiences with and trust in the clinician. Empathy builds trust and is a potent motivator. Finally, in presenting these guidelines, the committee recognizes that the responsible physician's judgment remains paramount.

The Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure

Abstract: Aram V. Chobanian, MDGeorge L. Bakris, MDHenry R. Black, MDWilliam C. Cushman, MDLee A. Green, MD, MPHJoseph L. Izzo, Jr, MDDaniel W. Jones, MDBarry J. Materson, MD, MBASuzanne Oparil, MDJackson T. Wright, Jr, MD, PhDEdward J. Roccella, PhD, MPHand the National High BloodPressure Education ProgramCoordinating Committee

Estrogen plus progestin and the risk of coronary heart disease

Abstract: Background Recent randomized clinical trials have suggested that estrogen plus progestin does not confer cardiac protection and may increase the risk of coronary heart disease (CHD). In this report, we provide the final results with regard to estrogen plus progestin and CHD from the Women's Health Initiative (WHI). Methods The WHI included a randomized primary-prevention trial of estrogen plus progestin in 16,608 postmenopausal women who were 50 to 79 years of age at base line. Participants were randomly assigned to receive conjugated equine estrogens (0.625 mg per day) plus medroxyprogesterone acetate (2.5 mg per day) or placebo. The primary efficacy outcome of the trial was CHD (nonfatal myocardial infarction or death due to CHD). Results After a mean follow-up of 5.2 years (planned duration, 8.5 years), the data and safety monitoring board recommended terminating the estrogen-plus-progestin trial because the overall risks exceeded the benefits. Combined hormone therapy was associated with a hazard ratio for CHD of 1.24 (nominal 95 percent confidence interval, 1.00 to 1.54; 95 percent confidence interval after adjustment for sequential monitoring, 0.97 to 1.60). The elevation in risk was most apparent at one year (hazard ratio, 1.81 [95 percent confidence interval, 1.09 to 3.01]). Although higher base-line levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol were associated with an excess risk of CHD among women who received hormone therapy, higher base-line levels of C-reactive protein, other biomarkers, and other clinical characteristics did not significantly modify the treatment-related risk of CHD. Conclusions Estrogen plus progestin does not confer cardiac protection and may increase the risk of CHD among generally healthy postmenopausal women, especially during the first year after the initiation of hormone use. This treatment should not be prescribed for the prevention of cardiovascular disease.

Effect of estrogen plus progestin on stroke in postmenopausal women: the Women's Health Initiative: a randomized trial.

Abstract: ContextThe Women's Health Initiative (WHI) trial of estrogen plus progestin was stopped early because of adverse effects, including an increased risk of stroke in the estrogen plus progestin group.ObjectiveTo assess the effect of estrogen plus progestin on ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke and in subgroups, and to determine whether the effect of estrogen plus progestin was modified by baseline levels of blood biomarkers.DesignMulticenter double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial involving 16 608 women aged 50 through 79 years with an average follow-up of 5.6 years. Baseline levels of blood-based markers of inflammation, thrombosis, and lipid levels were measured in the first 140 centrally confirmed stroke cases and 513 controls.InterventionsParticipants received 0.625 mg/d of conjugated equine estrogen plus 2.5 mg/d of medroxyprogesterone acetate (n = 8506) or placebo (n = 8102).Main Outcome MeasuresOverall strokes and stroke subtype and severity were centrally adjudicated by stroke neurologists.ResultsOne hundred fifty-one patients (1.8%) in the estrogen plus progestin and 107 (1.3%) in the placebo groups had strokes. Overall 79.8% of strokes were ischemic. For combined ischemic and hemorrhagic strokes, the intention-to-treat hazard ratio (HR) for estrogen plus progestin vs placebo was 1.31 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02-1.68); with adjustment for adherence, the HR was 1.50 (95% CI, 1.08-2.08). The HR for ischemic stroke was 1.44 (95% CI, 1.09-1.90) and for hemorrhagic stroke, 0.82 (95% CI, 0.43-1.56). Point estimates of the HRs indicate that excess risk of all stroke was apparent in all age groups, in all categories of baseline stroke risk, and in women with and without hypertension, prior history of cardiovascular disease, use of hormones, statins, or aspirin. Other risk factors for stroke, including smoking, blood pressure, diabetes, lower use of vitamin C supplements, blood-based biomarkers of inflammation, higher white blood cell count, and higher hematocrit levels did not modify the effect of estrogen plus progestin on stroke risk.ConclusionsEstrogen plus progestin increases the risk of ischemic stroke in generally healthy postmenopausal women. Excess risk for all strokes attributed to estrogen plus progestin appeared to be present in all subgroups of women examined.

Exercise Capacity and the Risk of Death in Women The St James Women Take Heart Project

Abstract: Background— Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death among women and accounts for more than half of their deaths. Women have been underrepresented in most studies of cardiovascular disease. Reduced physical fitness has been shown to increase the risk of death in men. Exercise capacity measured by exercise stress test is an objective measure of physical fitness. The hypothesis that reduced exercise capacity is associated with an increased risk of death was investigated in a cohort of 5721 asymptomatic women who underwent baseline examinations in 1992. Methods and Results— Information collected at baseline included medical and family history, demographic characteristics, physical examination, and symptom-limited stress ECG, using the Bruce protocol. Exercise capacity was measured in metabolic equivalents (MET). Nonfasting blood was analyzed at baseline. A National Death Index search was performed to identify all-cause death and date of death up to the end of 2000. The mean age of participants at...

Principal results of the Controlled Onset Verapamil Investigation of Cardiovascular End Points (CONVINCE) trial.

Abstract: the HR was 1.15 (95% CI, 0.90-1.48); for fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction, 0.82 (95% CI, 0.65-1.03); and for cardiovascular disease–related death, 1.09 (95% CI, 0.87-1.37). The HR was 1.05 (95% CI, 0.95-1.16) for any prespecified cardiovascular disease–related event and 1.08 (95% CI, 0.93-1.26) for all-cause mortality. Nonstroke hemorrhage was more common with participants in the COER-verapamil group (n=118) compared with the atenolol or hydrochlorothiazide group (n=79) (HR, 1.54 [95% CI, 1.16-2.04]; P=.003). More cardiovascular disease–related events occurred between 6 AM and noon in both the COER verapamil (99/277) and atenolol or hydrochlorothiazide (88/274) groups; HR, 1.15 (95% CI, 0.86-1.53). Conclusions The CONVINCE trial did not demonstrate equivalence of a COER verapamil–based antihypertensive regimen compared with a regimen beginning with a diuretic or -blocker. When considered in the context of other trials of calcium antagonists, these data indicate that the effectiveness of calcium-channel therapy in reducing cardiovascular disease is similar but not better than diuretic or -blocker treatment. JAMA. 2003;289:2073-2082 www.jama.com

Effect of estrogen plus progestin on stroke in postmenopausal women: The Women's Health initiative: A randomized trial

Abstract: The increased risk of stroke observed in the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) trial in connection with combined estrogen/progestin hormone therapy was one reason for ending the study early. The present authors analyzed theeffects of combined hormone therapy (CHT) on ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke in the 16,608 postmenopausal women, 50 to 79 years of age, who participated in the multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled WHI trial and were followed up for 5.6 years on average. All women were followed for at least 3.7 years. The women were randomly assigned to receive either CHT (0.625 mg conjugated equine estrogen plus 2.5 mg medroxyprogesterone acetate) or a placebo each day. The rate of stroke was 1.8% in women given CHT and 1.3% in the placebo group. Four of 5 strokes were ischemic. Hemorrhagic stroke accounted for 11.9% of events in the CHT group and 18.6% in the placebo group. There were 23 deaths resulting from stroke, 12 in the CHT group and 11 in placebo recipients. The combined hazard ratio (hour) for all subtypes of stroke combined was 1.31 (nominal 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02-1.68). Women who had never taken hormones had a 37% excess risk of stroke when given CHT, for a hazard ratio of 1.37 (95% CI, 1.03-1.82). On multivariate analysis, controlling for race/ethnicity and baseline systolic blood pressure did not influence stroke risk for women taking CHT. An excess risk was noted in all age groups; in women with all levels of baseline stroke risk; and in participants with and without hypertension, a history of cardiovascular disease, and statin or aspirin treatment. A number or risk factors for stroke failed to modify the effect of CHT on stroke risk. They included smoking, diabetes, biomarkers of inflammation, and a higher white blood cell count or hematocrit. These findings indicate that, independently of blood pressure, estrogen/progestin therapy augments the risk of stroke in postmenopausal women who are in good general health. Considering the increased risk of invasive breast cancer, myocardial infarction, and venous thrombosis in women participating in the WHI trial, the findings reinforce the view that the overall risk from CHT outweighs its possible benefits.

Principal results of the controlled onset verapamil investigation of cardiovascular end points (CONVINCE) trial

Abstract: CONTEXT Hypertensive patients are often given a calcium antagonist to reduce cardiovascular disease risk, but the benefit compared with other drug classes is controversial. OBJECTIVE To determine whether initial therapy with controlled-onset extended-release (COER) verapamil is equivalent to a physician's choice of atenolol or hydrochlorothiazide in preventing cardiovascular disease. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Double-blind, randomized clinical trial conducted at 661 centers in 15 countries. A total of 16 602 participants diagnosed as having hypertension and who had 1 or more additional risk factors for cardiovascular disease were enrolled between September 1996 and December 1998 and followed up until December 31, 2000. After a mean of 3 years of follow-up, the sponsor closed the study before unblinding the results. INTERVENTION Initially, 8241 participants received 180 mg of COER verapamil and 8361 received either 50 mg of atenolol or 12.5 mg of hydrochlorothiazide. Other drugs (eg, diuretic, beta-blocker, or an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor) could be added in specified sequence if needed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES First occurrence of stroke, myocardial infarction, or cardiovascular disease-related death. RESULTS Systolic and diastolic blood pressure were reduced by 13.6 mm Hg and 7.8 mm Hg for participants assigned to the COER verapamil group and by 13.5 and 7.1 mm Hg for partcipants assigned to the atenolol or hydrochlorothiazide group. There were 364 primary cardiovascular disease-related events that occurred in the COER verapamil group vs 365 in atenolol or hydrochlorothiazide group (hazard ratio [HR], 1.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.88-1.18; P =.77). For fatal or nonfatal stroke, the HR was 1.15 (95% CI, 0.90-1.48); for fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction, 0.82 (95% CI, 0.65-1.03); and for cardiovascular disease-related death, 1.09 (95% CI, 0.87-1.37). The HR was 1.05 (95% CI, 0.95-1.16) for any prespecified cardiovascular disease-related event and 1.08 (95% CI, 0.93-1.26) for all-cause mortality. Nonstroke hemorrhage was more common with participants in the COER-verapamil group (n = 118) compared with the atenolol or hydrochlorothiazide group (n = 79) (HR, 1.54 [95% CI, 1.16-2.04]; P =.003). More cardiovascular disease-related events occurred between 6 AM and noon in both the COER verapamil (99/277) and atenolol or hydrochlorothiazide (88/274) groups; HR, 1.15 (95% CI, 0.86-1.53). CONCLUSIONS The CONVINCE trial did not demonstrate equivalence of a COER verapamil-based antihypertensive regimen compared with a regimen beginning with a diuretic or beta-blocker. When considered in the context of other trials of calcium antagonists, these data indicate that the effectiveness of calcium-channel therapy in reducing cardiovascular disease is similar but not better than diuretic or beta-blocker treatment.

Doxazosin as combination therapy for patients with stage 1 and stage 2 hypertension.

Abstract: The purpose of this paper is to review the role of doxazosin, a long-acting alpha(1)-blocker, as a component of combination therapy for patients with stage 1 and stage 2 hypertension and for patients with concomitant hypertension and hyperlipidemia or glucose intolerance. Recent studies that evaluated doxazosin as combination therapy in the treatment of patients with inadequately controlled hypertension and patients with concomitant hypertension and other disorders were reviewed. Data extraction was based on the tolerability and efficacy data of doxazosin in patients with hypertension. Compared with placebo, doxazosin combination therapy leads to significant improvements in sitting and standing blood pressure. Doxazosin is well tolerated, with only minor adverse effects (e.g., headache, dizziness) as the most commonly reported treatment-related complications. The studies described demonstrate that doxazosin is effective as combination therapy for patients with stage 1 and stage 2 hypertension. The positive effects of doxazosin on serum lipids make combination therapy with doxazosin an attractive treatment option for patients who have concomitant hyperlipidemia or glucose intolerance.

Management of Older Hypertensive Patients: Is There a Difference in Approach?

Abstract: Hypertension is the most common reason Americans visit a physician. Recent analyses from the Framingham Heart Study and others have shown that there will be 70 million hypertensive Americans by the year 2020 and that the overwhelming majority of hypertensives will be 65 years of age or older (what we used to call elderly). The lifetime risk of Americans who live to age 85 years of becoming hypertensive is approximately 90% for both men and women. These individuals, even if they develop an elevated blood pressure late in life, are at significantly increased risk of the many medical complications attributable to hypertension (coronary artery disease, strokes, heart failure, chronic renal disease, and more). Older hypertensives are more likely to have an elevated systolic blood pressure and a low diastolic blood pressure, both of which are related to a loss of article compliance and have an increase in left ventricular mass and a decrease in peripheral resistance. We now have a substantial body of evidence from well done clinical trials that older hypertensives benefit as much or more than younger patients from antihypertensive therapy, so there is no longer any justification for withholding medication from any hypertensive patient whose competing risk or other medical problems are not a contraindication to treatment. These same studies, and practice-based analyses, have shown that the major barrier to reaching blood pressure goal is our failure to reduce systolic blood pressure to <140 mm Hg in most patients and to <130 mm Hg in diabetics and those with renal failure. The basis for all antihypertensive therapy, especially in older people, is thiazide diuretics with either angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, beta blockers, or calcium entry blockers as appropriate add-on treatment. The choice of the second agent depends on other factors, such as comorbidity, lifestyle, and affordability. We must be more aggressive in getting the message out that older hypertensives benefit from treatment and we must overcome the clinical inertia that seems to be a factor in the decision of many physicians not to treat an older patient. No older person should suffer a preventable, life-threatening event or become confined to a wheel chair if attention to lifestyle issues and a few pills a day could avoid that outcome.

Hypertension in Women: The Women Take Heart Project

Abstract: Hypertension is an important, modifiable risk for cardiovascular disease. The Women Take Heart study, a prospective, community-based cohort study of risk factors for heart disease, provides an opportunity to examine prevalence, awareness, and control of hypertension specifically in women. In 1992, 5932 women, age 35 and older (mean age, 52.9; 86% white, 9% African American, 5% other) and free of active heart disease symptoms for 3 months, were recruited through Chicago area public announcements, and their baseline examination data analyzed. Overall, 47.6% were hypertensive (systolic blood pressure 140 mm Hg or diastolic blood pressure 90 mm Hg, or self-report). Only 17.3% reported being hypertensive; in 63.2% of all hypertensive women, the hypertension was undetected or unacknowledged. Blood pressure was controlled to <140/90 mm Hg in 24.1% of self-reported hypertensives. Results from this study and national surveys indicate that hypertension detection and control remain major public health challenges in preventing cardiovascular disease in older women.