Ambrosius, Walter T.

Abstract Whether initiation of statins could increase survival free of dementia and disability in adults aged ≥75 years is unknown. PREVENTABLE, a double‐blind, placebo‐controlled randomized pragmatic clinical trial, will compare high‐intensity statin therapy (atorvastatin 40 mg) with placebo in 20,000 community‐dwelling adults aged ≥75 years without cardiovascular disease, disability, or dementia at baseline. Exclusion criteria include statin use in the prior year or for >5 years and inability to take a statin. Potential participants are identified using computable phenotypes derived from the electronic health record and local referrals from the community. Participants will undergo baseline cognitive testing, with physical testing and a blinded lipid panel if feasible. Cognitive testing and disability screening will be conducted annually. Multiple data sources will be queried for cardiovascular events, dementia, and disability; survival is site‐reported and supplemented by a National Death Index search. The primary outcome is survival free of new dementia or persisting disability. Co‐secondary outcomes are a composite of cardiovascular death, hospitalization for unstable angina or myocardial infarction, heart failure, stroke, or coronary revascularization; and a composite of mild cognitive impairment or dementia. Ancillary studies will offer mechanistic insights into the effects of statins on key outcomes. Biorepository samples are obtained and stored for future study. These results will inform the benefit of statins for increasing survival free of dementia and disability among older adults. This is a pioneering pragmatic study testing important questions with low participant burden to align with the needs of the growing population of older adults.

In the SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial), the number of strokes did not differ significantly by treatment group. However, stroke subtypes have heterogeneous causes that could respond differently to intensive blood pressure control. SPRINT participants (N=9361) were randomized to target systolic blood pressures of <120 mm Hg (intensive treatment) compared with <140 mm Hg (standard treatment). We compared incident hemorrhage, cardiac embolism, large- and small-vessel infarctions across treatment arms. Participants randomized to the intensive arm had mean systolic blood pressures of 121.4 mm Hg in the intensive arm (N=4678) and 136.2 mm Hg in the standard arm (N=4683) at one year. Sixty-nine strokes occurred in the intensive arm and 78 in the standard arm when SPRINT was stopped. The breakdown of stroke subtypes across treatment arms included hemorrhagic (intensive treatment, n=6, standard treatment, n=7) and ischemic stroke subtypes (large artery atherosclerosis: intensive treatment n=11, standard treatment, n=13; cardiac embolism: intensive treatment n=11, standard treatment n=15; small artery occlusion: intensive treatment n=8, standard treatment n=8; other ischemic stroke: intensive treatment n=3, standard treatment n=1). Fewer strokes occurred among participants without prior cardiovascular disease in the intensive (n=43) than the standard arm (n=61), but the difference did not reach predefined statistical significance level of 0.05 ( P =0.09). The interaction between baseline cardiovascular risk factor status and treatment arm on stroke risk did not reach significance ( P =0.05). Similar numbers of stroke subtypes occurred in the intensive BP control and standard control arms of SPRINT.

It remains uncertain whether intensive control of blood pressure (BP) results in a lower risk of atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients with hypertension. Using data from SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial), which enrolled participants with hypertension at increased risk of cardiovascular disease, we examined whether intensive BP lowering (target systolic BP [SBP] <120 mm Hg), compared with standard BP lowering (target SBP<140 mm Hg), results in a lower risk of AF. This analysis included 8022 participants (4003 randomized to the intensive arm and 4019 to standard BP arm) who were free of AF at the time of enrollment and with available baseline and follow-up electrocardiographic data. AF was ascertained from standard 12-lead electrocardiograms recorded at biannual study examinations and an exit visit. During up to 5.2 years of follow-up and a total of 28 322 person-years, 206 incident AF cases occurred; 88 in the intensive BP-lowering arm and 118 in the standard BP-lowering arm. Intensive BP lowering was associated with a 26% lower risk of developing new AF (hazard ratio, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.56–0.98]; P =0.037). This effect was consistent among prespecified subgroups of SPRINT participants stratified by age, sex, race, SBP tertiles, prior cardiovascular disease, and prior chronic kidney disease when interactions between treatment effect and these subgroups were assessed using Hommel adjusted P values. In conclusion, intensive treatment to a target of SBP <120 mm Hg in patients with hypertension at high risk of cardiovascular disease has the potential to reduce the risk of AF. Registration— URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT01206062.

Background and objectives eGFR and albuminuria primarily reflect glomerular function and injury, whereas tubule cell atrophy and interstitial fibrosis on kidney biopsy are important risk markers for CKD progression. Kidney tubule injury markers have primarily been studied in hospitalized AKI. Here, we examined the association between urinary kidney tubule injury markers at baseline with subsequent loss of kidney function in persons with nondiabetic CKD who participated in the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT). Design, setting, participants, & measurements Among 2428 SPRINT participants with CKD (eGFR<60 ml/min per 1.73 m 2 ) at baseline, we measured urine markers of tubule injury (IL-18, kidney injury molecule-1 [KIM-1], neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin [NGAL]), inflammation (monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 [MCP-1]), and repair (human cartilage glycoprotein-40 [YKL-40]). Cox proportional hazards models evaluated associations of these markers with the kidney composite outcome of 50% eGFR decline or ESKD requiring dialysis or kidney transplantation, and linear mixed models evaluated annualized change in eGFR. Results Mean participant age was 73±9 (SD) years, 60% were men, 66% were white, and mean baseline eGFR was 46±11 ml/min per 1.73 m 2 . There were 87 kidney composite outcome events during a median follow-up of 3.8 years. Relative to the respective lowest quartiles, the highest quartiles of urinary KIM-1 (hazard ratio, 2.84; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.31 to 6.17), MCP-1 (hazard ratio, 2.43; 95% CI, 1.13 to 5.23), and YKL-40 (hazard ratio, 1.95; 95% CI, 1.08 to 3.51) were associated with higher risk of the kidney composite outcome in fully adjusted models including baseline eGFR and urine albumin. In linear analysis, urinary IL-18 was the only marker associated with eGFR decline (−0.91 ml/min per 1.73 m 2 per year for highest versus lowest quartile; 95% CI, −1.44 to −0.38), a finding that was stronger in the standard arm of SPRINT. Conclusions Urine markers of tubule cell injury provide information about risk of subsequent loss of kidney function, beyond the eGFR and urine albumin.

Intensive systolic blood pressure (SBP) control improved outcomes in SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial). Our objective was to expand on reported findings by analysis of baseline characteristics, primary outcomes, adverse events, follow-up blood pressure, and medication use differences by baseline SBP (tertile 1 [T1], <132; tertile 2 [T2], 132–145; and tertile 3 [T3], >145 mm Hg). Participants with higher baseline SBP tertile were more often women and older, had higher cardiovascular risk, and lower utilization of antihypertensive medications, statins, and aspirin. Achieved SBP in both treatment arms was slightly higher in T2 and T3 compared with T1 and fewer in the T3 groups achieved SBP targets compared with T1 and T2 groups. The primary composite outcome with intensive versus standard SBP treatment was reduced by 30% in T1, 23% in T2, and 17% in T3 with no evidence of an interaction ( P =0.77). Event rates were lower in the intensive arm, and there was no evidence that this benefit differed by SBP tertile. There was no difference in the hazard for serious adverse events in any of the 3 tertiles. Medication utilization differed across the SBP tertiles at baseline with a lesser percentage of diuretics and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blocker drugs in the higher tertiles—a finding that reversed during the trial. The beneficial effects of intensive SBP lowering were not modified by the level of baseline SBP. Within the parameters of this population, these findings add support for clinicians to treat blood pressure to goal irrespective of baseline SBP.