Rastogi, Anjay

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.

AbstractBackgroundHypertension is a major risk factor for cardiovascular and cerebrovascular disease including stroke, small vessel disease, and dementia. The Systolic blood PRessure INTervention (SPRINT) randomized trial prospectively evaluated the effects of intensive systolic blood pressure (SBP) control (target SBP<120mmHg) versus standard control (SBP<140mmHg) on cardiovascular outcomes in individuals without baseline diabetes or stroke, and included cerebral blood flow (CBF) measurements. Previous studies with much smaller sample sizes and shorter duration suggested stable CBF in response to intensive treatment (SBP<125mmHg) [1], but long term effects are unknown. We evaluated the long‐term effects of intensive blood pressure treatment on CBF.MethodWhole brain CBF was measured at 3T using pseudocontinuous arterial spin labeled (ASL) perfusion MRI at baseline and after 3.9±0.3 years. Total white matter lesion (WML) load was measured from Fluid Attenuated Inversion Recovery T2 MRI. Data from 324 subjects with adequate ASL scan quality acquired from 6 sites were included.ResultDemographics and scanner specific CBF values are provided in Table 1. The intensive treatment group was older (p=0.01), but was otherwise similar to the standard group at baseline. There was a significant effect on the longitudinal CBF change (p=0.006) of the intensive treatment (5.7% increase) compared to the standard treatment (4.0% decrease, Fig 1). Secondary analysis showed a significant increase in age‐adjusted fractional CBF for the intensive treatment group (p<0.001) with no change (p=0.24) in the standard treatment group. Change in CBF was not associated with change in WML.ConclusionSustained intensive antihypertensive treatment does not reduce whole brain CBF, in fact it showed an increase in whole brain CBF relative to standard therapy. While improved CBF might contribute to the reduced WML progression observed in the intensive‐therapy group versus standard therapy in SPRINT[2], we did not observe a direct correlation between CBF changes and WML changes. References: (1) Croall et al. JAMA‐Neurol,2018; (2) Nasrallah et al., JAMA‐Neurol, 2019.

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.

In the past, the treatment of autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) has been limited to the management of its symptoms and complications. Recently, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved tolvaptan as the first drug treatment to slow kidney function decline in adults at risk of rapidly progressing ADPKD. Full prescribing information approved by the FDA provides helpful guidelines but does not address practical questions that are being raised by nephrologists, internists, and general practitioners taking care of patients with ADPKD, and by the patients themselves. In this review, we provide practical guidance and discuss steps that require consideration before and after prescribing tolvaptan to patients with ADPKD to ensure that this treatment is implemented safely and effectively. These steps include confirmation of diagnosis; identification of rapidly progressive disease; implementation of basic renal protective measures; counseling of patients on potential benefits and harms; exclusions to use; education of patients on aquaresis and its expected consequences; initiation, titration, and optimization of tolvaptan treatment; prevention of aquaresis-related complications; evaluation and management of liver enzyme elevations; and monitoring of treatment efficacy. Our recommendations are made on the basis of published evidence and our collective experiences during the randomized, clinical trials and open-label extension studies of tolvaptan in ADPKD.