Transcript Document
VBWG Growth in heart disease, 2000–2050 Deaths Population Prevalence 35.0 30.0 25.0 Growth by decade (%) 20.0 15.0 10.0 5.0 0.0 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 Year Foot DK et al. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2000;35:1067-81. VBWG Burden of adult hypertension Comparison of NHANES data 1988–1994 and 1999–2000 80 Hypertensive* P < 0.001 70 History of hypertension** 65.2 60 Hypertensive 50 adults (millions) 40 50.0 30 20 10 0 42.3 7.7 59.2 6.0 1988–1994 1999–2000 *US adults with SBP ≥140 mm Hg, DBP ≥90 mm Hg, or using antihypertensive medication (conventional definition) **US adults not classified by conventional definition but told at least twice by a healthcare professional that they had high BP Fields LE et al. Hypertension. 2004;44:398-404. CAMELOT: Optimal BP control in CAD patients VBWG Study design: Randomized, double-blind, multicenter, 24-month trial in patients with angiographically documented CAD (N = 1991) Treatment: Amlodipine (10 mg), enalapril (20 mg), or placebo added to background therapy with -blockers and/or diuretics Primary outcome: Incidence of CV events for amlodipine vs placebo IVUS substudy: Measurement of atherosclerosis progression using IVUS (n = 274) Outcome: Change in percent atheroma volume Nissen SE et al. JAMA. 2004;292:2217-26. CAMELOT: Baseline characteristics and concomitant medications VBWG Placebo (n = 655) Amlodipine (n = 663) Enalapril (n = 673) P Age, mean (y) 57.2 57.3 58.5 0.02 Men (%) 73.0 76.3 71.9 0.16 White race (%) 89.0 89.4 89.3 0.97 Body mass index, mean (kg/m2) 29.7 29.9 29.7 0.72 LDL-C, mean (mg/dL) 100 104 101 0.04 Systolic 128.9 129.5 128.9 0.76 Diastolic 77.6 77.7 77.2 0.54 Statin (%) 84.3 83.1 81.7 0.46 Diuretic (%) 33.4 32.1 26.8 0.02 -Blocker (%) 78.8 74.2 74.7 0.11 Aspirin (%) 95.4 94.4 94.7 0.69 Blood pressure, mean (mm Hg) Concomitant medications Nissen SE et al. JAMA. 2004;292:2217-26. CAMELOT: Similar BP reductions from baseline with amlodipine and enalapril Placebo Amlodipine Enalapril Systolic BP 132 VBWG Diastolic BP 80 130 78 128 P < 0.001 mm Hg 126 P < 0.001 76 124 122 74 120 118 72 0 1 3 6 9 12 Months 15 18 21 24 0 1 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 Months Nissen SE et al. JAMA. 2004;292:2217-26. VBWG CAMELOT: 31% Reduction in primary outcome with amlodipine compared to standard care 0.25 Placebo Amlodipine 31% Relative risk reduction P = 0.003 0.20 Cumulative CV events (proportion) Enalapril 0.15 0.10 0.05 0 0 6 12 Months 18 24 Placebo 655 588 558 525 488 Enalapril 673 608 572 553 529 Amlodipine 663 623 599 574 535 No. at risk Primary outcome = incidence of CV events Nissen SE et al. JAMA. 2004;292:2217-26. VBWG CAMELOT: Reduction in primary outcome with amlodipine, by subgroup Favors amlodipine Favors placebo RRR (%) P 33.9 4.1 0.002 0.91 Age, y <65 ≥65 22.9 49.3 0.07 0.006 Sex Male Female 26.8 42.8 0.03 0.03 Systolic BP ≤Mean >Mean 32.2 29.6 0.03 0.04 All patients 30.9 0.003 Lipid-lowering therapy With statin Without statin 0.25 0.5 0.75 1.0 1.25 1.5 Hazard ratio (95% CI) Box size indicates proportion of total study population (ie, smaller boxes have fewer patients relative to other subgroups). Nissen SE et al. JAMA. 2004;292:2217-26. VBWG CAMELOT: Slowed progression of atheroma with amlodipine and enalapril Atheroma volume measured using IVUS at baseline and 24 months (n = 274) All patients Baseline systolic BP > mean P = 0.02 † 2.5 2.3 2.0 Change in percent atheroma volume vs baseline (%) 1.5 * 1.3 1.0 0.8 0.5 0.0 *P = 0.001 vs baseline †P < 0.001 vs baseline 0.8 0.5 0.2 Placebo (n = 95) Enalapril Amlodipine (n = 88) (n = 91) Placebo Enalapril Amlodipine (n = 49) (n = 40) (n = 47) Nissen SE et al. JAMA. 2004;292:2217-26. VBWG CAMELOT: Continuous relationship between rate of atheroma progression and change in SBP LOWESS plot for combined amlodipine and enalapril drug-treatment groups 2.5 95% CI 2.0 Progression 1.5 Amlodipine and enalapril groups 1.0 Change in percent atheroma volume (%) 0.5 95% CI 0 –0.5 Regression –1.0 –1.5 –2.0 –40 –30 –20 –10 0 10 20 Change in systolic BP (mm Hg) LOWESS = locally weighted scatterplot smoothing Nissen SE et al. JAMA. 2004;292:2217-26. VBWG INVEST: Similar BP control with CAS and NCAS in hypertensive CAD patients 180 170 Calcium antagonist strategy (CAS) Noncalcium antagonist strategy (NCAS) 160 Systolic BP 150 (mm Hg) 140 130 120 110 100 Diastolic BP 90 (mm Hg) 80 70 60 0 6 12 18 No. of patients 24 Months 30 36 42 48 CAS 11267 8558 8639 7758 7842 5721 3659 1458 796 NCAS 11309 8573 8694 7710 7850 5834 3679 1473 817 Pepine CJ et al. JAMA. 2003;290:2805-15. VBWG INVEST: Similar reduction in primary outcome with CAS and NCAS in CAD patients 25 Noncalcium antagonist strategy (NCAS) Calcium antagonist strategy (CAS) 20 15 P = 0.057 Cumulative events 10 (%) 5 0 0 6 12 18 No. at risk 24 30 Months 36 42 48 54 60 CAS 11,267 10,921 10,716 10,512 10,008 6612 3738 1568 974 393 35 NCAS 11,309 10,991 10,785 10,536 10,048 6604 3706 1563 960 390 33 Primary outcome = first occurrence of death, nonfatal MI, or nonfatal stroke Pepine CJ et al. JAMA. 2003;290:2805-15. VBWG CAMELOT: Conclusions • In CAD patients with “normal” BP, amlodipine demonstrated a significant reduction in ischemia-related CV events. • IVUS substudy showed that progression of coronary atherosclerosis may be minimized or slowed when BP is further reduced below the so-called normal level. • Results suggest optimal BP range for CAD patients may be substantially lower than indicated by current guidelines. Nissen SE et al. JAMA. 2004;292:2217-26.