1 / 54

ALLHAT and ALLHAT-LLT

A comprehensive analysis of the ALLHAT and ALLHAT-LLT trials, exploring the unexpected success of diuretics in high-risk hypertensive patients and the discrepancies with ACE inhibitors. This study investigates the possible factors contributing to these findings and discusses the implications for hypertension treatment strategies.

rstecker
Download Presentation

ALLHAT and ALLHAT-LLT

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ALLHAT and ALLHAT-LLT Valentin Fuster MD Director, Cardiovascular Institute Mount Sinai Medical Center New York, NY Christopher Cannon MD Cardiologist Brigham and Women's Hospital Boston, MA James Ferguson MD Associate Director, Cardiology St Luke's Episcopal Hospital and Texas Heart Institute Houston, TX Michael Weber MD Professor of Medicine SUNY Downstate College of Medicine Brooklyn, NY

  2. ALLHAT and ALLHAT-LLT Special Guest Commentator Thomas G Pickering MD, PhD Director, Integrative and Behavioral Cardiovascular Health Program And Hypertension Program Mount Sinai Medical Center New York, NY

  3. Randomized designof ALLHAT Amlodipine Chlorthalidone Doxazosin Lisinopril High-risk hypertensive patients Consent / Randomize (42 418) Eligible for lipid-lowering Not eligible for lipid-lowering Consent / Randomize (10 355) Pravastatin Usualcare Follow for CHD and other outcomes until death or end of study (up to 8 yrs).

  4. ALLHAT: Trial design • 33 357 patients age >55 with hypertension and 1 additional risk factor • Randomized to: • chlorthalidone (12.5 mg to 25 mg/day, n=15 255) • amlodipine (2.5 mg to 10 mg/day, n=9048) • lisinopril (10 mg to 40 mg/day, n=9054) • Primary end point: fatal CHD or nonfatal MI

  5. ALLHAT: Primary end point JAMA 2002; 288:2981-2997

  6. Secondary outcomes: Amlodipine vs chlorthalidone JAMA 2002; 288:2981-2997

  7. Summary Why did diuretics do so well in this population, when we've all been talking about how great the ACE inhibitors are? How do we unravel this surprising finding? Fuster

  8. A negative study "I was frustrated by the authors immediately portraying this paper in public policy and economic terms." "I am by no means convinced that this study is anything other than what you might normally call a negative study." "I'm not convinced the discrepancies between the drugs are as obviously apparent as claimed." Weber

  9. ALLHAT: Blood pressure JAMA 2002; 288:2981-2997

  10. Heart-failure protection "I was astonished with the heart-failure result." It seems an ACE inhibitor would be a superior protector against heart failure Could the chlorthalidone be masking the symptoms of heart failure and resulting in missed diagnoses? Weber

  11. Blood-pressure effect It is possible the blood-pressure difference explains some, if not most, of the final results There was a consistent difference throughout the trial ACE inhibitors have been shown to be more effective in younger patients, and the age of the trial participants may be a factor in ALLHAT Pickering

  12. Blood-pressure difference Can the blood pressure have had significant impact when the difference was so small? Blood-pressure difference compared with chlorthalidone Amlodipine: +0.8 mm Hg Lisinopril: +2.0 mm Hg Fuster

  13. Stroke risk: Lisinopril vs chlorthalidone JAMA 2002; 288:2981-2997

  14. ALLHAT: Masking heart failure It is possible the diuretics were masking some of the clinical manifestations of heart failure "I don't think that [ALLHAT] means that we should throw out all the new forms of therapy and go back to treating everybody with diuretics." Ferguson

  15. ALLHAT: Understanding the biology "Is it the blood-pressure control or is it the specific agents?" We have confounding results and don't have the absolute answer right now We haven't had a chance to examine all the different subgroups yet Ferguson

  16. ALLHAT: Fundamental principles "We've been going along fat, dumb, and happy thinking we've got all these great new forms of therapy and they're so much better than what we had before. And now we've got to reexamine that." We need to apply the principles of risk stratification to the world of hypertension Ferguson

  17. ALLHAT: A surprise "I think we were all somewhat surprised." Consensus of meta-analyses was CCBs are better at preventing stroke, while ACE inhibitors are better at preventing coronary events when compared to standard diuretic and beta-blocker treatment Pickering

  18. ALLHAT: Elderly population ALLHAT had a relatively elderly population: mean age: 67 years 57% of patients >65 We don't have as many comparative trials in the elderly Pickering

  19. ALLHAT: Heart failure Increased heart failure was a factor involved in stopping the doxazosin arm of ALLHAT "It may be that the diuretic tends to reduce sodium retention whereas some of these agents may be associated with sodium retention if not given in combination with a diuretic." Pickering

  20. HOPE: Primary end points N Engl J Med 2000; 342(3):145-153

  21. African American population There seems to be an inconsistency between HOPE and ALLHAT concerning ACE inhibitors ALLHAT was designed to have a large black population (35%) in the study ACE inhibitors may be less effective in this population Weber

  22. Overinterpreting the findings? 30% to 40% of the benefit seen in HOPE may come from lowering blood pressure Can argue that in the white cohort in ALLHAT, ACE inhibitors may have reduced coronary events 5% to 8% once blood pressure is factored in "I am rather concerned that the authors of the study [ALLHAT]have perhaps overinterpreted their own findings" Weber

  23. Biochemical changes Past studies with diuretics suggested that one of the problems with the drug was an effect on elements like fasting glucose, potassium, etc These may increase risk for people with hypertension Does ALLHAT tell us we should stop worrying so much about these things? Fuster

  24. New-onset diabetes In SHEP, diabetics did well on chlorthalidone Beta blockers may help prevent new-onset diabetes ACE inhibitors have also been linked to prevention of new-onset diabetes Pickering

  25. ALLHAT: Fasting glucose levels JAMA 2002; 288:2981-2997

  26. Three patients Which would be the first drug of choice? Patient 1: Age 65; BP 170/100; no evidence of atherosclerotic disease Patient 2: Age 65; BP 170/100; previous MI, good LVF Patient 3: Age 65; BP 170/100; previous stroke

  27. First patient Patient 1: Age 65; BP 170/100; no evidence of atherosclerotic disease Patient 2: Age 65; BP 170/100; previous MI, good LVF Patient 3: Age 65; BP 170/100; previous stroke

  28. First patient: First drug Weber: Start with calcium channel blocker, maybe a diuretic in a black patient Pickering: Diuretic Ferguson: Diuretic Cannon: Diuretic, maybe a generic ACE inhibitor Fuster: ACE inhibitor in the past–not sure now

  29. Digesting ALLHAT We must teach our colleagues that the last word is not yet in on all this "This is a very complicated story, ALLHAT, we're going to have to take a few months to fully digest it." Weber

  30. Second patient Patient 1: Age 65; BP 170/100; no evidence of atherosclerotic disease Patient 2: Age 65; BP 170/100; previous MI, good LVF Patient 3: Age 65; BP 170/100; previous stroke

  31. Second patient: First drug Weber: ACE inhibitor Pickering: Beta blocker Ferguson: ACE inhibitor Cannon: Beta blocker, followed by ACE inhibitor Fuster: ACE inhibitor

  32. Third patient Patient 1: Age 65; BP 170/100; no evidence of atherosclerotic disease Patient 2: Age 65; BP 170/100; previous MI, good LVF Patient 3: Age 65; BP 170/100; previous stroke

  33. Third patient: First drug According to PROGRESS study, you should use a combination of ACE inhibitor and a diuretic Likely to start with diuretic for older patient and ACE inhibitor for younger, but will end up with both Pickering

  34. Third patient: First drug This patient is a quandary right now, having both manifest atherosclerotic disease and hypertension I am still biased toward ACE inhibitors and will make that the first line of therapy Cannot lose sight of the underlying atherosclerotic disease Ferguson

  35. Third patient: First drug I want to finish up with both ACE inhibitor and a diuretic (PROGRESS trial) so it doesn't matter which I start with "Someone who comes in with 170 systolic, you aren't going to get him down to 140 with 1 drug anyway." We all seem likely to end up with an ACE inhibitor and a diuretic as a combination Weber

  36. Third patient: First drug Start with an ACE inhibitor for the vascular disease risk and then titrate to blood pressure with diuretic as a follow-up drug Cannon

  37. Drug choice based on patient • An ACE inhibitor followed by a diuretic • Seems that for a patient age 65 with • No manifestation of disease–start with a diuretic • CAD with good VF–ACE inhibitor • After a stroke–combination of ACE inhibitor and diuretic Fuster

  38. Implications of ALLHAT ALLHAT suggested that all of these drugs are similar in their effect "Tragically, ALLHAT never examined the sorts of combinations that we use." ALLHAT is complicated by the fact the patients weren't treated in the way they would be in the real world Weber

  39. .3 .25 .2 .15 .1 .05 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Years to death ALLHAT mortality Chlorthalidone Amlodipine Lisinopril Cumulative mortality rate ALLHAT trial site

  40. ALLHAT-LLT: Trial design • 10 355 patients age >55 with hypertension and 1 additional risk factor and moderate hypercholesterolemia • Randomized to: • pravastatin (40 mg/day, n=15 255) • usual care • Primary end point: all-cause mortality

  41. ALLHAT-LLT: Primary results JAMA 2002; 288:2998-3007

  42. HPS: Mortality results Lancet 2002; 360:7-22

  43. ALLHAT-LLT: Statin use JAMA 2002; 288:2998-3007

  44. ALLHAT-LLT: Evolving standard of care "We've been going along thinking that the statins are the answer to all of our atherosclerotic disease problems, and they're not." If usual standard of care means 30% are on statins anyway, it's hard to improve on that with a statin Ferguson

  45. ALLHAT-LLT: Open label ALLHAT-LLT was not a double-blind trial, it was open-label Lots of dropouts (22.6% of statin arm came off their drug over the course of the trial) The big difference with other statin trials lies in the study design Cannon

  46. ALLHAT-LLT: Designing clean studies Must construct clean, well-designed studies that can give meaningful results even in the face of an improving standard of care ALLHAT-LLT was also underpowered due to lack of enrollment Cannon

  47. ALLHAT-LLT: Crossovers It may become more difficult to see differences in the future, the real danger is crossovers An unblinded trial makes it much easier to use the study drug as part of usual care Fuster

  48. ALLHAT-LLT: LDL-C 150 * Percent decrease from baseline. 140 7%* 130 LDL-C in mg/dL 11% Usual care 16% 120 23% Pravastatin 110 28% 30% 100 0 2 4 6 Year of blood draw

  49. Summary: ALLHAT In a hypertensive population, a diuretic was as good as the use of amlodipine and lisonipril "Diuretics may not be as bad as I thought." The results may be due in part to blood-pressure effects Fuster

  50. Summary: ALLHAT-LLT "It's not a good study." There was a lot of crossover, and that makes it difficult to draw conclusions It hasn't changed my opinion on statins Fuster

More Related