Wednesday, August 3, 2016

Associations of urinary sodium excretion with cardiovascular events in individuals with and without hypertension: a pooled analysis of data from four studies

INTRODUCTION
- Several prospective cohort studies have reported that the association between sodium consumption and cardiovascular disease or mortality is U-shaped, with increased risk at both high and low sodium intake
- A meta-analysis of 23 epidemiological studies (n=274 683) also reported a U-shaped relation (Graudal et al. Am J Hypertens 2014; 27: 1129-37)
- In view that increasing sodium intake is related to increased blood pressure, and that this is steeper in those individuals with hypertension compared with in those without hypertension, we hypothesised that there might be differences in the association between sodium intake and cardiovascular disease outcomes in individuals with hypertension compared with in those without hypertension

OBJECTIVE:
- To explore whether the association between sodium intake and cardiovascular disease events and all-cause mortality is modified by hypertension status.
- To compare the observed magnitude (and pattern) of association between sodium intake and clinical events with the predicted hazard ratio (HR) derived from modelling the association between sodium intake and blood pressure
[Assuming that all reductions in blood pressure should translate into cardiovascular disease reduction, with no other off -target effects (eg, activation of the renin system or increases in blood lipids)]

METHODS

Study design and participants
- Details of the studies’ designs and population characteristics have been published before and are described in the appendix (pp 2-6).
- In brief:
1) The Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiological Study (PURE Study) is an ongoing large-scale epidemiological cohort study that has enrolled 156 424 individuals between 35 years and 70 years from the population in 628 communities in 17 low-income, middle-income, and high-income countries on five continents.
- The sampling strategy used in PURE ensures representation from urban and rural communities from different geographical areas.
- For this analysis, we included 101 511 participants from PURE who collected morning fasting urine samples suitable for analysis and with baseline blood pressure measurements.

2) The EPIDREAM trial was a prospective cohort study of 17 453 individuals, aged 18-85 years, who were screened for eligibility to enter the DREAM clinical trial (a randomised, double-blind trial with a 2 × 2 factorial design that assigned participants at high risk for type 2 diabetes to receive either ramipril [15 mg/day] vs placebo or rosiglitazone [8 mg/day] vs placebo).
- The EPIDREAM cohort included participants who were screened for the study and includes those who entered DREAM and those who were not included in the trial and agreed to a long-term prospective follow-up
- For this analysis, to conserve power and at the same time to be efficient on resources, we used a case-cohort design to select all individuals who developed a cardiovascular disease event (n=478) during the follow-up of the EPIDREAM cohort and a control group comprised of a random sample of individuals (n=2372; five controls per case) who did not develop a cardio vascular disease event.

3) ONTARGET was a randomised, double-blind, parallel trial comparing the effects of ramipril (10 mg/day), telmisartan (80 mg/day), and combination therapy of ramipril (10 mg/day) and telmisartan (80 mg/day) in 25 620 patients, aged 55 years or older, with vascular disease or high-risk patients with diabetes.

4) TRANSCEND was a randomised controlled trial comparing telmisartan (80 mg/day) with placebo in 5926 participants who were intolerant to angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors

For this analysis, we included 28 757 participants from ONTARGET and TRANSCEND with morning fasting urine samples and with baseline blood pressure measures.

- All studies were coordinated by the Population Health Research Institute, Hamilton Health Sciences and McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.

Procedures
Urine sample collection and analysis
- A morning fasting urine sample was collected from every participant and shipped in ambient packaging (Saf-T-Pak) for analysis at the Clinical Research and Clinical Trials
Laboratory at Hamilton General Hospital in Hamilton, ON, Canada (the central laboratory), or the regional laboratory in Beijing, Bangalore, India, or Kocaeli, Turkey, for analyses with the use of validated and standardised methods.
- A description of the methods used for urinary analyses has been described previously. (O’Donnell et al. N Engl J Med 2014; 371: 61223; Mente et al., N Engl J Med 2014; 371: 60111)

Validation of Kawasaki formula
- We used the Kawasaki formula to estimate 24-h urinary excretion of sodium and potassium from a fasting morning specimen and used these estimates as surrogates for daily sodium and potassium intake (in grams).
- Previous studies have reported that this method provides a reliable estimate of sodium intake in healthy Japanese participants (r=0.73) and this was replicated later in Japanese participants with hypertension (r=0.69 in those on blood pressure medication, r=0.66 in those not medicated), and more recently in Chinese participants with hypertension (r=0.64).
- We did further validation of the method in 1083 people from 11 countries, and showed that the estimated sodium excretion from the morning urine specimen shows a good correlation with direct measures of sodium excretion from the actual 24-h urine collection (intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.70 [95% CI 0.61-0.77] among individuals with hypertension and 0.71 [0.61 to 0.78] among those without hypertension). (Mente et al, 2014. J Hypertens 32:1005-14)
- Further, the blood pressure change per g of sodium was 2.11/0.78 mm Hg, which is consistent with the results of a meta-analysis of sodium lowering randomised controlled trials (appendix pp 7, 8)

Data Collection and Measurements
- Weight, height, and two recordings of blood pressure after 5 min of rest in a sitting position with the use of an Omron automatic digital monitor (Omron HEM-757 used in all studies) were recorded in all participants.
- Individuals were considered hypertensive if their untreated baseline blood pressure was 140/90 mm Hg or greater or if they were prescribed antihypertensive drugs at baseline.
- The information about study variables was collected with similar approaches to measure risk factor variables and data collection forms in each of the studies.
- Information about personal medical history and use of drugs were recorded.
- Standardised case-report forms was used to capture data for major cardiovascular disease events and death during follow-up.
- Events were classified according to the definitions used in each study, but they were broadly similar.
- For this analysis, we included data from the PURE study (which is ongoing) through to March, 2015, the complete data from ONTARGET/TRANSCEND, and case-cohort data from EPIDREAM.

Statistical Analysis
- Mean estimated 24-h urinary excretion values of sodium were computed overall and by hypertension status.
- Multivariable linear regression was used to obtain estimates of the slope describing the relation between estimated sodium excretion (exposure) and blood pressure measurements (outcome variable), within each subpopulation, with adjustment for age, sex, body-mass index, education, alcohol intake, current smoking, and geographical region.
- We examined the association between an estimated so-called usual level of sodium excretion (ie, accounting for the degree of correlation between sodium levels in urine when measured after 30 days and 90 days in 448 individuals; this also allows adjustment for regression dilution bias) and blood pressure.
- Analysis of covariance was done, with tests for linear trend, to compare the adjusted mean blood pressure according to sodium excretion level.

- The primary outcome was defined as the composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and heart failure.
- We used restricted cubic-spline plots with four knots (at the 5th, 35th, 65th, and 95th percentiles) to explore the shape of the association between the estimated sodium excretion and the outcomes.
- Participants were categorised into urinary sodium excretion groups, based on 1 g/day increments of excretion
- Because few individuals had excretion values less than 2 g/day or more than 8 g/day, we truncated excretion values at less than 3 g/day and >7 g/day to avoid small numbers of individuals at the extreme ends of the distribution (about 10% of participants in the lowest and highest excretion categories within each subgroup).
- We calculated HRs of time to event with Cox proportional hazards models, with shared frailty models. The clustering variable was the study cohort. The proportional hazards assumption was checked by visual inspection of log-log plots.
- The primary model included age, sex, ethnicity, BMI, smoking status, diabetes, educational level, alcohol consumption, physical activity, past cardiovascular disease events, and treatment allocation (ramipril, telmisartan, or both, and treatment with statins, β-blockers, diuretic therapy, calcium antagonist, and antidiabetes medication), as in our previously published papers
- Separate analyses were done that excluded those individuals who had had previous cardiovascular events.
- Interaction tests were done to assess whether the slopes of the associations between estimated sodium excretion level and blood pressure, cardiovascular disease events, or deaths differed between those individuals with and without hypertension

Simulation Modelling (for objective number 2)
- We modelled the estimated effect of changes in sodium intake on risk of incident cardiovascular disease events, based on the observed associations between sodium excretion and systolic blood pressure, and between systolic blood pressure and cardiovascular events (appendix p 9).
- For this modelling, we focused on 98 612 participants (3733 cardiovascular disease events; median 3.7 years of follow-up (IQR 2.9-5.0) without baseline cardiovascular disease, because this subcohort is comprised of generally healthy people from the population among whom few were receiving drugs.
- We compared these simulated blood pressure-based estimates with directly observed HR of sodium excretion versus clinical outcomes to assess the consistency between estimates derived overall and in those individuals with and without hypertension.
- Cox regression was used to calculate HRs and 95% CIs of cardiovascular disease events (total cardiovascular disease, stroke, and myocardial infarction) per 1 mm Hg increment in systolic blood pressure, within each subgroup of hypertension status.

RESULTS

Participants’ Characteristics
- 133 118 individuals, (63 559 with hypertension and 69 559 without hypertension), were included in the study.
- 98 612 (74%) individuals were without previous cardiovascular disease, and 118 232 (89%) were without diabetes.
- Baseline characteristics of the study participants are shown in the appendix (pp 9, 10).
- The mean age was 58.6 years (SD 10.3) in individuals with hypertension and 50.5 (10.7) in those without hypertension.
- Individuals with hypertension were more likely to be men, heavier, less physically active, and had more previous cardiovascular disease and diabetes (appendix pp 10, 11).

Mean estimated sodium excretion
- 4956 g/day (SD 1747) in individuals with hypertension and
- 4823 g/day (1647) in those without hypertension (p<0.0001).

Among those individuals with hypertension:
- 7006 (11%) had an estimated sodium excretion of <3.0 g/day and
- 15 126 (24% of those with hypertension, or 11% of the overall population) had an estimated sodium excretion of ≥6 g/day
- 7060 (11% of those with hypertension, or 5% of the overall population) had an estimated sodium excretion of ≥7g/day
- 41 427 (65%) had an estimated sodium excretion between 3 g/day and 6 g/day.

In those individuals without hypertension,
- 7547 (11%) had an estimated sodium excretion of < 3.0 g/day and
- 14 098 (20%) had an estimated sodium excretion of ≥ 6 g/day
- 6271 (9%) had an estimated sodium excretion of ≥ 7 g/day
- 47 914 (69%) had an estimated sodium excretion between 3 g/day and 6 g/day

- After adjustment for regression dilution bias, 3039 (<3%) participants had a sodium excretion of < 3 g/day and 21 240 (16%) had an estimated sodium excretion of 6 g/day
(11 146 [18%] of those individuals with hypertension and 10 094 [15%] of those without hypertension; p<0.0001).

Outcome
- 133 118 (96%) participants had completed follow-up, with a median follow-up of 4.2 years (IQR 3.0-5.0).
- The primary composite outcome of all-cause death or a major cardiovascular disease event occurred in 6835 individuals (11%) with hypertension and 3021 (4%) without hypertension (table).
- Those participants with 4-5 g of sodium excretion had the lowest risk and this was used as the reference category.

Association between sodium excretion and primary composite outcome
- The association between sodium excretion and the primary composite outcome varied significantly by hypertension status (pheterogeneity=0.0342; figure 1).

- In the hypertension group, a U-shaped association between sodium excretion and cardiovascular events and mortality was apparent.
- Compared with sodium excretion of 4-5 g/day (reference category), sodium excretion of ≥7 g/day (HR 1.23 [95% CI 1.11-1.37]; p<0.0001) and <3 g/day (1.34 [1.23-1.47]; p<0.0001) were both associated with increased risk of the composite outcome (table; figure 1).
- After adjustment for blood pressure, the associations between high sodium excretion and the composite outcome (HR 1.21 [95% CI 1.091.34]; p=0.0006), and the association between low sodium excretion and the composite outcome were unaltered (1.35 [1.23-1.49]; p<00001).

- In those individuals without hypertension, compared with 4-5 g/day, sodium excretion of ≥ 7 g/day was not associated with risk of the primary composite outcome (HR 0.90 [95% CI 0.761.08]; p=0.2547), whereas an excretion of < 3 g/day was associated with a significantly increased risk (1.26 [1.10-1.45]; p=0.0009; table; figure 1).
- After adjustment for blood pressure, the association between low sodium excretion and the composite outcome remained significant (p=0.0011).

- Similar results were noted for death from any cause (pheterogeneity=0.0135) and major cardiovascular disease (pheterogeneity=0.0432; table).

- The results described above of a U-shaped association in those participants with hypertension were consistent in those participants with and without vascular disease (appendix p 12).
- Among those participants without hypertension, an increased risk with sodium excretion of < 3g/day compared with 4-5 g/day was consistent in those with and without vascular disease, whereas a sodium excretion of ≥7 g/day was associated with an increased risk only in those with known vascular disease (appendix p 12).



Sensitivity Analysis
- When we exclude data from the EPIDREAM study from the analysis (which is a case-cohort study of 2850 individuals), the results of the study overall and by subgroup do not change and the estimates from the PURE study report the same findings (appendix 8). - Further, the data from the ONTARGET and TRANSCEND trials are consistent with the data from the two observational studies
- Exclusion of those participants who had an event in the first 2 years of follow-up did not affect the estimates (table).
- Further, in those with hypertension, exclusion of 35 027 individuals who were taking antihypertensive medication did not change the findings (table).

- Sodium excretion was more strongly associated with increased systolic blood pressure in individuals with hypertension (2.08 mm Hg increment in systolic pressure per g [95% CI 1.96-2.21]) than in those without hypertension (1.22 mm Hg [1.13-1.30]; p<0.0001 for interaction; figure 2).
- Similar results were noted for diastolic blood pressure (0.72 mm Hg increment in diastolic pressure per g [95% CI 0.65-0.80] and 0.52 mm Hg [0.46-0.58], respectively; p<0.0001 for interaction; figure 2).


Simulation models
- In the simulation models, in which we assumed that the effect of sodium intake on cardiovascular disease events was solely related to its association through systolic blood pressure, the projected HR of cardiovascular disease events, stroke, and myocardial infarction increased in a graded fashion.
- However, there was a greater increase in risk in individuals with hypertension, and a more modest association in those without hypertension (p<0.0001 for heterogeneity; figure 3; appendix p 18).

- The modelled estimates differed from the observed HR of cardiovascular disease events both in individuals with hypertension and those without hypertension.
- This discordance was marked at lower levels of sodium excretion (ie, <3 g/day).
- The projection model shows lower HR estimates with lower sodium excretion, whereas the observed HR estimates show an increased risk of events with lower sodium excretion.
- In individuals with hypertension, the observed HR was similar to the modelled HR at average or higher levels of sodium excretion (>4 g/day; figure 3; appendix 10).



DISCUSSION
- Significant heterogeneity was noted in the association between sodium excretion and the composite outcome by hypertension status.
- In both individuals with or without hypertension, there is an increased risk of cardiovascular disease events and deaths associated with 24-h urinary sodium excretion of <3 g/day
- However, an increase in risk of cardiovascular disease associated with high sodium excretion (surrogate for intake) was only seen in individuals with hypertension (which represents 24% of those with hypertension but only about 10% of the overall populations enrolled in the four cohorts included in this analysis), but not in those without hypertension

Comparison with other studies
- Our results are consistent with another recently published cohort study (PREVEND study; n=7543), which reported an association between increased sodium intake and cardiovascular disease, that was confined to participants with baseline hypertension (pinteraction=0.08) and in those with baseline pro-BNP (brain natriuretic peptide) concentrations above the median.
- Other studies have not reported a significant modifying eff ect of previous hypertension, but these studies have been smaller than our study

- In our analysis, the association between low sodium intake (<3 g/day) and increased cardiovascular disease and mortality was consistent, irrespective of baseline hypertension status and after further adjustment for blood pressure level indicating that mechanisms unrelated to blood pressure might be operational
- Our findings are also in keeping with a previous meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies showing a U-shaped association between sodium intake and cardiovascular disease events, in both healthy and high-risk populations (eg, those individuals with cardiovascular disease or diabetes), with consistency across different methods of sodium estimation (Graudal et al. Am J Hypertens 2014; 27: 112937)
- Although the meta-analysis included previous analyses from the ONTARGET/TRANSCEND cohort, it did not include the PURE study and EPIDREAM cohorts, and the PURE study accounts for most of the current study population

- Our findings replicate previous reports and extend these observations to populations based on baseline hypertension status. Further, they suggest that although there is a limit below which sodium intake would be unsafe, the harm associated with high sodium consumption seems to be confined to those individuals with hypertension.
- Only about 10% of the population in our study had both hypertension and high sodium consumption (6 g/day or more).
- This argues against a population-wide approach to reduce sodium intake in most countries, except in those where the mean sodium intake is high (eg, some in central Asia or some parts of China).

- We noted that most of the world’s population (about 95%) studied consumes more than 3 g/day of sodium, regardless of hypertension status and only 22% consume 6 g/day or more of sodiumthe threshold above which we note an increase in mortality and cardiovascular disease risk

Mechanistic function of sodium
- Sodium is an essential cation and is crucial to the action potential of all cells in the body.
- Sodium homoeostasis is under tight physiological regulation.
- Further, emerging evidence suggests that inflammatory responses with infections involve mobilising high concentrations of sodium to the local tissues that are involved, and this ability might be part of an essential defence mechanism to external infections.
- Sodium intake is governed by neural mechanisms that regulate intake of sodium and related homoeostatic mechanisms, and so although extreme reductions in sodium intake are possible in controlled settings for short periods, this is unlikely to be sustainable in free living individuals in the long term.

- Previous modelling studies that have estimated the effect of reducing sodium intake globally on cardiovascular mortality are based on the assumption that the blood pressure-lowering effects of sodium reduction seen in short-term trials will translate into reductions in cardiovascular disease in the long term. (Mozaffarian et al. N Engl J Med 2014; 371: 624–34; the previous paper shared in evidence-sharingblogspot)
- However, it is now known that whether lowering blood pressure results in reductions in cardiovascular disease is dependent on the baseline blood pressure of the population, the mechanism of blood pressure lowering, and presence or absence of cardiovascular disease.
- Although the SPRINT trials (also shared in evidence-sharing blogspot) did report a reduction in heart failure and cardiovascular death when lowering blood pressure to a mean of 121 mm Hg systolic blood pressure in a primary prevention population, several other randomised controlled trials have failed to show a benefit of lowering systolic blood pressure below 130 mm Hg in a primary prevention population (HOPE-3) and secondary prevention populations (ACCORD, SPS3, PRoFESS), and some have shown harm.

- Three independent meta-analyses of large randomised trials of blood pressure lowering with antihypertensive drugs in individuals with diabetes show that the benefits of blood pressure lowering in reducing clinical events is noted only in those with a systolic blood pressure of higher than 140 mm Hg.
- This finding is also supported by the results of the recent HOPE 3 trial, which showed that reducing systolic blood pressure by 6 mm Hg reduced cardiovascular disease risk by about 25% only in those with increased baseline levels (systolic blood pressure >143 mm Hg), but not in those with lower initial systolic blood pressure, despite similar reductions in blood pressure.
- These data are consistent with our finding that the association of high sodium intake and cardiovascular disease is confined to those with baseline blood pressure higher than 140/90 mm Hg.

- The mechanism of blood pressure lowering is also important and non-blood pressure effects might be beneficial or harmful
- Although high-risk peopleeg, those with previous myocardial infarction or strokehave benefited from ACE inhibitors or β blockers, the benefits seem to be not exclusively due to blood pressure lowering, and other drugs that lower blood pressure in high risk people might not necessarily reduce cardiovascular disease events in such populations
- Further, some drugs that were shown to reduce blood pressure to similar extents differed in their effect on cardiovascular disease or its individual cardiovascular disease outcomes
- Our data suggest that although a persuasive case can be made to reduce sodium intake in individuals with hypertension and high sodium intake, it is unclear whether the remaining more than 90% of the population will benefit from dietary sodium reduction.

Limitations of simulations models & possible mechanistic explanation
- Our analyses indicate the limitations of estimates from modelled calculations based only on projected changes in blood pressure from sodium lowering.
- This is apparent in view that the results differ compared with the directly observed data relating sodium to cardiovascular disease events and supported by an absence of cardiovascular disease reduction with blood pressure lowering in people without cardiovascular disease.
- This suggests that the effect of a given level of sodium intake on clinical outcomes is only partly mediated through its effects on blood pressure and that other mechanisms might also be at play.
- This is supported by observations of activation of the renin system and of catecholamines with low sodium intake.
- High renin concentrations have been reported in studies of the Yanomamo Indians who reportedly consume very little sodium.
- Several studies have shown that increases of renin, aldosterone, and catecholamines are all associated with increased cardiovascular disease events and mortality.
- Therefore, predicting the net clinical effect based on only considering the effects of sodium on blood pressure might not provide a comprehensive understanding of its effects on cardiovascular disease and mortality, especially within the range of sodium intake that affects the renin system (<4 g/day).

- We noted that the association of sodium intake with cardiovascular disease remained strong even when adjusted for blood pressure levels.
- This indicates that the association between sodium and cardiovascular disease might also be related to non-blood pressure mechanisms, which requires mechanistic investigation in careful physiological studies
- Randomised trials have shown that sodium lowering has only a small effect on blood pressure in individuals without hypertension and that such individuals might be less sensitive to the blood pressure effects of salt consumption.
- Furthermore, understanding of why low sodium intake is associated with increased event rates, despite slightly lower blood pressure, is also of importance.
- As sodium is an essential cation, it should not be surprising that there is an optimal range for its intake.
- This mirrors the situation of most biological systems and it is only with external toxins (eg, tobacco or environmental pollutants) that a linear association is likely

Limitations of study design and Recommendations
- Despite careful design, follow-up, and analyses, observational analyses cannot definitively prove causality
- Therefore, ideally large and long-term randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of sodium reduction to various levels to assess the effect on clinical outcomes are essential to guide public policy
- In view of the absence of such RCTs, large prospective observational studies (despite their inherent limitations) relating sodium intake to cardiovascular disease should be considered the best available evidence.
-  Further, we have initiated a pilot RCT to assess feasibility as a prelude to establishing a larger and long-term study to definitively address this question (NCT02458248).
- In the absence of large definitive RCTs showing a clear reduction in cardiovascular disease, the weight of the substantial epidemiological studies describing a potentially adverse effect of low sodium should urge caution in making broad public health recommendations.
- Further, the observation that high sodium intake is only associated with increased cardiovascular disease in individuals with hypertension raises questions whether public health policies targeted at reducing sodium in the entire population are appropriate
- Therefore, until new robust data emerge from large trials, it might be prudent to recommend reduction in sodium intake only in those with high sodium intake and with hypertension.
-Some might consider large randomised trials of sodium reduction impractical to assess their effect on cardio vascular disease, but they are essential to definitively resolve the controversy

Strength
- Large size, international cohorts, use of validated urinary measure of sodium intake, standardised methods to measure a large number of covariates, and careful and standardised measurement of blood pressure à valid and generalizable
- Our analyses include participants with established cardiovascular disease recruited into an RCT (ONTARGET/TRANSCEND) as well as those without vascular disease identified from the population (PURE) or those screened for a trial (EPIDREAM). This broad range of individuals from 49 countries indicates that our findings are widely applicable and robust because similar findings were noted across all four studies.

Limitations of the study
- Although the collection of one overnight urine sample to estimate the 24-h urinary sodium excretion might be considered a limitation, it has been validated against 24-h urine collections in previous studies of healthy individuals and those with hypertension and in our international validation study, with correlations similar to that noted with a blood pressure measured at a clinic visit versus 24-h ambulatory monitoring.
- Further, our analyses take into account the day to day variability of sodium intake in individuals by estimating the correlation of two measures taken 30-90 days apart and then using statistical adjustments to assess the degree of regression dilution.
- Adjustments for day to day variability and the absence of perfect correlation with 24-h urinary estimates of sodium would steepen all the associations (both at the low and high ends of sodium intake) and so would not qualitatively affect the pattern of our results

- With our method, there is about a 10% overestimation of 24-h sodium excretion, indicating that the true intake range at which risk of cardiovascular events and death changes might occur at a slightly lower level of sodium intake.
- Residual confounding cannot be completely ruled out in any epidemiological study but extensive multivariable analyses did not change our results.
- Further sensitivity analyses to minimise the potential for reverse causality (in which sicker people reduce sodium intake) by excluding in turn those with known cardiovascular disease, hypertension, or diabetes or by confining analyses to events beyond 2 years, did not change the pattern of our findings.
- Therefore our results are robust to different forms of analyses.

CONCLUSION
- Association between low sodium intake (vs moderate intake) and increased risk of clinical outcomes in those individuals with and without hypertension, whereas high sodium intake (> 6 g/day) was associated with an increased risk in individuals with hypertension.
- Our findings suggest that sodium reduction should be confined to only those individuals with hypertension and high sodium intake; this represents only about 10% of the population studied.

Sunday, July 24, 2016

Global Sodium Consumption and Death from Cardiovascular Causes

INTRODUCTION
- A high dietary intake of Sodium is associated with elevated blood pressure, a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease.
- The United Nations (UN), World Health Organization (WHO), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and other organizations have emphasized the relationship between dietary sodium and cardiovascular outcomes.

- As part of the Global Burden of Diseases Nutrition and Chronic Diseases Expert Group
(NUTRICODE), we
i) Systematically identified and analyzed data on sodium consumption worldwide and calculated the dose-response effects of sodium on blood pressure in a new meta-analysis of trials.
ii) Compiled data to calculate the effects of blood pressure on cause-specific cardiovascular mortality and to characterize current blood-pressure levels and numbers of cause-specific deaths according to country, age, and sex
iii) Used data relating levels of sodium intake to blood pressure and cardiovascular events, as well as data on the lowest current levels of sodium intake according to country, to define a reference range for sodium consumption
iv) Used data (Table S1 in the Supplementary Appendix) to estimate the impact of current levels of sodium intake on cardiovascular mortality throughout the world

METHODS

Assessment of Global Sodium Consumption
- Search Period: March 2008 to December 2011
- Systematic searches were conducted for previously conducted national or subnational surveys on individual-level sodium consumption based on urinary excretion, estimated dietary intake, or both
- Data Included: 142 surveys with data from 24-hour urine collections and 91 with estimates of dietary intake, including 28 with both types of data (Table S2 in the Supplementary Appendix).
- These surveys included data from 66 countries, accounting for 74.1% of adults in the world.
- Using a hierarchical Bayesian model, we estimated the mean level of sodium consumption and statistical uncertainty according to age, sex, and calendar year in 187 nations.
- An article with detailed results of these analyses has been published previously (Powles et al. BMJ Open 2013; 3(12): e003733)

- Our model estimated sodium consumption with the use of 24-hour urine collections as the reference standard.
- To make our data comparable to data from prior regional surveys and blood pressure trials in which urinary sodium levels were measured, we did not adjust our analyses for sodium loss due to factors other than urinary excretion (e.g., sweat).

Effects of Reduced Sodium Intake on Blood Pressure
- Two recent Cochrane meta-analyses evaluated randomized trials of the effect of reduce sodium intake on blood pressure. (He et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev
2013; 4: CD004937; Graudal et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011;11: CD004022)
- These meta-analyses did not determine whether blood-pressure lowering was linear across a range of sodium intakes and did not simultaneously quantify heterogeneity according to age, race, and the presence or absence of hypertension
- We performed a new meta-analysis evaluating all randomized interventions identified in these articles (Section S1 in Supplementary Appendix).
- Using data from these trials, we evaluated whether the effects of reduced sodium intake on blood pressure were linear.
- We evaluated the potential heterogeneity in this effect by taking into account population characteristics, including age, the presence or absence of hypertension, and race, as well as the duration of the intervention.
- We also assessed whether, apart from the presence or absence of hypertension, the effects of reduced sodium intake on blood-pressure lowering were blunted by the use of antihypertensive medication.

Effects of Blood-Pressure Levels on Cardiovascular Mortality
- To calculate the effects of systolic blood pressure on deaths from cardiovascular causes, we combined results from two large international projects (totaling 99 cohorts, 1.38 million participants, and 65,000 cardiovascular events) that pooled individual-level data, consistently adjusted for confounding.
- We accounted for regression dilution bias based on serial blood-pressure measures over time.
- We interpolated and extrapolated age-specific proportional effects (relative risks) of systolic blood pressure on cardiovascular mortality in 10-year age groups across the pooling projects (see Section S2 and Fig. S3 in the Supplementary Appendix).
- We used the same estimates of relative risk according to sex and race, on the basis of evidence of generally similar proportional effects of blood pressure on cardiovascular events according to sex and race in trials of antihypertensive drugs and observational studies of blood pressure and cardiovascular events.

Reference Levels of Sodium Consumption
- To define reference levels of sodium consumption, we conducted a search of published survey data, cohort studies, controlled trials, and dietary recommendations.
- We determined levels of sodium consumption that were associated with the lowest blood-pressure levels in ecologic studies and in randomized trials and with the lowest risk of disease in meta-analyses of prospective cohort studies
- We also considered at least theoretical feasibility based on the lowest national mean levels of consumption globally.
- Finally, we considered the consistency of our identified reference intake levels with major dietary guidelines.
- Details are provided in Section S4 in the Supplementary Appendix

Current Blood-Pressure Levels and Cause-Specific Mortality
- Data on current blood-pressure levels and cardiovascular mortality, each according to country, age, and sex, were compiled as part of the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010
- Data on blood pressure (from 786 country-years and 5.4 million participants) were obtained from published and unpublished health examination surveys and epidemiologic studies from around the world.
- Data on causes of death were obtained for 187 countries from 1980 through 2010; these data were obtained from vital-registration systems, verbal autopsies, mortality surveillance, census data, surveys, hospitals, police records, and mortuaries.
- Details of data collection and the statistical modeling used to estimate mean systolic blood pressure and causespecific mortality are provided in Table S1 and Sections S5 and S6 in the Supplementary Appendix

Cardiovascular Mortality Associated with Sodium Consumption above the Reference Level
- We estimated disease burdens using comparative risk assessment, capturing geographic and demographic variations in sodium intake, blood pressure, cardiovascular mortality, and corresponding uncertainties (details are provided in Table S1 and Section S7 in the Supplementary Appendix).
- We incorporated age-specific and sex-specific sodium intake, blood-pressure level, relative risk, and mortality data for each country to model the fraction and numbers of deaths estimated to be attributable to sodium intake above the reference level.

- The population-attributable fraction was estimated in a two-step process.
- First, we used the effects of sodium consumption on blood pressure according to age, the presence or absence of hypertension, and race to calculate the change in mean systolic blood pressure that would be expected from reducing sodium consumption to reference levels as defined above.
- Second, we used the age-specific effects of blood pressure on cardiovascular mortality to calculate the resulting change in risk.
- Estimated numbers of deaths attributable to sodium intake above the reference level were calculated by multiplying the population-attributable fraction by the absolute number of deaths in each country, age, and sex stratum.

RESULTS

Global Sodium Consumption
- We estimated that in 2010, the mean level of consumption of sodium worldwide was 3.95 g per day, and regional means ranged from 2.18 to 5.51 g per day (Fig. S1 in the Supplementary Appendix).
- Overall, 181 of 187 countries — 99.2% of the adult population in the world — had estimated mean levels of sodium intake exceeding the World Health Organization recommendation of 2.0 g per day, and 119 countries — 88.3% of the adult population in the worldexceeded this recommended level by more than 1.0 g per day.

Effects of Reduced Sodium Intake on Blood Pressure
- In our primary analysis of reduced sodium intake and blood pressure, we found strong evidence of a linear dose–response relationship (P < 0.001 for linearity and P = 0.58 for nonlinearity) (Fig. 1A).
- When the data were evaluated with the use of inverse-variance weighted meta-regression, each reduction of 2.30 g of sodium per day was associated with a reduction of 3.82 mm Hg (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.08 to 4.55) in blood pressure (Fig. 1B).


- The effects of dietary sodium on blood pressure were modified according to population characteristics, with larger reductions in blood pressure among (Fig. S2 in the Supplementary Appendix):
i) older persons >  younger persons
ii) blacks > whites,
iii) hypertensive > normotensive persons.
- For a white, normotensive population at 50 years of age, each reduction of 2.30 g per day in sodium intake lowered systolic blood pressure by 3.74 mm Hg (95% CI, 2.29 to 5.18).
- We did not find evidence of substantial blunting of the blood-pressure–lowering effects of sodium restriction by antihypertensive drugs, although the data available to address this question were limited. Further details are provided in Section S1 in the Supplementary Appendix

Effects of Blood Pressure on Cardiovascular Mortality
- The pooled analyses of blood pressure and cardiovascular mortality showed a log-linear (proportional) dose–response relationship, with no evidence of a threshold as low as a systolic blood pressure of at least 115 mm Hg (see Section S2 and Fig. S3 in the Supplementary Appendix).
- The relative magnitude of the effect on blood pressure decreased with age, in a manner similar to that seen with other cardiovascular risk factors.

Reference Levels of Sodium Consumption
- Potential reference levels of sodium consumption according to various definitions are shown in Table S3 in the Supplementary Appendix
- The lowest mean intake associated with both lower systolic blood pressure and a lower positive relationship between higher age and blood pressure in ecologic studies was 614 mg of sodium per day.
- In large, well-controlled, randomized feeding trials, the lowest tested sodium intake for which reductions in blood-pressure levels were clearly documented was 1500 mg per day.
- In prospective observational studies, the lowest mean sodium intake associated with a lower risk of cardiovascular events ranged from 1787 to 2391 mg per day.
- We also considered observed mean levels of sodium intake that have been associated with the lowest risk of stomach cancer (1245 mg per day).
- Levels of sodium intake associated with the lowest risk ranged from 614 to 2391 mg per day, depending on the type of evidence and the outcome.
- According to national data on sodium consumption, the estimated lowest observed mean national intake level was approximately 1500 mg per day.
- The maximum level of sodium intake recommended in major dietary guidelines ranged from 1200 to 2400 mg per day


Estimated Cardiovascular Mortality Attributed to Sodium Consumption
- On the basis of the correlations between sodium intake and blood pressure and between blood pressure and cardiovascular mortality that are described above, and using a reference level of sodium intake of 2.0±0.2 g per day, we found that 1.65 million deaths from cardiovascular causes (95% uncertainty interval, 1.10 million to 2.22 million) worldwide in 2010 were attributable to sodium consumption above the reference level (Table 1, and Table S4 in the Supplementary Appendix).

Of these deaths,
- 687,000 (41.7%) were due to coronary heart disease,
- 685,000 (41.6%) were due to stroke, and
- 276,000 (16.7%) were due to other cardiovascular disease.
- Globally, 40.4% of these deaths occurred prematurely (i.e., in persons younger than 70 years of age) (see Section S8 and Fig. S4 in the Supplementary Appendix).
- Four of every 5 sodium-associated deaths from cardiovascular causes (84.3%) occurred in low-income and middle-income countries.
- In sum, approximately 1 of every 10 deaths from cardiovascular causes worldwide (9.5%) (95% uncertainty interval, 6.4 to 12.8) and nearly 1 of every 5 (17.8%) premature deaths from cardiovascular causes were attributed to sodium consumption above the reference level.

- Across nine regions of the world, the absolute rate of sodium-associated deaths from cardiovascular causes was highest in Central Asia and Eastern and Central Europe (Fig. 2A, and Fig. S5 and Table S4 in the Supplementary Appendix).
- Proportional cardiovascular mortality was high in all regions: among younger adults, it exceeded 10% in nearly all regions and it exceeded 20% in Central Asia and Eastern and Central Europe, East Asia, and Southeast Asia (Fig. 2B).
- Among older adults, who have a higher absolute risk and more competing risk factors, proportional sodium-associated cardiovascular mortality approached or exceeded 10% in Central Asia and Eastern and Central Europe, East Asia, and Southeast Asia.
- Most sodium-associated cardiovascular deaths were due to coronary heart disease, except in East Asia, Southeast Asia, and sub-Saharan Africa, where most deaths from cardiovascular causes were due to stroke, especially hemorrhagic and other nonischemic strokes (Table S4 and Fig. S5 in the Supplementary Appendix). 


- Across individual nations, substantial variation was evident.
- Sodium-associated cardiovascular mortality was highest in the country of Georgia (1967 deaths per 1 million adults per year; 95% uncertainty interval, 1321 to 2647) and lowest in Kenya (4 deaths per 1 million adults per year; 95% uncertainty interval, 3 to 6) (Fig. 3).
- Proportional cardiovascular mortality ranged from 27.4% in Mauritius (95% uncertainty interval, 18.8 to 35.9) to 0.3% in Kenya (95% uncertainty interval, 0.2 to 0.4) (Fig. 4).


-Among the 30 most populous nations (Fig. S6 in the Supplementary Appendix), the highest sodium-associated cardiovascular mortality was in Ukraine (1540 deaths per 1 million adults per year; 95% uncertainty interval, 1017 to 2099), and the highest proportional mortality was in China (15.3% of all cardiovascular deaths; 95% uncertainty interval, 10.5 to 20.2).
- Detailed information about individual nations is provided in Section S9 and Table S5 in the Supplementary Appendix.

- In sensitivity analyses, lowering the definition of the reference intake level from 2.0 to 1.0 g of sodium per day increased the number of deaths from cardiovascular causes in the world that were attributed to sodium consumption by approximately 40%, to 2.30 million (95% uncertainty interval, 1.55 million to 3.07 million) (Tables S6 and S7 and Fig. S7 and S8 in the Supplementary Appendix).
- When we estimated effects attributable only to sodium intake above 4.0±0.4 g per day, 512,901 worldwide deaths from cardiovascular causes (95% uncertainty interval, 333,710 to 704,773) were attributed to such consumption (Tables S8 and S9 in the Supplementary Appendix).
- This was the estimated number of deaths that were potentially preventable if only the nations with the highest level of sodium consumption lowered their intake to just the current mean intake in the world.
- If we altered our model so that the estimated benefits of blood-pressure lowering did not continue below 125 mm Hg, 1.55 million deaths from cardiovascular causes in the world (95% uncertainty interval, 1.10 million to 2.10 million) were attributed to sodium consumption above a level of 2.0 g per day.

DISCUSSION

Main Findings
- Globally, 1.65 million deaths from cardiovascular causes in 2010 — about 1 of 10 deaths from cardiovascular causes — were attributed to sodium consumption of more than 2.0 g per day.
- Notably, 4 of 5 of these deaths occurred in low and middle-income countries, and 2 of 5 of these deaths occurred prematurely (before the age of 70 years).

Regional Findings
- Our findings also show and quantify the heterogeneity in disease burden attributed to sodium according to region, age, and type of cardiovascular disease.
- Yet, we also found that no region and few countries were spared.
- Whereas estimated sodium-associated cardiovascular mortality was highest in Central Asia, it was high (more than 750 deaths per 1 million adults who were 70 years of age or older) in all regions.
- The estimated number of proportional sodium-associated deaths was also high, approaching or exceeding 15% of premature deaths from cardiovascular causes in most regions

Dose-response relationship between sodium intake and blood pressure
- Our meta-analysis of 107 randomized interventions in 103 trials showed a linear dose–response relationship between reduced sodium intake and blood pressure, jointly modified according to age, race, and the presence or absence of hypertension.
- These findings are consistent with the findings of a meta-analysis, published after submission of this article, that included fewer trials (34 trials).
- Larger effects in older adults and hypertensive persons would be consistent with decreasing vascular compliance and renal filtration; in blacks, larger effects would be consistent with differences in renal handling of sodium.
- We used randomized trials of reduced sodium intake and blood pressure to estimate the more conceptually appropriate effect of lifetime differences in intake, because direct evidence on lifetime effects, which may be larger, is available only from ecologic comparisons and experiments involving nonhuman primates

Possible controversy
- Some researchers have argued that it may not be possible to directly extrapolate the effects of sodium on blood pressure to cardiovascular risk.
- However, the effect on cardiovascular disease is supported by extensive experimental and ecologic evidence, data on cardiovascular events from some trials of reduced sodium intake, and evidence of the cardiovascular benefits of blood-pressure lowering across multiple interventions (see Section S3 in the Supplementary Appendix).
- A meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies showed that higher sodium consumption was associated with a higher rate of death from coronary heart disease (relative risk, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.13 to 1.53) and death from stroke (relative risk, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.27 to 2.10), the two main end points in our analysis.
- Although concerns have been raised that reduced sodium intake may cause physiological harm, a meta-analysis of 37 trials showed no significant adverse effects on blood lipid levels, catecholamine levels, or renal function

Results from observational studies
- There is mixed evidence from observational data on the relationship between very low sodium intake and cardiovascular events.
- A recent Institute of Medicine report concluded that, if restricted to studies of clinical cardiovascular events, there is insufficient evidence that lowering sodium intake further beyond 2.30 g per day either increases or decreases the occurrence of cardiovascular disease.
- Yet the report further concluded that the entirety of the evidence, “when considered collectively, indicates a positive relationship between higher levels of sodium intake and [the] risk of cardiovascular disease.”
- Although precise targets for sodium reduction remain controversial, various organizations tasked with reviewing all the evidence have arrived at target levels ranging from 1200 to 2400 mg per day (Table S3 in the Supplementary Appendix).

Limitations
- Causality cannot be proved, although every effort was made to maximize validity, minimize error and bias, and incorporate heterogeneity and uncertainty,
- Dietary sodium was estimated based on 24-hour urine collections, which reflect approximately 90% of intake and also can be limited by incomplete collection.
- Data on sodium intake were not available across all countries or years - increased statistical uncertainty and the risk that some data could reflect sampling bias.
- Dietary sodium is also associated with nonfatal cardiovascular disease, kidney disease, and gastric cancer, the second-leading fatal cancer worldwide – may underestimate the full global health effects of dietary sodium.
- No data on potassium consumption – also influences blood pressure and the risk of stroke.
- Specific approaches or timelines for reduced sodium intake was not incorporated.

CONCLUSION
- On the basis of currently available data on sodium consumption, dose–response effects on blood pressure and cardiovascular mortality, and cause-specific deaths, we estimate that in 2010, a total of 1.65 million deaths from cardiovascular causes were attributable to consumption of more than 2.0 g of sodium per day.



Correspondence (Comment by other experts and the authors' reply)

Saturday, July 23, 2016

Intensive vs Standard Blood Pressure Control and Cardiovascular Disease Outcomes in Adults Aged ≥75 Years. A Randomized Clinical Trial

INTRODUCTION
- In the United States, 75% of persons older than 75 years have hypertension, for whom cardiovascular disease complications are a leading cause of disability, morbidity, and mortality
- European guideline committees have recommended treatment initiation only above 160 mm Hg for persons aged 80 years or older
- US guideline, a report from the panel appointed to the Eighth Joint National Committee (JNC 8), recommended a SBP treatment target of 150 mm Hg for adults aged 60 years or older.
- However, a report from a minority of the members argued to retain the previously recommended SBP treatment goal of 140 mm Hg, highlighting the lack of consensus

- Whether treatment targets should consider factors such as frailty or functional status is also unknown
- Observational studies have noted differential associations among elevated blood pressure (BP) and cardiovascular disease, stroke, and mortality risk when analyses are stratified according to measures of functional status.
- A recent secondary analysis of the Systolic Hypertension in the Elderly Program showed that the benefit of antihypertensive therapy was limited to participants without a self-reported physical ability limitation.
- In contrast, analyses from the Hypertension in the Very Elderly Trial (HYVET) showed a consistent benefit with antihypertensive therapy on outcomes irrespective of frailty status.

The Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) recently reported that participants assigned to an intensive SBP treatment target of less than 120 mm Hg vs the standard SBP treatment goal of less than140mmHg had a 25% lower relative risk of major cardiovascular events and death, and a 27% lower relative risk of death from any cause.
- This trial was specifically funded to enhance recruitment of a prespecified subgroup of adults aged 75 years or older, and the study protocol (appears in Supplement 1) also included measures of functional status and frailty.
- This article details results for the prespecified subgroup of adults aged 75 years or older with hypertension.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effects of intensive (<120 mm Hg) compared with standard (<140 mm Hg) SBP targets in persons aged 75 years or older with hypertension but without diabetes.

METHODOLOGY

Population
Inclusion:
- Increased risk for cardiovascular disease (based on a clinical or subclinical cardiovascular disease, chronic kidney disease [CKD], a 10-year Framingham General cardiovascular disease risk ≥15%, or age ≥75 years).

Exclusion:
- had type 2 diabetes, a history of stroke, symptomatic heart failure within the past 6 months or reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (<35%), a clinical diagnosis of or treatment for dementia, an expected survival of less than 3 years, unintentional weight loss (>10% of body weight) during the preceding 6 months, an SBP of less than 110 mm Hg following 1 minute of standing, or resided in a nursing home.

Study Measurements
- Sociodemographic data were collected at baseline, whereas both clinical and laboratory data were obtained at baseline and every 3 months
- Race and ethnicity information was obtained via self-report.
- Blood pressure was determined using the mean of 3 properly sized automated cuff readings, taken 1 minute apart after 5 minutes of quiet rest without staff in the room.
- Gait speed was measured via a timed 4-m walk performed twice at the participant’s usual pace from a standing start.
- The use of an assistive device was permitted if typically used by the participant to walk short distances.
- The faster of the 2 gait speeds (measured in meters/second) was used in the analysis.
- Frailty status at randomization was quantified using a previously reported 37-item frailty index.

Clinical Outcomes
- A committee unaware of treatment assignment adjudicated the protocol-specified clinical outcomes.
- The primary cardiovascular disease outcome was a composite of: nonfatal myocardial infarction, acute coronary syndrome not resulting in a myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, nonfatal acute decompensated heart failure, and death from cardiovascular causes.
- Secondary outcomes: all-cause mortality and the composite of the SPRINT primary outcome and all-cause mortality.
- The primary renal disease outcome was assessed in participants with CKD at baseline (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] <60 ml/min/1.73 m2 based on the 4-variable
Modification of Diet in Renal Disease equation). It was based on the composite incidence of either a decrease in eGFR of 50% or greater (confirmed by subsequent laboratory test ≥90 days later) or the development of end-stage renal disease requiring long-term dialysis or transplantation.
- Secondary renal disease outcome (assessed in participants without CKD at baseline) was based on incidence of a decrease in eGFR from 30% or greater at baseline to a value less than 60 mL/min/1.73 m2 (also confirmed by a subsequent test ≥90 days later).

Definition of Serious Adverse Events
- Serious adverse events (SAEs) were defined as events that were fatal or life threatening, resulted in significant or persistent disability, required hospitalization or resulted in prolonged hospitalization, or medical events that the investigator judged to be a significant hazard or harm to the participant and required medical or surgical intervention to prevent any of these.
- The following conditions of interest were reported as adverse events if they were evaluated in an emergency department: hypotension, syncope, injurious falls, electrolyte abnormalities, and bradycardia.
- Episodes of acute kidney injury (or acute renal failure) were monitored if they led to hospitalization and were reported in the hospital discharge summary.

Statistical Analysis
- Power to detect a 25% treatment effect for the primary outcome within the subgroup of participants aged 75 years or older was estimated assuming an enrollment of 3250.With a 2-year recruitment period, maximum follow-up of 6 years, and annual loss to follow-up of 2%, power was estimated to be 81.9%, assuming an event rate of 3.25%per year in the standard treatment group (Appendix B in Supplement 1).

- Linear-mixed models with an unstructured covariance matrix, assuming independence across participants, were used to model longitudinal differences in SBP between treatment groups
- Fixed effects in the model were BP at randomization and a treatment group indicator.
- The time to first occurrence of the primary composite outcome, all-cause mortality, primary composite outcome plus all-cause mortality, SAEs, and loss to follow-up or withdrawing consent were compared between the 2 randomized groups using Cox proportional hazards regression models with the baseline hazard function stratified by clinic site (participants were recruited at 100 clinics).
- Follow-up time was censored on the date of last event ascertainment on or before August 20, 2015, the date on which the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute director decided to stop the intervention.

- Exploratory secondary analyses were conducted to examine modification of the treatment effect by frailty status and gait speed.
- Neither frailty status nor gait speed was a prespecified subgroup in the trial protocol.
We fit separate Cox regression models:
- for frailty status classified as fit (frailty index ≤0.10), less fit (frailty index >0.10 to ≤0.21), or frail (frailty index >0.21), and
- for gait speed classified as 0.8m/s or greater (normal walker), less than 0.8 m/s (slow walker), or missing.
- Interactions between treatment group, frailty status, and gait speed were formally tested by including interaction terms within a Cox regression model (ie, using likelihood ratio tests to compare with a model that did not allow the treatment effect to vary by frailty status or gait speed).
- For the primary cardiovascular disease composite outcome, sensitivity analyses accounting for the competing risk of death were conducted using the sub-distribution hazard model of Fine and Gray.
- All hypothesis tests were 2-sided at the 5%level of significance

- Additional analyses compared the total burden of SAEs between the randomized groups (allowing for recurrent events) using the mean cumulative count estimator (standard errors computed using bootstrap resampling).
- Hazard ratios (HRs) were computed to compare the randomized groups using the gap-time formation of the Prentice, Williams, and Peterson recurrent events regression model.
- All analyses were performed using SAS version 9.4 (SAS Institute Inc) and the R Statistical Computing Environment (http://www.r-project.org)

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics and Study Retention
- The treatment groups were similar for most characteristics with the exception of frailty status and aspirin use (Table 1).
- Overall, 815 participants (30.9%) were classified as frail and 1456 (55.2%) as less fit (Table 1).
- A total of 2510 (95.2%) participants provided complete follow-up data.

- In the intensive treatment group, 440 participants (33.4%) were classified as frail compared with 375 participants (28.4%) in the standard treatment group.
- A total of 740 participants (28.1%) were classified as slow walkers (<0.8m/s).
- There was no baseline treatment group difference in the proportion of participants classified as slow walkers or in performance on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment screening test

- Even though participants who were less fit, frail, or with reduced gait speed exhibited higher rates of loss to follow-up or withdrawal of consent, there were no significant differences between the treatment groups for frailty or low gait speed (eTable 1 in Supplement 2).
- The frequency at which participants discontinued the intervention but continued follow-up was 6.2% in the intensive treatment group vs 6.4% in the standard treatment group (P = .87).


Blood Pressure Levels
Throughout follow-up,
Mean SBP:
- Intensive treatment group: 123.4 mm Hg
- Standard treatment group: 134.8 mm Hg
- Between group difference: 11.4 mg (95% CI, 10.8-11.9 mm Hg)

Mean Diastolic BP:
- Intensive treatment group: 62.0 mm Hg
- Standard treatment group: 67.2 mm Hg

- On average, participants in the intensive treatment group required 1 more medication to reach the achieved lower BP (eTable 2 and eFigure 1 in Supplement 2).
- Within the intensive treatment group, mean SBP during follow-up was higher for participants classified as less fit or frail compared with those considered fit.

- Differences in mean SBP by treatment group differed by frailty status (P = .01), with frail participants exhibiting smaller inter-treatment group differences (10.8 mm Hg) compared with less fit participants (11.3 mm Hg) and fit participants (13.5 mm Hg).
- Treatment group differences in SBP were similar across subgroups defined by gait speed.


Clinical Outcome
- A primary composite outcome event was observed for 102 participants (2.59% per year) in the intensive treatment group and for 148 participants (3.85% per year) in the standard treatment group (HR, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.51-0.85]; Table 3).
- Results were similar for all-cause mortality (there were 73 deaths in the intensive treatment group and 107 deaths in the standard treatment group; HR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.49-0.91]).
- Inference for the primary outcome was unchanged when non-cardiovascular disease death was treated as a competing risk (HR, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.52-0.85]).
- At 3.14 years, the number needed to treat (NNT) estimate for the primary outcome was 27 (95% CI, 19-61) and for all-cause mortality was 41 (95% CI, 27-145).
 - Because the treatment effect estimate was not statistically significant for cardiovascular disease death, the NNT estimate (using the abbreviations of Altman) was an NNTBenefit of 116 (NNTHarm of 544 to ∞ to NNTBenefit of 68).


- In participants without CKD at the time of randomization, more participants in the intensive treatment group compared with the standard treatment group experienced the secondary CKD outcome (a 30% decrease in eGFR from baseline to an eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 [1.70% vs 0.58% per year, respectively]; HR, 3.14 [95% CI, 1.66-6.37]).
- There were no significant treatment group differences in the primary renal outcome in those with baseline CKD; however, power to detect differences was limited due to low numbers of events.

Exploratory Subgroup Analyses
- Results stratified by baseline frailty status showed higher event rates with increasing frailty in both treatment groups (Table 4 and Figure 2).
- However, within each frailty stratum, absolute event rates were lower for the intensive treatment group (P = .84 for interaction).
- Results were similar when participants were stratified by gait speed (P = .85 for interaction), with the HRs in favor of the intensive treatment group in each gait speed stratum (eFigure 2 in Supplement 2).




Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)
- Detailed information regarding SAEs appears in eTable 3 and eTable 4 in Supplement 2.
- In the intensive treatment group, SAEs occurred in 637 participants (48.4%) compared with 637 participants (48.3%) in the standard treatment group (HR, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.89-1.11]; P = .90).
- The absolute rate of SAEs was higher but was not statistically significantly different in the intensive treatment group for hypotension (2.4%vs 1.4% in the standard treatment group;
For each specific SAE:
- Hypotension: 2.4% (intensive group) vs 1.4% (standard group) (HR, 1.71 [95% CI, 0.97-3.09])
- Syncope: 3.0% (intensive group) vs 2.4% (standard group) (HR, 1.23 [95% CI, 0.76-2.00])
- Electrolyte abnormalities: 4.0% (intensive group) vs 2.7% (standard group) (HR, 1.51 [95% CI, 0.99-2.33])
- Acute kidney injury: 5.5% (intensive group) vs 4.0% (standard group) (HR, 1.41 [95% CI, 0.98-2.04])
- Injurious falls: 4.9% (intensive group) vs 5.5% (standard group) (HR, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.65-1.29])
[Note from ZYL: To see whether the group differences are significant, we look at the 95% confidence interval (CI) of the hazard ratio (HR): If the CI pass did not pass through the value ‘1’, then it is significant; if the CI passed through value ‘1’, then it is not significant (The reason why we look at ‘1’ is because ‘1’ means null effect in ratio).
From the results, all of the CI of the serious adverse events reported passed through the value ‘1’, therefore the serious adverse events between groups were not significantly difference. However, it must be noted that there is a trend that the intensive group had more hypotension, electrolyte abnormalities and acute kidney injury (the lower CI is very near to 1)
- Even though the SAE rates were higher with greater frailty or slower walking speed, these rates were not statistically different by treatment group when stratified by frailty status or gait speed.

DISCUSSION

Main Findings
- These results extend and detail the main SPRINT study findings in community-dwelling persons aged 75 years or older, demonstrating that a treatment goal for SBP of <120 mm Hg reduced incident cardiovascular disease by 33% (from 3.85% to 2.59% per year) and total mortality by 32% (from 2.63% to 1.78% per year)
- Number needed to treat: strategy of intensive BP control for 3.14 years would be expected to prevent 1 primary outcome event for every 27 persons treated and 1 death from any cause for every 41 persons treated.
- These estimates are lower than those from the overall results of the trial due to the higher event rate in persons aged 75 years or older.
- Exploratory analysis also suggested that the benefit of intensive BP control was consistent among persons in this age range who were frail or had reduced gait speed.

Serious Adverse Events
- The overall SAE rate was comparable by treatment group, including among the most frail participants.
- There were no differences in the number of participants experiencing injurious falls or in the prevalence of orthostatic hypotension measured at study visits – complement results from other trials demonstrating improved BP control reduces risk for orthostatic hypotension and has no effect on risk for injurious falls

Limitations
- Randomization was not stratified by categories of age
- Did not enroll older adults residing in nursing homes, persons with type 2 diabetes or prevalent stroke (because of concurrent BP lowering trials) and individuals with symptomatic heart failure due to protocol differences required to maintain BP control in this condition – cannot be generalized to these groups of patients. Individuals with these conditions also represent a subset of older persons at increased risk for falls.

Exploratory Analysis
- No other chronic conditions were excluded from this trial, and the frailty index applied in this study combined with the assessment of gait speed contribute to assessing possible effect modification by comorbidity and functional status.
- In exploratory analyses, there was no evidence of heterogeneity for the cardiovascular benefit of intensive BP management by frailty or gait speed.
- However, these analyses should be interpreted cautiously.
- The analyses were not prespecified in the trial protocol and were possibly underpowered because SPRINT was designed to consider only the ability to detect a treatment effect in participants aged 75 years or older as a whole

Representativeness of the trial participants
- Despite excluding some chronic conditions, 30.9% of participants aged 75 years or older in this trial were categorized as frail at baseline, and the distribution of frailty status parallels that estimated for ambulatory, community living populations of similar age.
- In addition, the proportion of US adults aged 75 years or older who have hypertension and meet the study entry criteria has been estimated to represent 64% of that population using the 2007-2012 National Health and Nutrition Surveys (approximately 5.8 million individuals).
- Therefore, participants aged 75 years or older in this trial are representative of a sizeable fraction of adults in this age group with hypertension

Compare with the HYVET Trial
- Randomized 3845 patients aged 80 years or older within Europe and Asia (mean age, 83 years [3 years older than SPRINT]; mean entry SBP, 173mmHg [31 mm Hg higher than SPRINT]) to either therapy with indapamide, with or without the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor perindopril, or placebo with an SBP treatment goal of <150 mm Hg.
- The 2-year between-group SBP difference was 15 mm Hg (the active treatment group achieved a mean SBP of 143mm Hg, slightly higher than the SPRINT baseline SBP).
- Similar to SPRINT, HYVET was terminated early (at a median follow-up time of 1.8 years) due to significant reductions in the incidence rate of total mortality.
- A retrospective analysis of the HYVET population conducted to determine its frailty status identified that (1) the cohort’s frailty status was similar to that of community living populations of similar age and (2) the treatment benefits were similar even in the most frail participants.
- Taken together, current results from SPRINT also reinforce and extend HYVET’s conclusions that risk reductions in cardiovascular disease events and mortality from high BP treatment are evident regardless of frailty status

SAEs related to Acute Kidney Injury
- Among all participants aged 75 years or older, the SAEs related to acute kidney injury occurred more frequently in the intensive treatment group (72 participants [5.5%] vs 53 participants [4.0%] in the standard treatment group).
- The differences in adverse renal outcomes may be related to a reversible intrarenal hemodynamic effect of the reduction in BP and more frequent use of diuretics, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, and angiotensin II receptor blockers in the intensive treatment group.
- Although there is no evidence of permanent kidney injury associated with the lower BP goal, the possibility of long-term adverse renal outcomes cannot be excluded and requires longer-term follow-up

Implications of the study
- Considering the high prevalence of hypertension among older persons, patients and their physicians may be inclined to underestimate the burden of hypertension or the benefits of lowering BP, resulting in under-treatment.
- On average, the benefits that resulted from intensive therapy required treatment with 1 additional antihypertensive drug and additional early visits for dose titration and monitoring.
- Future analyses of SPRINT data may be helpful to better define the burden, costs, and benefits of intensive BP control.
- However, the present results have substantial implications for the future of intensive BP therapy in older adults because of this condition’s high prevalence, the high absolute risk for cardiovascular disease complications from elevated BP, and the devastating consequences of such events on the independent function of older people

CONCLUSIONS
- Among ambulatory adults aged 75 years or older, treating to an SBP target of less than 120 mm Hg compared with an SBP target of less than 140 mm Hg resulted in significantly lower rates of fatal and nonfatal major cardiovascular events and death from any cause
- The overall serious adverse events rate was comparable by treatment group, including among the most frail participants.