David M Reboussin,Sarah A Gaussoin,Nicholas M Pajewski,Byron C Jaeger,Bonnie Sachs,Stephen R Rapp,Mark A Supiano,Maryjo L Cleveland,Valerie Hunter,Jamehl L Demons,Paula K Ogrocki,Alan Jay Lerner,Gordon J Chelune,Virginia G Wadley,Margaret L Scales,Nancy F Woolard,Letitia H Perdue,Kathryn E Callahan,Jeff D Williamson
{"title":"强化与标准血压控制对SPRINT患者轻度认知障碍和可能的痴呆的长期影响。","authors":"David M Reboussin,Sarah A Gaussoin,Nicholas M Pajewski,Byron C Jaeger,Bonnie Sachs,Stephen R Rapp,Mark A Supiano,Maryjo L Cleveland,Valerie Hunter,Jamehl L Demons,Paula K Ogrocki,Alan Jay Lerner,Gordon J Chelune,Virginia G Wadley,Margaret L Scales,Nancy F Woolard,Letitia H Perdue,Kathryn E Callahan,Jeff D Williamson","doi":"10.1212/wnl.0000000000213334","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES\r\nThe Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial suggested that intensive lowering of systolic blood pressure (SBP) decreases the risk of developing dementia. However, an insufficient number of probable dementia cases stemming from the trial's early termination made results inconclusive. The goal of this study was to estimate the effect of intensive vs standard SBP lowering on the longer term incidence of cognitive impairment leveraging extended follow-up for cognitive status.\r\n\r\nMETHODS\r\nThis is a prespecified secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial. Between 2010 and 2013, patients aged 50 years and older with hypertension and increased cardiovascular risk excluding those with diabetes mellitus or history of stroke were recruited from 102 clinics in the United States and Puerto Rico. Participants were randomized to a SBP goal of <120 mm Hg (intensive treatment) or <140 mm Hg (standard treatment) and received treatment for 3.3 years. In-person cognitive assessment follow-up occurred through July 2018. Continued ascertainment of cognitive status by telephone began in December 2019 for participants who had not withdrawn consent or been previously adjudicated with probable dementia, but provided consent for future research. Data were analyzed using survival analyses.\r\n\r\nRESULTS\r\nOf 9,361 randomized participants, 7,221 (77%) were eligible to be re-contacted. Cognitive status of 4,232 (59%) was ascertained (mean age 67 years, 36% female). We accrued a total of 216 new cases of probable dementia, less than our target of 326. Over a median follow-up of 7 years, 248 participants of the intensive treatment group (8.5 per 1,000 person-years) were adjudicated with probable dementia, compared with 293 participants (10.2 per 1,000 person-years) in the standard treatment group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.86; 95% CI, 0.72-1.02). Consistent with earlier results from the trial, the rate of both mild cognitive impairment (MCI; HR, 0.87 95% CI, 0.76-1.00) and a composite of MCI or probable dementia was lower with intensive treatment (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.79, 0.99).\r\n\r\nDISCUSSION\r\nAmong ambulatory adults with hypertension and high cardiovascular risk, intensive treatment vs standard treatment of SBP for 3.3 years resulted in a lower risk of MCI and cognitive impairment including MCI or probable dementia, but not for probable dementia alone.\r\n\r\nCLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE\r\nThis study provides Class II evidence that intensively reducing SBP (target <120 mm Hg) decreases the risk of cognitive impairment in individuals aged 50 years and older with hypertension.\r\n\r\nCLINICAL TRIAL INFORMATION\r\nClinical trial number NCT01206062.","PeriodicalId":19256,"journal":{"name":"Neurology","volume":"83 1","pages":"e213334"},"PeriodicalIF":7.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Long-Term Effect of Intensive vs Standard Blood Pressure Control on Mild Cognitive Impairment and Probable Dementia in SPRINT.\",\"authors\":\"David M Reboussin,Sarah A Gaussoin,Nicholas M Pajewski,Byron C Jaeger,Bonnie Sachs,Stephen R Rapp,Mark A Supiano,Maryjo L Cleveland,Valerie Hunter,Jamehl L Demons,Paula K Ogrocki,Alan Jay Lerner,Gordon J Chelune,Virginia G Wadley,Margaret L Scales,Nancy F Woolard,Letitia H Perdue,Kathryn E Callahan,Jeff D Williamson\",\"doi\":\"10.1212/wnl.0000000000213334\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES\\r\\nThe Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial suggested that intensive lowering of systolic blood pressure (SBP) decreases the risk of developing dementia. However, an insufficient number of probable dementia cases stemming from the trial's early termination made results inconclusive. The goal of this study was to estimate the effect of intensive vs standard SBP lowering on the longer term incidence of cognitive impairment leveraging extended follow-up for cognitive status.\\r\\n\\r\\nMETHODS\\r\\nThis is a prespecified secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial. Between 2010 and 2013, patients aged 50 years and older with hypertension and increased cardiovascular risk excluding those with diabetes mellitus or history of stroke were recruited from 102 clinics in the United States and Puerto Rico. Participants were randomized to a SBP goal of <120 mm Hg (intensive treatment) or <140 mm Hg (standard treatment) and received treatment for 3.3 years. In-person cognitive assessment follow-up occurred through July 2018. Continued ascertainment of cognitive status by telephone began in December 2019 for participants who had not withdrawn consent or been previously adjudicated with probable dementia, but provided consent for future research. Data were analyzed using survival analyses.\\r\\n\\r\\nRESULTS\\r\\nOf 9,361 randomized participants, 7,221 (77%) were eligible to be re-contacted. Cognitive status of 4,232 (59%) was ascertained (mean age 67 years, 36% female). We accrued a total of 216 new cases of probable dementia, less than our target of 326. Over a median follow-up of 7 years, 248 participants of the intensive treatment group (8.5 per 1,000 person-years) were adjudicated with probable dementia, compared with 293 participants (10.2 per 1,000 person-years) in the standard treatment group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.86; 95% CI, 0.72-1.02). Consistent with earlier results from the trial, the rate of both mild cognitive impairment (MCI; HR, 0.87 95% CI, 0.76-1.00) and a composite of MCI or probable dementia was lower with intensive treatment (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.79, 0.99).\\r\\n\\r\\nDISCUSSION\\r\\nAmong ambulatory adults with hypertension and high cardiovascular risk, intensive treatment vs standard treatment of SBP for 3.3 years resulted in a lower risk of MCI and cognitive impairment including MCI or probable dementia, but not for probable dementia alone.\\r\\n\\r\\nCLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE\\r\\nThis study provides Class II evidence that intensively reducing SBP (target <120 mm Hg) decreases the risk of cognitive impairment in individuals aged 50 years and older with hypertension.\\r\\n\\r\\nCLINICAL TRIAL INFORMATION\\r\\nClinical trial number NCT01206062.\",\"PeriodicalId\":19256,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neurology\",\"volume\":\"83 1\",\"pages\":\"e213334\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neurology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.0000000000213334\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.0000000000213334","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景与目的收缩压干预试验表明,强化降低收缩压(SBP)可降低发生痴呆的风险。然而,由于试验过早终止而导致的可能痴呆病例数量不足,导致结果不确定。本研究的目的是通过对认知状态的长期随访,评估强化降压与标准降压对认知障碍长期发生率的影响。方法:这是一项预先指定的随机临床试验的二次分析。在2010年至2013年期间,从美国和波多黎各的102家诊所招募了年龄在50岁及以上的高血压患者,心血管风险增加,不包括糖尿病或中风病史。参与者被随机分为收缩压目标<120 mm Hg(强化治疗)或<140 mm Hg(标准治疗),并接受3.3年的治疗。现场认知评估随访持续到2018年7月。从2019年12月开始,通过电话继续确定认知状态,参与者没有撤回同意或先前被裁定患有可能的痴呆症,但为未来的研究提供了同意。数据采用生存分析进行分析。结果9361名随机参与者中,7221名(77%)符合再次联系条件。确定了4232人(59%)的认知状况(平均年龄67岁,36%为女性)。我们总共积累了216例可能的痴呆症新病例,低于326例的目标。在中位7年的随访中,强化治疗组有248名参与者(每1000人年8.5名)被判定为可能患有痴呆,而标准治疗组有293名参与者(每1000人年10.2名)(风险比[HR], 0.86;95% ci, 0.72-1.02)。与早期试验结果一致,轻度认知障碍(MCI;HR, 0.87 95% CI, 0.76-1.00),强化治疗降低了MCI或可能痴呆的复合发生率(HR, 0.89;95% ci, 0.79, 0.99)。在患有高血压和高危心血管疾病的门诊成年人中,强化治疗与标准收压治疗3.3年相比,轻度认知损伤和认知障碍(包括轻度认知损伤或可能的痴呆)的风险较低,但仅对可能的痴呆没有影响。证据分类:这项研究提供了II级证据,表明在50岁及以上的高血压患者中,密集降低收缩压(目标<120 mm Hg)可降低认知功能障碍的风险。临床试验信息临床试验编号NCT01206062。
Long-Term Effect of Intensive vs Standard Blood Pressure Control on Mild Cognitive Impairment and Probable Dementia in SPRINT.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES
The Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial suggested that intensive lowering of systolic blood pressure (SBP) decreases the risk of developing dementia. However, an insufficient number of probable dementia cases stemming from the trial's early termination made results inconclusive. The goal of this study was to estimate the effect of intensive vs standard SBP lowering on the longer term incidence of cognitive impairment leveraging extended follow-up for cognitive status.
METHODS
This is a prespecified secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial. Between 2010 and 2013, patients aged 50 years and older with hypertension and increased cardiovascular risk excluding those with diabetes mellitus or history of stroke were recruited from 102 clinics in the United States and Puerto Rico. Participants were randomized to a SBP goal of <120 mm Hg (intensive treatment) or <140 mm Hg (standard treatment) and received treatment for 3.3 years. In-person cognitive assessment follow-up occurred through July 2018. Continued ascertainment of cognitive status by telephone began in December 2019 for participants who had not withdrawn consent or been previously adjudicated with probable dementia, but provided consent for future research. Data were analyzed using survival analyses.
RESULTS
Of 9,361 randomized participants, 7,221 (77%) were eligible to be re-contacted. Cognitive status of 4,232 (59%) was ascertained (mean age 67 years, 36% female). We accrued a total of 216 new cases of probable dementia, less than our target of 326. Over a median follow-up of 7 years, 248 participants of the intensive treatment group (8.5 per 1,000 person-years) were adjudicated with probable dementia, compared with 293 participants (10.2 per 1,000 person-years) in the standard treatment group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.86; 95% CI, 0.72-1.02). Consistent with earlier results from the trial, the rate of both mild cognitive impairment (MCI; HR, 0.87 95% CI, 0.76-1.00) and a composite of MCI or probable dementia was lower with intensive treatment (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.79, 0.99).
DISCUSSION
Among ambulatory adults with hypertension and high cardiovascular risk, intensive treatment vs standard treatment of SBP for 3.3 years resulted in a lower risk of MCI and cognitive impairment including MCI or probable dementia, but not for probable dementia alone.
CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE
This study provides Class II evidence that intensively reducing SBP (target <120 mm Hg) decreases the risk of cognitive impairment in individuals aged 50 years and older with hypertension.
CLINICAL TRIAL INFORMATION
Clinical trial number NCT01206062.
期刊介绍:
Neurology, the official journal of the American Academy of Neurology, aspires to be the premier peer-reviewed journal for clinical neurology research. Its mission is to publish exceptional peer-reviewed original research articles, editorials, and reviews to improve patient care, education, clinical research, and professionalism in neurology.
As the leading clinical neurology journal worldwide, Neurology targets physicians specializing in nervous system diseases and conditions. It aims to advance the field by presenting new basic and clinical research that influences neurological practice. The journal is a leading source of cutting-edge, peer-reviewed information for the neurology community worldwide. Editorial content includes Research, Clinical/Scientific Notes, Views, Historical Neurology, NeuroImages, Humanities, Letters, and position papers from the American Academy of Neurology. The online version is considered the definitive version, encompassing all available content.
Neurology is indexed in prestigious databases such as MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Biological Abstracts®, PsycINFO®, Current Contents®, Web of Science®, CrossRef, and Google Scholar.