{"title":"虚弱对2型糖尿病患者强化血压控制有效性的影响:一项随机对照试验的二次分析","authors":"Li Wenjie, Zhiyan Wang, Mingxiao Li, Chao Jiang, Chang Hua, Yangyang Tang, Hao Zhang, Xinru Liu, Shiyue Zheng, Hang Guo, Manlin Zhao, Yu Feng Wang, Mingyang Gao, Qiang Lv, Jianzeng Dong, Chang-Sheng Ma, Xin Du","doi":"10.1136/heartjnl-2024-324360","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Frailty is an independent risk factor for cardiovascular events. It is uncertain whether frailty modifies the efficacy of intensive blood pressure (BP) control among participants with type 2 diabetes mellitus(T2DM).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes Blood Pressure (ACCORD BP) trial, a two-by-two factorial trial, examined the effects of systolic BP (<120 vs <140 mm Hg) and glycaemic control on cardiovascular events in T2DM. We constructed a frailty index using the Rockwood cumulative deficit approach. Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate the effectiveness of intensive BP treatment according to frailty status. The primary composite outcome was non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke or death from cardiovascular causes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 4733 participants (mean age: 62.7 years; 39.9% frailty). The mean average number of antihypertensive medications was higher in frail patients compared with non-frail patients in both the standard (2.2 vs 1.7) and intensive (3.1 vs 2.7) treatment groups. In the standard glycaemic arm, intensive BP treatment reduced the risk of the primary outcome (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.97) regardless of frailty status (p value for interaction=0.86). The benefits of intensive BP intervention were consistent across the spectrum of the frailty index (p value for interaction=0.96) in the standard glycaemic arm. However, no benefits of intensive BP treatment (HR 1.08, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.43) were observed in the intensive glycaemic arm.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In the ACCORD BP study, the benefit of intensive BP treatment was consistent regardless of frailty in the setting of standard glycaemic control. Frailty should not be a barrier to intensive BP control in patients with T2DM treated with guideline-recommended standard glycaemic control.</p>","PeriodicalId":12835,"journal":{"name":"Heart","volume":" ","pages":"626-633"},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Impact of frailty on the effectiveness of intensive blood pressure control for patients with type 2 diabetes: a secondary analysis of a randomised controlled trial.\",\"authors\":\"Li Wenjie, Zhiyan Wang, Mingxiao Li, Chao Jiang, Chang Hua, Yangyang Tang, Hao Zhang, Xinru Liu, Shiyue Zheng, Hang Guo, Manlin Zhao, Yu Feng Wang, Mingyang Gao, Qiang Lv, Jianzeng Dong, Chang-Sheng Ma, Xin Du\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/heartjnl-2024-324360\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Frailty is an independent risk factor for cardiovascular events. It is uncertain whether frailty modifies the efficacy of intensive blood pressure (BP) control among participants with type 2 diabetes mellitus(T2DM).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes Blood Pressure (ACCORD BP) trial, a two-by-two factorial trial, examined the effects of systolic BP (<120 vs <140 mm Hg) and glycaemic control on cardiovascular events in T2DM. We constructed a frailty index using the Rockwood cumulative deficit approach. Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate the effectiveness of intensive BP treatment according to frailty status. The primary composite outcome was non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke or death from cardiovascular causes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 4733 participants (mean age: 62.7 years; 39.9% frailty). The mean average number of antihypertensive medications was higher in frail patients compared with non-frail patients in both the standard (2.2 vs 1.7) and intensive (3.1 vs 2.7) treatment groups. In the standard glycaemic arm, intensive BP treatment reduced the risk of the primary outcome (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.97) regardless of frailty status (p value for interaction=0.86). The benefits of intensive BP intervention were consistent across the spectrum of the frailty index (p value for interaction=0.96) in the standard glycaemic arm. However, no benefits of intensive BP treatment (HR 1.08, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.43) were observed in the intensive glycaemic arm.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In the ACCORD BP study, the benefit of intensive BP treatment was consistent regardless of frailty in the setting of standard glycaemic control. Frailty should not be a barrier to intensive BP control in patients with T2DM treated with guideline-recommended standard glycaemic control.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12835,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Heart\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"626-633\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Heart\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2024-324360\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Heart","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2024-324360","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:虚弱是心血管事件的独立危险因素。目前尚不清楚虚弱是否会改变2型糖尿病(T2DM)患者强化血压控制的效果。方法:控制糖尿病血压心血管风险试验(ACCORD BP)是一项二乘二因子试验,研究了收缩压的影响(结果:4733名参与者(平均年龄:62.7岁;39.9%的弱点)。在标准治疗组(2.2 vs 1.7)和强化治疗组(3.1 vs 2.7)中,体弱患者的平均降压药物数量均高于非体弱患者。在标准血糖组,强化降压治疗降低了主要结局的风险(HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.58至0.97),无论虚弱状态如何(相互作用的p值=0.86)。在标准血糖组中,强化降压干预的益处在整个虚弱指数范围内是一致的(相互作用的p值=0.96)。然而,在强化降糖组中,没有观察到强化降压治疗的益处(HR 1.08, 95% CI 0.82 - 1.43)。结论:在ACCORD BP研究中,在标准血糖控制的情况下,无论虚弱与否,强化BP治疗的益处是一致的。在接受指南推荐的标准血糖控制治疗的T2DM患者中,虚弱不应成为强化血压控制的障碍。
The Impact of frailty on the effectiveness of intensive blood pressure control for patients with type 2 diabetes: a secondary analysis of a randomised controlled trial.
Background: Frailty is an independent risk factor for cardiovascular events. It is uncertain whether frailty modifies the efficacy of intensive blood pressure (BP) control among participants with type 2 diabetes mellitus(T2DM).
Methods: The Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes Blood Pressure (ACCORD BP) trial, a two-by-two factorial trial, examined the effects of systolic BP (<120 vs <140 mm Hg) and glycaemic control on cardiovascular events in T2DM. We constructed a frailty index using the Rockwood cumulative deficit approach. Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate the effectiveness of intensive BP treatment according to frailty status. The primary composite outcome was non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke or death from cardiovascular causes.
Results: There were 4733 participants (mean age: 62.7 years; 39.9% frailty). The mean average number of antihypertensive medications was higher in frail patients compared with non-frail patients in both the standard (2.2 vs 1.7) and intensive (3.1 vs 2.7) treatment groups. In the standard glycaemic arm, intensive BP treatment reduced the risk of the primary outcome (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.97) regardless of frailty status (p value for interaction=0.86). The benefits of intensive BP intervention were consistent across the spectrum of the frailty index (p value for interaction=0.96) in the standard glycaemic arm. However, no benefits of intensive BP treatment (HR 1.08, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.43) were observed in the intensive glycaemic arm.
Conclusions: In the ACCORD BP study, the benefit of intensive BP treatment was consistent regardless of frailty in the setting of standard glycaemic control. Frailty should not be a barrier to intensive BP control in patients with T2DM treated with guideline-recommended standard glycaemic control.
期刊介绍:
Heart is an international peer reviewed journal that keeps cardiologists up to date with important research advances in cardiovascular disease. New scientific developments are highlighted in editorials and put in context with concise review articles. There is one free Editor’s Choice article in each issue, with open access options available to authors for all articles. Education in Heart articles provide a comprehensive, continuously updated, cardiology curriculum.