Forum for Science, Industry and Business

Sponsored by:     3M 
Search our Site:

 

Prominent hypertension specialists question results of TROPHY study on hypertension

30.10.2006
There may be as many as 70 million Americans with prehypertension. If these people can be treated pharmacologically to avoid or delay progression to clinical hypertension, there would be significant benefits to them and the overall health of the population.

The recent TROPHY study seems to lead to that conclusion. However, two editorials published in the November issue of the American Journal of Hypertension emphatically argue that the study is flawed and the conclusions reached are misleading.

Persons with prehypertension, generally defined as having a systolic blood pressure in the range of 120-139 mm Hg or a diastolic blood pressure of 80-89, will usually develop hypertension at the rate of about 10% per year. The recent Trial of Preventing Hypertension (TROPHY) examined whether treating patients with candesartan for two years resulted in a sustained reduction in the incidence of high blood pressure after the drug was discontinued. The TROPHY study concluded that the treatment significantly reduced the risk of incident hypertension over the four year study.

According to Stephen Persell, MD, MPH, TROPHY results are likely invalid. He and co-author David W. Baker, MD, MPH, both of the Feinberg School of Medicine at Northwestern University, argue that the study used an unusual definition of incident hypertension which could not accurately discriminate whether the drug had a sustained effect. They demonstrate that because blood pressure readings taken during active treatment were combined with readings taken after treatment had ended, a difference between treatment and placebo could appear even if blood pressures were identical after the treatment had ended. They also analyze how the results could be misleading due to the methods used to calculate the mean blood pressures.

In the second editorial, Jay I. Meltzer MD, Clinical Specialist in Hypertension in the Nephrology Division of the Columbia College of Physicians and Surgeons, also zeros in on the study endpoint. He argues that clinical practitioners would require a more realistic, classical definition of incident hypertension than was used in TROPHY.

Dr. Meltzer also identifies two other issues in the study. He explains, "Further straining the question of applicability is the confusion between what the authors said they would do and what they actually did. They renamed TROPHY a 'feasibility' study, without specifically defining the term. It usually means a pilot study, but TROPHY was not designed as a pilot…Clinicians rightly suspect bias when the trial language is changed post hoc to allow more accommodation to the data." Finally, he argues that the major conclusion that the drug did prevent the development of hypertension was compromised by the choice of an arbitrary endpoint.

Persell and Baker caution that "the consequences of drawing erroneous conclusions from studies of treatments to prevent progression from pre-hypertension to hypertension are enormous. An expert panel of statisticians and trial methodologists without ties to pharmaceutical companies should be convened to provide consensus recommendations for how future studies addressing the prevention of hypertension should be conducted and reported. Computer models should also be used to confirm that the study methodology would not make it appear that a treatment for prehypertension had sustained benefits when, in fact, none existed."

Dr. Meltzer is equally direct. "What conclusions might actually be appropriate? TROPHY proved that two years of candesartan treatment of patients with 'high normal' or 'prehypertension' did not prevent or delay the development of hypertension, but instead caused a 'slow unmasking.' Reasonable acceptance of the author's own predetermined guidelines for the interpretation of 'slow unmasking' would have necessitated publishing a negative study, which, paradoxically, could have been a great benefit to the hypertension literature. Instead, TROPHY was presented in a way that enables those who want to believe in the original idea despite the evidence against it, still can and still do. Even as the authors trumpet candesartan's success in the paper's conclusions and in public presentations, the conclusion section of TROPHY paradoxically states that they do not advocate treating the 25 million people with prehypertension, but don't explain why."

Yvonne Raiford | EurekAlert!
Further information:
http://www.elsevierhealth.com/

More articles from Studies and Analyses:

nachricht The Great Unknown: Risk-Taking Behavior in Adolescents
19.01.2017 | Max-Planck-Institut für Bildungsforschung

nachricht A sudden drop in outdoor temperature increases the risk of respiratory infections
11.01.2017 | University of Gothenburg

All articles from Studies and Analyses >>>

The most recent press releases about innovation >>>

Die letzten 5 Focus-News des innovations-reports im Überblick:

Im Focus: Quantum optical sensor for the first time tested in space – with a laser system from Berlin

For the first time ever, a cloud of ultra-cold atoms has been successfully created in space on board of a sounding rocket. The MAIUS mission demonstrates that quantum optical sensors can be operated even in harsh environments like space – a prerequi-site for finding answers to the most challenging questions of fundamental physics and an important innovation driver for everyday applications.

According to Albert Einstein's Equivalence Principle, all bodies are accelerated at the same rate by the Earth's gravity, regardless of their properties. This...

Im Focus: Traffic jam in empty space

New success for Konstanz physicists in studying the quantum vacuum

An important step towards a completely new experimental access to quantum physics has been made at University of Konstanz. The team of scientists headed by...

Im Focus: How gut bacteria can make us ill

HZI researchers decipher infection mechanisms of Yersinia and immune responses of the host

Yersiniae cause severe intestinal infections. Studies using Yersinia pseudotuberculosis as a model organism aim to elucidate the infection mechanisms of these...

Im Focus: Interfacial Superconductivity: Magnetic and superconducting order revealed simultaneously

Researchers from the University of Hamburg in Germany, in collaboration with colleagues from the University of Aarhus in Denmark, have synthesized a new superconducting material by growing a few layers of an antiferromagnetic transition-metal chalcogenide on a bismuth-based topological insulator, both being non-superconducting materials.

While superconductivity and magnetism are generally believed to be mutually exclusive, surprisingly, in this new material, superconducting correlations...

Im Focus: Studying fundamental particles in materials

Laser-driving of semimetals allows creating novel quasiparticle states within condensed matter systems and switching between different states on ultrafast time scales

Studying properties of fundamental particles in condensed matter systems is a promising approach to quantum field theory. Quasiparticles offer the opportunity...

All Focus news of the innovation-report >>>

Anzeige

Anzeige

Event News

Sustainable Water use in Agriculture in Eastern Europe and Central Asia

19.01.2017 | Event News

12V, 48V, high-voltage – trends in E/E automotive architecture

10.01.2017 | Event News

2nd Conference on Non-Textual Information on 10 and 11 May 2017 in Hannover

09.01.2017 | Event News

 
Latest News

Tracking movement of immune cells identifies key first steps in inflammatory arthritis

23.01.2017 | Health and Medicine

Electrocatalysis can advance green transition

23.01.2017 | Physics and Astronomy

New technology for mass-production of complex molded composite components

23.01.2017 | Process Engineering

VideoLinks
B2B-VideoLinks
More VideoLinks >>>