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.”
The editorials are “Studying Interventions to Prevent the Progression from Prehypertension to Hypertension: Does TROPHY Win the Prize?” by Stephen D. Persell, MD, MPH, and David W. Baker, MD, MPH, and “A Specialist in Clinical Hypertension Critiques the Trophy Trial” by Jay I. Meltzer MD. Both appear in the November issue of the American Journal of Hypertension, Volume 19/Issue 11, published by Elsevier.
Yvonne Raiford | alfa
3D images of cancer cells in the body: Medical physicists from Halle present new method
16.05.2018 | Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg
Better equipped in the fight against lung cancer
16.05.2018 | Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg
At the LASYS 2018, from June 5th to 7th, the Laser Zentrum Hannover e.V. (LZH) will be showcasing processes for the laser material processing of tomorrow in hall 4 at stand 4E75. With blown bomb shells the LZH will present first results of a research project on civil security.
At this year's LASYS, the LZH will exhibit light-based processes such as cutting, welding, ablation and structuring as well as additive manufacturing for...
There are videos on the internet that can make one marvel at technology. For example, a smartphone is casually bent around the arm or a thin-film display is rolled in all directions and with almost every diameter. From the user's point of view, this looks fantastic. From a professional point of view, however, the question arises: Is that already possible?
At Display Week 2018, scientists from the Fraunhofer Institute for Applied Polymer Research IAP will be demonstrating today’s technological possibilities and...
So-called quantum many-body scars allow quantum systems to stay out of equilibrium much longer, explaining experiment | Study published in Nature Physics
Recently, researchers from Harvard and MIT succeeded in trapping a record 53 atoms and individually controlling their quantum state, realizing what is called a...
The historic first detection of gravitational waves from colliding black holes far outside our galaxy opened a new window to understanding the universe. A...
A team led by Austrian experimental physicist Rainer Blatt has succeeded in characterizing the quantum entanglement of two spatially separated atoms by observing their light emission. This fundamental demonstration could lead to the development of highly sensitive optical gradiometers for the precise measurement of the gravitational field or the earth's magnetic field.
The age of quantum technology has long been heralded. Decades of research into the quantum world have led to the development of methods that make it possible...
02.05.2018 | Event News
13.04.2018 | Event News
12.04.2018 | Event News
23.05.2018 | Life Sciences
23.05.2018 | Life Sciences
23.05.2018 | Physics and Astronomy