|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
|
A putative placebo comparison of the SCOPE and LIFE trials
Peter A Meredith
University of Glasgow, Division of Cardiovascular & Medical Sciences, Gardiner Institute, Western Infirmary, Glasgow, G11 6NT, Scotland, UK, P.A.Meredith{at}clinmed.gla.ac.uk
Lilian S Murray
University of Glasgow, Division of Cardiovascular & Medical Sciences, Gardiner Institute, Western Infirmary, Glasgow, G11 6NT, Scotland, UK
John JV McMurray
University of Glasgow, Division of Cardiovascular & Medical Sciences, Gardiner Institute, Western Infirmary, Glasgow, G11 6NT, Scotland, UK
The Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension (LIFE) trial and the Study on Cognition and Prognosis in the Elderly (SCOPE) superficially produced comparable outcomes, with effects on stroke greater than those anticipated from blood pressure (BP) lowering alone. This, however, ignores important features of both studies. It ignores firstly the disparate comparator agents — atenolol in LIFE and predominantly hydrochlorthiazide in SCOPE, secondly the small, but potentially important BP differential between the treatment arms in SCOPE and finally the small, statistically non-significant increase in coronary heart disease (CHD) in both trials. This analysis compares the major cardiovascular outcomes in these trials with reference to placebo. Two alternative reference populations were employed to calculate the imputed placebo, firstly the MRC Trial in Elderly Hypertensives and secondly a meta-analysis of trials in the elderly, which included comparisons between diuretic- and β-blocker-based regimens. Overall, the choice of `comparator placebo' did not substantially influence the derived results. Accounting for BP difference and based on the meta-analysis, both trials demonstrated statistically significant reductions in fatal/non-fatal stroke compared with placebo — relative risks (95% confidence intervals [CI]) of 0.53 (0.39, 0.73) and 0.56 (0.41, 0.76) for SCOPE and LIFE, respectively. For fatal/non-fatal MI, there were greater discrepancies between the studies, but with neither achieving statistical significance compared with placebo — relative risks of 0.85 (0.59, 1.24) and 1.08 (0.80, 1.46) for SCOPE and LIFE, respectively. This analysis clearly demonstrates that both candesartan in SCOPE and losartan in LIFE are associated with reductions in stroke events compared with placebo, greater than that observed in the well-established meta-analysis of placebo-controlled hypertensive trials. However, the CIs are such that it is not possible to suggest definitively that this is a benefit beyond BP reduction alone. Neither trial is sufficiently `powered' to demonstrate a benefit in CHD outcomes, but with SCOPE there was a trend towards benefit with a point estimate compatible with the major meta-analysis.
Key Words: LIFE • SCOPE • losartan • candesartan • imputed placebo
References
- Collins R., Peto R., MacMahon S. et al. Blood pressure, stroke, and coronary heart disease. Part 2, short-term reductions in blood pressure: Overview of randomised drug trials in their epidemiological context.Lancet 1990;335:827-38.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Staessen JA, Wang J-G., Thijs L. Cardiovascular prevention and blood pressure reduction:A quantitative overview updated until 1 March 2003. J Hypertens 2003;21:1055-76.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Furberg CD, Wright Jr JT, Davis BR et al. Major outcomes in high-risk hypertensive patients randomized to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or calcium channel blocker vs diuretic:The Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering treatment to prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT).JAMA 2002;288:2981-97.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Dahlof B., Devereux RB, Kjeldsen SE et al. Cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in the Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension study (LIFE):A randomised trial against atenolol. Lancet 2002;359:995-1003.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Lithell H., Hansson L., Skoog I. et al.The study on cognition and prognosis in the elderly (SCOPE): Principal results of a randomized double-blind intervention trial. J Hypertens 2003; 21:875-86.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Messerli FH, Grossman E., Goldbourt U. Are beta-blockers efficacious as first-line therapy for hypertension in the elderly? JAMA 1998;279:1903-07.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Peart S., Brennan PJ, Broughton P. et al. Medical Research Council trial of treatment of hypertension in older adults: Principal results. BMJ 1992;304:405-12.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Hasselblad V., Kong DF Statistical methods for comparison to placebo in active-control trials. Drug Info J 2001;35:435-49.
- MacMahon S., Rodger A. The effects of antihypertensive treatment on vascular disease: reappraisal of the evidence in 1994. J Cardiovasc Med Biol 1993;279:1903-07.
- Collin R., MacMahon S. Blood pressure, antihypertensive drug treatment and the risks of stroke and of coronary heart disease. Brit Med Bull 1994;50:272-98.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Blood Pressure Lowering Treatment Trialists' Collaboration. Effects of different blood-pressure-lowering regimens on major cardiovascular events: results of prospectivelydesigned overviews of randomised trials. Lancet 2003;362: 1527-35.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Psaty B., LumleyT, Furberg CD et al. Health outcomes associated with various antihypertensive therapies used as first line agents:A network meta-analysis. JAMA 2003;289:2534-44.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Hansson L., Zanchetti I., Carruthers SG et al. Effects of intensive blood-pressure lowering and low-dose aspirin in patients with hypertension: Principal results of the Hypertension Optimal Treatment (HOT) randomised trial. Lancet 1998;351:1755-62.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Lewington S., Clarke R., Qizilbash N., Peto R., Collins R.Age-specific relevance of usual blood pressure to vascular mortality: a meta-analysis of individual data for one million adults in 61 prospective studies. Lancet 2002;360:1903-13.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Messerli FH, Beevers DG, Franklin SS, Pickering TG Beta-blockers in hypertension - The emperor has no clothes: An open letter to present and prospective drafters of new guidelines for the treatment of hypertension. Am J Hypertens 2003;16:870-3.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Messerli FH The LIFE study:The straw that should break the camel's back. Eur Heart J 2003;24:487-9.[Free Full Text]
Journal of Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System, Vol. 5, No. 2,
59-63 (2004)
DOI: 10.3317/jraas.2004.011
 CiteULike  Complore  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter What's this?
|
|
