• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

氨氯地平或氯噻酮单药治疗收缩压干预试验(SPRINT)。

Monotherapy treatment with chlorthalidone or amlodipine in the systolic blood pressure intervention trial (SPRINT).

机构信息

Cardiovascular Institute, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ, USA.

出版信息

J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2021 Jul;23(7):1335-1343. doi: 10.1111/jch.14296. Epub 2021 Jun 2.

DOI:10.1111/jch.14296
PMID:34076333
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8678684/
Abstract

This post hoc analysis of the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) examined the performance of chlorthalidone (C) versus amlodipine (A) monotherapies. ANOVA was used to analyze the differences in systolic blood pressure (SBP) response between C and A. Logistic regression was used to examine monotherapy failure (adding a second antihypertensive agent or switching to a different antihypertensive agent) rates. Four hundred ninety-one participants were treated with C monotherapy (n = 210, mean dose = 22 mg/day) or A monotherapy (n = 281, mean dose = 7 mg/day). There was a significant difference in mean SBP reduction between the C and A monotherapies at the third visit (higher reduction with A, adjusted p = .018). Unadjusted analysis showed a higher failure with C in the standard treatment group. Although the average SBP at failure was higher and above the 140 mm Hg cutoff that indicated monotherapy failure with A (142.60) compared with C (138.40), more participants on C failed despite having SBP below the 140 cutoff. This was probably due to decisions made by the investigative teams to change the antihypertensive regimen, because, in their opinion, the clinical picture required it. After adjusting for baseline characteristics, C had higher failure than A only in the standard treatment group (1.64 odds ratio [OR], 95% CI 1.06-2.56, p = .028). A sub-analysis including participants who had never used antihypertensive treatment before randomization had similar results (2.57 OR, 95% CI 1.34-5.02, p = .004). Overall, in SPRINT chlorthalidone was associated with higher monotherapy failure than amlodipine in the standard treatment group because of decisions of the investigative teams.

摘要

这篇 SPRINT 事后分析检查了氯噻酮(C)与氨氯地平(A)单药治疗的效果。方差分析用于分析 C 和 A 单药治疗组收缩压(SBP)反应的差异。逻辑回归用于检查单药治疗失败(加用第二种降压药或改用其他降压药)率。491 名患者接受氯噻酮单药治疗(n=210,平均剂量 22mg/天)或氨氯地平单药治疗(n=281,平均剂量 7mg/天)。在第三次就诊时,C 和 A 单药治疗的平均 SBP 降低有显著差异(A 降低更多,调整后 p=0.018)。未经调整的分析显示标准治疗组 C 的失败率更高。尽管 C 的平均失败 SBP 更高,高于 A 单药治疗失败的 140mmHg 切点(142.60mmHg),但更多 C 组患者尽管 SBP 低于 140mmHg 切点仍失败。这可能是由于研究团队决定改变降压方案,因为根据他们的临床判断需要改变。在调整基线特征后,只有在标准治疗组中 C 的失败率才高于 A(1.64 比值比[OR],95%CI 1.06-2.56,p=0.028)。一项包括随机分组前从未使用过降压治疗的参与者的亚分析得出了相似的结果(2.57 OR,95%CI 1.34-5.02,p=0.004)。总的来说,在 SPRINT 研究中,由于研究团队的决策,氯噻酮在标准治疗组中与更高的单药治疗失败率相关。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/cb66/8678684/ab9e33b11238/JCH-23-1335-g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/cb66/8678684/3bb47ae7c48f/JCH-23-1335-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/cb66/8678684/50d99d5720c7/JCH-23-1335-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/cb66/8678684/7f1472ad126a/JCH-23-1335-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/cb66/8678684/82d5da950782/JCH-23-1335-g005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/cb66/8678684/ab9e33b11238/JCH-23-1335-g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/cb66/8678684/3bb47ae7c48f/JCH-23-1335-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/cb66/8678684/50d99d5720c7/JCH-23-1335-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/cb66/8678684/7f1472ad126a/JCH-23-1335-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/cb66/8678684/82d5da950782/JCH-23-1335-g005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/cb66/8678684/ab9e33b11238/JCH-23-1335-g004.jpg

相似文献

1
Monotherapy treatment with chlorthalidone or amlodipine in the systolic blood pressure intervention trial (SPRINT).氨氯地平或氯噻酮单药治疗收缩压干预试验(SPRINT)。
J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2021 Jul;23(7):1335-1343. doi: 10.1111/jch.14296. Epub 2021 Jun 2.
2
S-amlodipine plus chlorthalidone vs. S-amlodipine plus telmisartan in hypertensive patients unresponsive to amlodipine monotherapy: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.氨氯地平单药治疗无效的高血压患者中,左旋氨氯地平联合氯噻酮与左旋氨氯地平联合替米沙坦的疗效比较:一项随机对照试验的研究方案
Trials. 2018 Jun 20;19(1):324. doi: 10.1186/s13063-018-2636-1.
3
Clinical effectiveness of low-dose chlorthalidone (6.25 mg) + atenolol combination in stage I hypertensive patients: a multicenter, randomized, controlled study.低剂量氯噻酮(6.25毫克)联合阿替洛尔治疗I期高血压患者的临床疗效:一项多中心、随机、对照研究。
Curr Med Res Opin. 2008 Jun;24(6):1771-9. doi: 10.1185/03007990802118071. Epub 2008 May 13.
4
Chlorthalidone Versus Amlodipine for Hypertension in Kidney Transplant Recipients Treated With Tacrolimus: A Randomized Crossover Trial.氯噻酮与氨氯地平治疗肾移植受者他克莫司治疗的高血压:一项随机交叉试验。
Am J Kidney Dis. 2017 Jun;69(6):796-804. doi: 10.1053/j.ajkd.2016.12.017. Epub 2017 Mar 1.
5
Treatment-Resistant Hypertension and Outcomes Based on Randomized Treatment Group in ALLHAT.基于 ALLHAT 随机治疗组的顽固性高血压及其转归
Am J Med. 2017 Apr;130(4):439-448.e9. doi: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2016.10.002. Epub 2016 Oct 27.
6
Antihypertensive efficacy and safety of manidipine versus amlodipine in elderly subjects with isolated systolic hypertension: MAISH study.马尼地平与氨氯地平治疗老年单纯收缩期高血压的降压疗效及安全性:MAISH研究
Clin Drug Investig. 2007;27(9):623-32. doi: 10.2165/00044011-200727090-00004.
7
Comparison of Fixed-dose Combinations of Amlodipine/Losartan Potassium/Chlorthalidone and Amlodipine/Losartan Potassium in Patients With Stage 2 Hypertension Inadequately Controlled With Amlodipine/Losartan Potassium: A Randomized, Double-blind, Multicenter, Phase III Study.氨氯地平/氯沙坦钾/氢氯噻嗪固定剂量复方制剂与氨氯地平/氯沙坦钾用于氨氯地平/氯沙坦钾治疗血压控制不佳的2级高血压患者的比较:一项随机、双盲、多中心、III期研究
Clin Ther. 2017 Oct;39(10):2049-2060. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2017.08.013. Epub 2017 Sep 19.
8
Efficacy and safety of olmesartan medoxomil and hydrochlorothiazide compared with benazepril and amlodipine besylate.与苯那普利和苯磺酸氨氯地平相比,奥美沙坦酯氢氯噻嗪片的疗效与安全性
Am J Cardiovasc Drugs. 2007;7(5):361-72. doi: 10.2165/00129784-200707050-00006.
9
Amlodipine versus chlorthalidone versus placebo in the treatment of stage I isolated systolic hypertension.
Am J Hypertens. 2002 Jan;15(1 Pt 1):31-6. doi: 10.1016/s0895-7061(01)02224-5.
10
Low-Dose Triple Antihypertensive Combination Therapy in Patients with Hypertension: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase II Study.高血压患者的低剂量三联抗高血压联合治疗:一项随机、双盲、Ⅱ期研究。
Drug Des Devel Ther. 2020 Dec 31;14:5735-5746. doi: 10.2147/DDDT.S286586. eCollection 2020.

引用本文的文献

1
Choice of antihypertensive agent in isolated systolic hypertension and isolated diastolic hypertension: A secondary analysis of the ALLHAT trial.在单纯收缩期高血压和单纯舒张期高血压中选择降压药物:ALLHAT 试验的二次分析。
Am Heart J. 2022 Dec;254:30-34. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2022.07.006. Epub 2022 Aug 4.

本文引用的文献

1
Clinical Benefit of Treatment of Stage-1, Low-Risk Hypertension.1 期、低危高血压治疗的临床获益。
Hypertension. 2018 Dec;72(6):1285-1293. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.118.11787.
2
Trends in Healthcare Expenditures Among US Adults With Hypertension: National Estimates, 2003-2014.美国成年人高血压医疗支出趋势:2003-2014 年全国估计数。
J Am Heart Assoc. 2018 May 30;7(11):e008731. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.118.008731.
3
2017 ACC/AHA/AAPA/ABC/ACPM/AGS/APhA/ASH/ASPC/NMA/PCNA Guideline for the Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Management of High Blood Pressure in Adults: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines.
2017美国心脏病学会/美国心脏协会/美国医师协会/美国心脏病学学会/美国预防医学学院/美国老年病学会/美国药学协会/美国血液学会/美国预防医学学会/美国医学协会/美国初级保健医师学会成人高血压预防、检测、评估和管理指南:美国心脏病学会/美国心脏协会临床实践指南工作组报告
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018 May 15;71(19):e127-e248. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2017.11.006. Epub 2017 Nov 13.
4
Chlorthalidone Versus Amlodipine for Hypertension in Kidney Transplant Recipients Treated With Tacrolimus: A Randomized Crossover Trial.氯噻酮与氨氯地平治疗肾移植受者他克莫司治疗的高血压:一项随机交叉试验。
Am J Kidney Dis. 2017 Jun;69(6):796-804. doi: 10.1053/j.ajkd.2016.12.017. Epub 2017 Mar 1.
5
Global Disparities of Hypertension Prevalence and Control: A Systematic Analysis of Population-Based Studies From 90 Countries.高血压患病率与控制情况的全球差异:来自90个国家基于人群研究的系统分析
Circulation. 2016 Aug 9;134(6):441-50. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.115.018912.
6
Efficacy of Low-Dose Chlorthalidone and Hydrochlorothiazide as Assessed by 24-h Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring.24 小时动态血压监测评估小剂量氯噻酮和氢氯噻嗪的疗效。
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016 Feb 2;67(4):379-389. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2015.10.083.
7
A Randomized Trial of Intensive versus Standard Blood-Pressure Control.强化与标准血压控制的随机试验
N Engl J Med. 2015 Nov 26;373(22):2103-16. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1511939. Epub 2015 Nov 9.
8
Providing Contemporary Access to Historical Biospecimen Collections: Development of the NHLBI Biologic Specimen and Data Repository Information Coordinating Center (BioLINCC).为当代提供对历史生物样本库藏品的访问:美国国立心肺血液研究所生物样本与数据存储库信息协调中心(BioLINCC)的发展。
Biopreserv Biobank. 2015 Aug;13(4):271-9. doi: 10.1089/bio.2014.0050. Epub 2015 Jul 17.
9
The design and rationale of a multicenter clinical trial comparing two strategies for control of systolic blood pressure: the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT).一项比较两种收缩压控制策略的多中心临床试验的设计与原理:收缩压干预试验(SPRINT)
Clin Trials. 2014 Oct;11(5):532-46. doi: 10.1177/1740774514537404. Epub 2014 Jun 5.
10
Blood pressure-lowering efficacy of monotherapy with thiazide diuretics for primary hypertension.噻嗪类利尿剂单药治疗原发性高血压的降压疗效。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 May 29;2014(5):CD003824. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003824.pub2.