Critical decisions: A mixed-methods study of decision-making among diverse gynecologic cancer patients considering therapeutic clinical trial enrollment.

OBJECTIVE: Participation in therapeutic clinical trials does not reflect the diversity of gynecologic cancer patients, limiting access to novel therapeutics and generalizability of results. Reasons for inequities in participation among historically underrepresented populations remain undertheorized, as studies have shown equal willingness to participate among groups. We sought to apply a precarity framework to conceptualize the factors that impact patients' desire to enroll, to improve equity in gynecologic oncology clinical trial participation. METHODS: Gynecologic cancer patients at a single tertiary care facility in the Southwestern United States who discussed participation in therapeutic clinical trial with their oncology provider from 2020 to 2021 were identified. Enrolled participants completed surveys and qualitative interviews regarding treatment experiences and decision-making. Oncology providers completed parallel surveys at the time of their patient's enrollment. Descriptive statistics and thematic coding were used to analyze data. RESULTS: 30 patients were enrolled and participated in surveys and interviews. No differences were found in quantitative data assessing shared decision-making and patient-centered communication between those who enrolled and those who did not. Qualitative data demonstrated that patients who declined trial enrollment expressed concerns regarding uncertainty and loss of control, independence in decision-making, and significant resource challenges and financial toxicity of cancer treatment. CONCLUSIONS: We identified a constellation of factors that contribute to desire to enroll in clinical trials, that we describe using the framework of precarity. Through identification of precarious patients and mitigation of burdens, we anticipate improved enrollment and retention in therapeutic clinical trials among diverse gynecologic oncology patients.

Differing Experiences of Nutrition Care During Treatment Among Oncology Nurses, Providers, and Patients.

BACKGROUND: Provision of nutrition care for patients with cancer represents a key component of holistic oncology care. However, information is limited about the use and perceptions of registered dietitian-led nutrition care in the oncology setting. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to better understand the experiences and expectations of patients and healthcare workers regarding nutrition care during outpatient cancer treatment. METHODS: Oncology care team members (N = 55) and patients (N = 90) completed a survey about their knowledge of and interest in nutrition care. A subset of participants completed semistructured interviews to capture experiences with and perspectives on nutrition care practices. FINDINGS: The majority of patients (n = 73) reported experiencing at least one nutrition impact symptom, but only 14 indicated that they frequently discussed nutrition during provider visits. In addition, 40 oncology care team members indicated frequently discussing nutrition at visits, although 13 were unaware of local nutrition resources.

A comparative post hoc analysis of finerenone and spironolactone in resistant hypertension in moderate-to-advanced chronic kidney disease.

Background: Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) reduce systolic blood pressure (SBP) and increase serum potassium concentration ([K+]). This indirect comparison investigated any differences in SBP-lowering and hyperkalemia risk between finerenone, a nonsteroidal MRA, and the steroidal MRA spironolactone ± a potassium binder. Methods: In FIDELITY (a pooled analysis of FIDELIO-DKD and FIGARO-DKD), a subgroup of patients with treatment-resistant hypertension (TRH) and chronic kidney disease meeting eligibility criteria of the AMBER trial were identified (FIDELITY-TRH). The main outcomes were mean change in SBP, incidence of serum [K+] ≥5.5 mmol/L and hyperkalemia-associated treatment discontinuation. Results at ∼17 weeks were compared with 12 weeks from AMBER. Results: In 624 FIDELITY-TRH patients and 295 AMBER patients, the least squares mean change in SBP (mmHg) from baseline was -7.1 for finerenone and -1.3 for placebo {between-group difference -5.74 [95% confidence interval (CI) -7.99 to -3.49], P < .0001} versus -11.7 for spironolactone + patiromer and -10.8 for spironolactone + placebo [between-group difference -1.0 (95% CI -4.4-2.4), P = .58]. The incidence of serum [K+] ≥5.5 mmol/L was 12% for finerenone and 3% for placebo versus 35% with spironolactone + patiromer and 64% with spironolactone + placebo. Treatment discontinuation due to hyperkalemia was 0.3% for finerenone and 0% for placebo versus 7% for spironolactone + patiromer and 23% for spironolactone + placebo. Conclusions: In patients with TRH and chronic kidney disease compared with spironolactone with or without patiromer, finerenone was associated with a lower SBP reduction and lower risk of hyperkalemia and treatment discontinuation.Trial Registration: AMBER (NCT03071263), FIDELIO-DKD (NCT02540993), FIGARO-DKD (NCT02545049).

Patient, provider, and nurse preferences of patient reported outcomes (PRO) and side effect management during cancer treatment of underrepresented racial and ethnic minority groups, rural and economically disadvantaged patients: a mixed methods study.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate patient, oncologist and nurse perspectives on side effects and patient reported outcomes (PROs) with the question of how to optimize side effect management and PRO tools in this unique population. METHODS: This pilot study utilized a mixed method explanatory design. Patients receiving intravenous (IV) chemotherapy from June to August 2020 were surveyed about side effect burden and PRO system preferences. Providers and nurses (PN) completed complementary surveys. Semi-structured phone interviews were conducted among a subset of each group. RESULTS: Of 90 patient surveys collected; 51.1% minority, 35.6% rural, and 40.0% income < $30,000, 48% felt side effect management was a significant issue. All patients reported access to a communication device but 12.2% did not own a cell phone; 68% smart phone, 20% cell phone, 22% landline, 53% computer, and 39% tablet. Patients preferred a response to reported side effects within 0-3 h (73%) while only 29% of the 55 PN surveyed did (p < 0.0001). Interviews reinforced that side effect burden was a significant issue, the varied communication devices, and a PRO system could improve side effect management. CONCLUSION: In a non-White, rural and low-income patient population, 87.8% of patients reported owning a cell phone. Although all agreed side effect management was a prominent issue, expectations between patients and PN differed substantially. Qualitative data echoed the above and providing concrete suggestions to inform development of a PRO program and side effect mitigation strategies among a diverse patient population.

Improving Sexual and Gender Minority Cancer Care: Patient and Caregiver Perspectives From a Multi-Methods Pilot Study.

Purpose: Up to 1 million lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (i.e., sexual and gender minority, SGM) individuals in the United States have histories of cancer. This medically underserved population is diverse, with complex sexualities and gender identities, and distinct health concerns. SGM persons experience disproportionate risks for, and rates of, anal, breast, cervical, colorectal, endometrial, lung, and prostate cancers, in addition to cancers affecting transgender persons who have undergone sex-reassignment. SGM individuals are linked by shared experiences of stigmatization as a minority population for which little cancer research has been conducted. SGM cancer patients frequently report reluctance to seek healthcare, have poorer outcomes following diagnosis, engage in elevated risk behaviors (i.e. smoking and alcohol use) even after cancer diagnosis, have difficulty making emotional adjustment to illness, and experience higher rates of psychological distress. They report less satisfaction with cancer care, deficiencies in patient-centeredness and shared decision-making, gaps in care, and social isolation. Minority stress resulting from experiences of anti-SGM sentiment and discrimination affects cancer patients and their informal cancer caregivers. Our paper presents findings from a pilot study to identify gaps and opportunities to improve cancer care for SGM patients and caregivers at the University of New Mexico Comprehensive Cancer Center. Methods: Between June 2020 and July 2021, we used a multi-methods research design informed by ecological theory to collect qualitative and quantitative data regarding cancer patient and caregiver quality of life (QoL) and experiences of cancer and survivorship care. We used PROMIS measures distributed via REDCap to assess QoL (i.e., fatigue, pain interference, pain intensity, anxiety, depression, emotional support, social isolation, and companionship), and conducted in-depth semi-structured interviews. We recruited 10 SGM cancer patients and 8 heterosexual, cisgender (H/C) patient matches, and their self-identified informal cancer caregivers (n=36, dyad total n=18). Interviews ranged from 1 to 2 hours, were audio-recorded and transcribed for analysis. The study was approved by the University of New Mexico Human Research Protections Office Institutional Review Board. Results: Results of the PROMIS QoL assessments indicated that SGM patients reported greater anxiety [mean (SD) = 54.5 (8.8)] and depression [mean (SD) = 49.3 (4.8)] than H/C patients [mean (SD)=51.6 (7.5) and 45.4 (6.8) respectively], while heterosexual, cisgender (H/C) patients reported higher fatigue [mean (SD) =52.04 (8.18)] and stronger pain intensity than SGM patients [mean (SD)=48.3 (9.1) and 37.8 (9.1) respectively]. SGM patients reported higher levels of social isolation [mean (SD) = 48.3 (7.3) vs. 42.1 (7.4) for H/C patients, whereas H/C patients reported more emotional support (mean (SD) =57.5 (9.3) vs. 53.0 (6.9)] and companionship [mean (SD) = 55.2 (8.6) vs. 51.5 (11.0)]. SGM and H/C differences in caregiver QoL were most notable with regards to higher levels of fatigue [mean (SD) = 47.1 (6.0) for SGM, and 42.4 (11.5) for H/C] and companionship [mean (SD) = 55.3 (6.0) for SGM, and 50.9 (5.5) for H/C]. Qualitative interviews supported our quantitative results. SGM patients and caregivers articulated experiences of anti-SGM stigma and discrimination contributing to minority stress that influenced their initial cancer care encounters. SGM dyads had more trepidation and/or medical mistrust during initial cancer care encounters when compared to H/C patients and caregivers. SGM patients questioned care that was not culturally responsive to SGM preferences, while H/C patients were more apt to identify gaps in communication and perceived lack of clarity regarding cancer care delivery. Although SGM patients experienced high satisfaction with their cancer care once they developed trust with their providers, they discussed desires to have more direct conversations with their oncologists about their sexual orientation and gender identities and sexual health. All patients and providers in the study (SGM and H/C) appreciated their oncology care teams. All patients and caregivers relied on social networks comprised of friends and family, although SGM patients and caregivers had smaller social networks and relied less on biological family, and single SGM individuals experienced challenges accessing cancer care and struggled with social isolation. We discovered too, that all caregivers, regardless of Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity (SOGI), perceived a lack of support and information pertaining to their loved one's treatment, side effects and best way to provide care. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that prior stigmatizing experiences contribute to minority stress and medical mistrust for SGM cancer patients and their informal caregivers across the cancer care experience. Findings point to specific gaps in SGM cancer patient care, including lack of conversation about patient SOGI, inadequate staff and oncology provider SGM specific knowledge and cultural competence/cultural humility training, and insufficient patient supports for those who lack social support during cancer care treatment. Further, this study reveals inadequacies in SGM specific support, and overall support services for informal cancer caregivers. Additional research is required to develop targeted interventions to address minority stress and clinic environment concerns to improve cancer care for SGM patients. Importantly, while there were differences between SGM and H/C experiences of cancer treatment, significant similarities also emerged. Caregiver expressed consensus about the current lack of support and guidance for informal caregivers of cancer patients. Future work should focus on providing caregiver-specific resources in the clinic setting and facilitating support groups for caregivers to network with one another, as well as for tailoring SGM specific caregiver support services. Our findings highlight areas for improving cancer care for the SGM community, as well as a broader population of patients and caregivers.

Finerenone in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease and Type 2 Diabetes According to Baseline HbA1c and Insulin Use: An Analysis From the FIDELIO-DKD Study.

OBJECTIVE: Finerenone significantly improved cardiorenal outcomes in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and type 2 diabetes (T2D) in the Finerenone in Reducing Kidney Failure and Disease Progression in Diabetic Kidney Disease trial. We explored whether baseline HbA1c level and insulin treatment influenced outcomes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Patients with T2D, urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio (UACR) of 30-5,000 mg/g, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of 25 to <75 mL/min/1.73 m2, and treated with optimized renin-angiotensin system blockade were randomly assigned to receive finerenone or placebo. Efficacy outcomes included kidney (kidney failure, sustained decrease ≥40% in eGFR from baseline, or renal death) and cardiovascular (cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or hospitalization for heart failure) composite endpoints. Patients were analyzed by baseline insulin use and by baseline HbA1c <7.5% (58 mmol/mol) or ≥7.5%. RESULTS: Of 5,674 patients, 3,637 (64.1%) received insulin at baseline. Overall, 5,663 patients were included in the analysis for HbA1c; 2,794 (49.3%) had baseline HbA1c <7.5% (58 mmol/mol). Finerenone significantly reduced risk of the kidney composite outcome independent of baseline HbA1c level and insulin use (Pinteraction = 0.41 and 0.56, respectively). Cardiovascular composite outcome incidence was reduced with finerenone irrespective of baseline HbA1c level and insulin use (Pinteraction = 0.70 and 0.33, respectively). Although baseline HbA1c level did not affect kidney event risk, cardiovascular risk increased with higher HbA1c level. UACR reduction was consistent across subgroups. Adverse events were similar between groups regardless of baseline HbA1c level and insulin use; few finerenone-treated patients discontinued treatment because of hyperkalemia. CONCLUSIONS: Finerenone reduces kidney and cardiovascular outcome risk in patients with CKD and T2D, and risks appear consistent irrespective of HbA1c levels or insulin use.

Southwest Harvest for Health: An Adapted Mentored Vegetable Gardening Intervention for Cancer Survivors.

Harvest for Health is a home-based vegetable gardening intervention that pairs cancer survivors with Master Gardeners from the Cooperative Extension System. Initially developed and tested in Alabama, the program was adapted for the different climate, growing conditions, and population in New Mexico. This paper chronicles the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of "Southwest Harvest for Health". During the nine-month single-arm trial, 30 cancer survivor-Master Gardener dyads worked together to establish and maintain three seasonal gardens. Primary outcomes were accrual, retention, and satisfaction. Secondary outcomes were vegetable and fruit (V and F) intake, physical activity, and quality of life. Recruitment was diverse and robust, with 30 survivors of various cancers, aged 50-83, roughly one-third minority, and two-thirds females enrolled in just 60 days. Despite challenges due to the COVID-19 pandemic, retention to the nine-month study was 100%, 93% reported "good-to-excellent" satisfaction, and 87% "would do it again." A median increase of 1.2 servings of V and F/day was documented. The adapted home-based vegetable gardening program was feasible, well-received, and resulted in increased V and F consumption among adult cancer survivors. Future studies are needed to evaluate the effectiveness of this program and to inform strategies to increase the successful implementation and further dissemination of this intervention.

CBPR Implementation Framework for Community-Academic Partnerships.

The Engage for Equity (E2) study is an intervention trial for community-academic research partnerships that seeks to improve partnering practices and health equity outcomes by providing community and academic partners with tools to enhance and advance power sharing and health equity. Twenty-five community/academic research teams completed a two-day training intervention where they were introduced to the CBPR Conceptual Model and corresponding applied tools to their partnerships. We report on team interviews conducted immediately after the training, where teams discussed opportunities and challenges using the CBPR Model as an implementation framework as they considered their own contexts, their partnering processes/practices, actions, and their desired outcomes. We applied Diffusion of Innovation theory to guide data collection and analysis; augmented by intent to use and collective reflection. Results pointed to the flexibility of the CBPR model, concrete use of tools (e.g., planning/evaluation), and broader use in inspiring collective reflection to improve partnering practices and inform equity values. As an implementation framework, the CBPR model incorporates collaborative processes and strategies to mitigate power differentials into key phases of implementation studies, adding factors central to health equity work, not existing in previous implementation frameworks.

Engage for Equity: Development of Community-Based Participatory Research Tools.

We developed a set of four community-based participatory research (CBPR) partnership tools aimed at supporting community-academic research partnerships in strengthening their research processes, with the ultimate goal of improving research outcomes. The aim of this article is to describe the tools we developed to accomplish this goal: (1) the River of Life Exercise; (2) a Partnership Visioning Exercise; (3) a personalized Partnership Data Report of data from academic and community research partners; and (4) a Promising Practices Guide with aggregated survey data analyses on promising CBPR practices associated with CBPR and health outcomes from two national samples of CBPR projects that completed a series of two online surveys. Relying on Paulo Freire's philosophy of praxis, or the cycles of collective reflection and action, we developed a set of tools designed to support research teams in holding discussions aimed at strengthening research partnership capacity, aligning research partnership efforts to achieve grant aims, and recalling and operationalizing larger social justice goals. This article describes the theoretical framework and process for tool development and provides preliminary data from small teams representing 25 partnerships who attended face-to-face workshops and provided their perceptions of tool accessibility and intended future use.

Hypertension Canada's 2020 Comprehensive Guidelines for the Prevention, Diagnosis, Risk Assessment, and Treatment of Hypertension in Adults and Children.

Hypertension Canada's 2020 guidelines for the prevention, diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment of hypertension in adults and children provide comprehensive, evidence-based guidance for health care professionals and patients. Hypertension Canada develops the guidelines using rigourous methodology, carefully mitigating the risk of bias in our process. All draft recommendations undergo critical review by expert methodologists without conflict to ensure quality. Our guideline panel is diverse, including multiple health professional groups (nurses, pharmacy, academics, and physicians), and worked in concert with experts in primary care and implementation to ensure optimal usability. The 2020 guidelines include new guidance on the management of resistant hypertension and the management of hypertension in women planning pregnancy.

Antihypertensive effect of the mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist eplerenone: a pooled analysis of patient-level data from comparative trials using regulatory-approved doses.

PURPOSE: Several options are available for the treatment of hypertension; however, many treated patients are still not below blood pressure (BP) target. Eplerenone, a selective mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist, is an approved treatment option for the management of patients with hypertension in a number of countries. This patient-level pooled analysis was conducted to document the efficacy and safety/tolerability of eplerenone at the dosages approved for use in hypertension in comparison to placebo or other approved antihypertensive agents. METHODS: Seventeen Phase III studies conducted in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension in the Eplerenone Hypertension Clinical Program were reviewed; eleven met the selection criteria. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in seated diastolic BP and seated systolic BP measured at the end of the study. RESULTS: A total of 2,698 patients were included in this per-protocol analysis. In patients treated for at least 6 weeks with a stable dose of eplerenone, doses of 50 mg daily and 100 mg daily were associated with greater reductions of seated systolic BP and seated diastolic BP compared with placebo (P<0.001) and active-controlled studies (P< 0.033). In the analysis of covariance model testing of the contribution of four factors (age, body mass index [BMI], history of cardiovascular disease, and diabetes) on the BP lowering effects of eplerenone, only BMI and age were associated with small though statistically significant changes in BP (<0.2 mmHg). Eplerenone was well tolerated; headache was the most common adverse event for patients in any group. Severe hyperkalemia (serum potassium level >6.0 mmol/L) occurred in up to 0.4% in the eplerenone groups, 0.4% in the placebo group, and 0.1% in the active-control group. CONCLUSION: This patient-level pooled analysis provides robust evidence that eplerenone, at 50 mg or 100 mg daily, was effective in lowering BP in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension and was well tolerated.

Hypertension Canada's 2018 Guidelines for Diagnosis, Risk Assessment, Prevention, and Treatment of Hypertension in Adults and Children.

Hypertension Canada provides annually updated, evidence-based guidelines for the diagnosis, assessment, prevention, and treatment of hypertension in adults and children. This year, the adult and pediatric guidelines are combined in one document. The new 2018 pregnancy-specific hypertension guidelines are published separately. For 2018, 5 new guidelines are introduced, and 1 existing guideline on the blood pressure thresholds and targets in the setting of thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke is revised. The use of validated wrist devices for the estimation of blood pressure in individuals with large arm circumference is now included. Guidance is provided for the follow-up measurements of blood pressure, with the use of standardized methods and electronic (oscillometric) upper arm devices in individuals with hypertension, and either ambulatory blood pressure monitoring or home blood pressure monitoring in individuals with white coat effect. We specify that all individuals with hypertension should have an assessment of global cardiovascular risk to promote health behaviours that lower blood pressure. Finally, an angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor combination should be used in place of either an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker in individuals with heart failure (with ejection fraction < 40%) who are symptomatic despite appropriate doses of guideline-directed heart failure therapies. The specific evidence and rationale underlying each of these guidelines are discussed.

Hypertension Canada's 2017 Guidelines for Diagnosis, Risk Assessment, Prevention, and Treatment of Hypertension in Adults.

Hypertension Canada provides annually updated, evidence-based guidelines for the diagnosis, assessment, prevention, and treatment of hypertension. This year, we introduce 10 new guidelines. Three previous guidelines have been revised and 5 have been removed. Previous age and frailty distinctions have been removed as considerations for when to initiate antihypertensive therapy. In the presence of macrovascular target organ damage, or in those with independent cardiovascular risk factors, antihypertensive therapy should be considered for all individuals with elevated average systolic nonautomated office blood pressure (non-AOBP) readings ≥ 140 mm Hg. For individuals with diastolic hypertension (with or without systolic hypertension), fixed-dose single-pill combinations are now recommended as an initial treatment option. Preference is given to pills containing an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker in combination with either a calcium channel blocker or diuretic. Whenever a diuretic is selected as monotherapy, longer-acting agents are preferred. In patients with established ischemic heart disease, caution should be exercised in lowering diastolic non-AOBP to ≤ 60 mm Hg, especially in the presence of left ventricular hypertrophy. After a hemorrhagic stroke, in the first 24 hours, systolic non-AOBP lowering to < 140 mm Hg is not recommended. Finally, guidance is now provided for screening, initial diagnosis, assessment, and treatment of renovascular hypertension arising from fibromuscular dysplasia. The specific evidence and rationale underlying each of these guidelines are discussed.

Hypertension Canada's 2016 Canadian Hypertension Education Program Guidelines for Blood Pressure Measurement, Diagnosis, Assessment of Risk, Prevention, and Treatment of Hypertension.

Hypertension Canada's Canadian Hypertension Education Program Guidelines Task Force provides annually updated, evidence-based recommendations to guide the diagnosis, assessment, prevention, and treatment of hypertension. This year, we present 4 new recommendations, as well as revisions to 2 previous recommendations. In the diagnosis and assessment of hypertension, automated office blood pressure, taken without patient-health provider interaction, is now recommended as the preferred method of measuring in-office blood pressure. Also, although a serum lipid panel remains part of the routine laboratory testing for patients with hypertension, fasting and nonfasting collections are now considered acceptable. For individuals with secondary hypertension arising from primary hyperaldosteronism, adrenal vein sampling is recommended for those who are candidates for potential adrenalectomy. With respect to the treatment of hypertension, a new recommendation that has been added is for increasing dietary potassium to reduce blood pressure in those who are not at high risk for hyperkalemia. Furthermore, in selected high-risk patients, intensive blood pressure reduction to a target systolic blood pressure ≤ 120 mm Hg should be considered to decrease the risk of cardiovascular events. Finally, in hypertensive individuals with uncomplicated, stable angina pectoris, either a ß-blocker or calcium channel blocker may be considered for initial therapy. The specific evidence and rationale underlying each of these recommendations are discussed. Hypertension Canada's Canadian Hypertension Education Program Guidelines Task Force will continue to provide annual updates.

The 2015 Canadian Hypertension Education Program recommendations for blood pressure measurement, diagnosis, assessment of risk, prevention, and treatment of hypertension.

The Canadian Hypertension Education Program reviews the hypertension literature annually and provides detailed recommendations regarding hypertension diagnosis, assessment, prevention, and treatment. This report provides the updated evidence-based recommendations for 2015. This year, 4 new recommendations were added and 2 existing recommendations were modified. A revised algorithm for the diagnosis of hypertension is presented. Two major changes are proposed: (1) measurement using validated electronic (oscillometric) upper arm devices is preferred over auscultation for accurate office blood pressure measurement; (2) if the visit 1 mean blood pressure is increased but < 180/110 mm Hg, out-of-office blood pressure measurements using ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (preferably) or home blood pressure monitoring should be performed before visit 2 to rule out white coat hypertension, for which pharmacologic treatment is not recommended. A standardized ambulatory blood pressure monitoring protocol and an update on automated office blood pressure are also presented. Several other recommendations on accurate measurement of blood pressure and criteria for diagnosis of hypertension have been reorganized. Two other new recommendations refer to smoking cessation: (1) tobacco use status should be updated regularly and advice to quit smoking should be provided; and (2) advice in combination with pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation should be offered to all smokers. The following recommendations were modified: (1) renal artery stenosis should be primarily managed medically; and (2) renal artery angioplasty and stenting could be considered for patients with renal artery stenosis and complicated, uncontrolled hypertension. The rationale for these recommendation changes is discussed.

Assessment and management of hypertension in transplant patients.

Hypertension in renal transplant recipients is common and ranges from 50% to 80% in adult recipients and from 47% to 82% in pediatric recipients. Cardiovascular morbidity and mortality and shortened allograft survival are important consequences of inadequate control of hypertension. In this review, we examine the epidemiology, pathophysiology, and management considerations of post-transplant hypertension. Donor and recipient factors, acute and chronic allograft injury, and immunosuppressive medications may each explain some of the pathophysiology of post-transplant hypertension. As observed in other patient cohorts, renal artery stenosis and adrenal causes of hypertension may be important contributing factors. Notably, BP treatment goals for renal transplant recipients remain an enigma because there are no adequate randomized controlled trials to support a benefit from targeting lower BP levels on graft and patient survival. The potential for drug-drug interactions and altered pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the different antihypertensive medications need to be carefully considered. To date, no specific antihypertensive medications have been shown to be more effective than others at improving either patient or graft survival. Identifying the underlying pathophysiology and subsequent individualization of treatment goals are important for improving long-term patient and graft outcomes in these patients.

Effectiveness and tolerability of a trandolapril-based antihypertensive treatment regimen over 12 months in actual clinical care across Canada.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There is little information on the effects of trandolapril on renal function when used in Canadian general practice. We evaluated the use and blood pressure (BP) lowering effectiveness of trandolapril-based therapies in Canadian conditions of actual care and attempted to capture assessments of urinary albumin concentration (UAC) and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) in clinical practice. METHODS: This was a prospective, non-interventional, observational study in adults with uncontrolled hypertension, with or without co-morbidities, either treatment-naïve or uncontrolled on existing antihypertensive medications. Hypertension was not defined per protocol. Trandolapril doses (0.5, 1, 2, 4 mg) and subjects' continued medical care were all at the discretion of the treating physician. Data were gathered after 3, 6 and 12 months. RESULTS: 7,993 patients entered the study and 4,983 patients attended the Month 12 visit. Most patients (91.7 %) received trandolapril as a new prescription. At 12 months, 72.9 % of patients without diabetes and 34.4 % with diabetes were controlled (targets <140/90 and 130/80 mmHg, respectively) and 79.2 % of patients with diabetes had BP below 140/90 mmHg. Evaluable eGFR data were available for 25.1, 21.2 and 21.7 % of patients at Months 3, 6 and 12, respectively, and UAC data for 9.6, 8.2 and 9.0 % of patients at the same time points. Treatment was well tolerated. Dropout rates were 37.7 % after 12 months. CONCLUSION: Effective, sustained and well-tolerated double-digit BP reduction is achievable with a trandolapril-based treatment regimen for all patient groups. It appears that for diabetic patients blood pressure control as per Canadian Hypertension Education Program recommendations is yet challenging. The results also illuminate the persistent gap between treatment guidelines and actual care.

The 2011 Canadian Hypertension Education Program recommendations for the management of hypertension: blood pressure measurement, diagnosis, assessment of risk, and therapy.

We updated the evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis, assessment, prevention, and treatment of hypertension in adults for 2011. The major guideline changes this year are: (1) a recommendation was made for using comparative risk analogies when communicating a patient's cardiovascular risk; (2) diagnostic testing issues for renal artery stenosis were discussed; (3) recommendations were added for the management of hypertension during the acute phase of stroke; (4) people with hypertension and diabetes are now considered high risk for cardiovascular events if they have elevated urinary albumin excretion, overt kidney disease, cardiovascular disease, or the presence of other cardiovascular risk factors; (5) the combination of an angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor and a dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker (CCB) is preferred over the combination of an ACE inhibitor and a thiazide diuretic in persons with diabetes and hypertension; and (6) a recommendation was made to coordinate with pharmacists to improve antihypertensive medication adherence. We also discussed the recent analyses that examined the association between angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) and cancer.