Effect of Antihypertensive Medication Reduction vs Usual Care on Short-term Blood Pressure Control in Patients With Hypertension Aged 80 Years and Older: The OPTIMISE Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Deprescribing of antihypertensive medications is recommended for some older patients with polypharmacy and multimorbidity when the benefits of continued treatment may not outweigh the harms. Objective: This study aimed to establish whether antihypertensive medication reduction is possible without significant changes in systolic blood pressure control or adverse events during 12-week follow-up. Design, Setting, and Participants: The Optimising Treatment for Mild Systolic Hypertension in the Elderly (OPTIMISE) study was a randomized, unblinded, noninferiority trial conducted in 69 primary care sites in England. Participants, whose primary care physician considered them appropriate for medication reduction, were aged 80 years and older, had systolic blood pressure lower than 150 mm Hg, and were receiving at least 2 antihypertensive medications were included. Participants enrolled between April 2017 and September 2018 and underwent follow-up until January 2019. Interventions: Participants were randomized (1:1 ratio) to a strategy of antihypertensive medication reduction (removal of 1 drug [intervention], n = 282) or usual care (control, n = 287), in which no medication changes were mandated. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was systolic blood pressure lower than 150 mm Hg at 12-week follow-up. The prespecified noninferiority margin was a relative risk (RR) of 0.90. Secondary outcomes included the proportion of participants maintaining medication reduction and differences in blood pressure, frailty, quality of life, adverse effects, and serious adverse events. Results: Among 569 patients randomized (mean age, 84.8 years; 276 [48.5%] women; median of 2 antihypertensive medications prescribed at baseline), 534 (93.8%) completed the trial. Overall, 229 (86.4%) patients in the intervention group and 236 (87.7%) patients in the control group had a systolic blood pressure lower than 150 mm Hg at 12 weeks (adjusted RR, 0.98 [97.5% 1-sided CI, 0.92 to ∞]). Of 7 prespecified secondary end points, 5 showed no significant difference. Medication reduction was sustained in 187 (66.3%) participants at 12 weeks. Mean change in systolic blood pressure was 3.4 mm Hg (95% CI, 1.1 to 5.8 mm Hg) higher in the intervention group compared with the control group. Twelve (4.3%) participants in the intervention group and 7 (2.4%) in the control group reported at least 1 serious adverse event (adjusted RR, 1.72 [95% CI, 0.7 to 4.3]). Conclusions and Relevance: Among older patients treated with multiple antihypertensive medications, a strategy of medication reduction, compared with usual care, was noninferior with regard to systolic blood pressure control at 12 weeks. The findings suggest antihypertensive medication reduction in some older patients with hypertension is not associated with substantial change in blood pressure control, although further research is needed to understand long-term clinical outcomes. Trial Registration: EudraCT Identifier: 2016-004236-38; ISRCTN identifier: 97503221.

Prevalence of opioid dependence in Scotland 2015-2020: A multi-parameter estimation of prevalence (MPEP) study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Drug-related deaths in Scotland more than doubled between 2011 and 2020. To inform policymakers and understand drivers of this increase, we estimated the number of people with opioid dependence aged 15-64 from 2014/15 to 2019/20. DESIGN: We fitted a Bayesian multi-parameter estimation of prevalence (MPEP) model, using adverse event rates to estimate prevalence of opioid dependence jointly from Opioid Agonist Therapy (OAT), opioid-related mortality and hospital admissions data. Estimates are stratified by age group, sex and year. SETTING: Scotland, 2014/15 to 2019/20. PARTICIPANTS: People with opioid dependence and potential to benefit from OAT, whether ever treated or not. Using data from the Scottish Public Health Drug Linkage Programme, we identified a baseline cohort of individuals who had received OAT within the last 5 years, and all opioid-related deaths and hospital admissions (whether among or outside of this cohort). MEASUREMENTS: Rates of each adverse event type and (unobserved) prevalence were jointly modelled. FINDINGS: The estimated number and prevalence of people with opioid dependence in Scotland in 2019/20 was 47 100 (95% Credible Interval [CrI] 45 700 to 48 600) and 1.32% (95% CrI 1.28% to 1.37%). Of these, 61% received OAT during 2019/20. Prevalence in Greater Glasgow and Clyde was estimated as 1.77% (95% CrI 1.69% to 1.85%). There was weak evidence that overall prevalence fell slightly from 2014/15 (change -0.07%, 95% CrI -0.14% to 0.00%). The population of people with opioid dependence is ageing, with the estimated number of people aged 15-34 reducing by 5100 (95% CrI 3800 to 6400) and number aged 50-64 increasing by 2800 (95% CrI 2100 to 3500) between 2014/15 and 2019/20. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of opioid dependence in Scotland remained high but was relatively stable, with only weak evidence of a small reduction, between 2014/15 and 2019/20. Increased numbers of opioid-related deaths can be attributed to increased risk among people with opioid dependence, rather than increasing prevalence.

Mortality among individuals prescribed opioid-agonist therapy in Scotland, UK, 2011-20: a national retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Drug-related death (DRD) rate in Scotland, UK, has increased rapidly to one of the highest in the world. Our aim was to examine the extent to which opioid-agonist therapy (OAT) in Scotland is protective against drug-related mortality and how this effect has varied over time. METHODS: We included individuals in Scotland with opioid use disorder who received at least one OAT prescription between Jan 1, 2011, and Dec 31, 2020. We calculated drug-related mortality rates and used Quasi-Poisson regression models to estimate trends over time and by OAT exposure, adjusting for potential confounding. FINDINGS: In a cohort of 46 453 individuals prescribed OAT with a total of 304 000 person-years of follow-up, DRD rates more than trebled from 6·36 per 1000 person-years (95% CI 5·73-7·01) in 2011-12 to 21·45 (20·31-22·63) in 2019-20. DRD rates were almost three and a half times higher (hazard ratio 3·37; 95% CI 1·74-6·53) for those off OAT compared with those on OAT after adjustment for confounders. However, confounder adjusted DRD risk increased over time for both people off and on OAT. INTERPRETATION: Drug-related mortality rates among people with opioid use disorders in Scotland increased between 2011 and 2020. OAT remains protective but is insufficient on its own to slow the increase in DRD risk for people who are opioid dependent in Scotland. FUNDING: Scottish Government Drug Deaths Taskforce, Public Health Scotland, and National Institute for Health and Care Research.

Generalizability of Blood Pressure Lowering Trials to Older Patients: Cross-Sectional Analysis.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Randomized controlled trials are used to inform clinical guidelines on the management of hypertension in older adults, but it is unclear to what extent these trials represent the general population attending routine clinical practice. This study aimed to define the proportion and characteristics of patients eligible for hypertension trials conducted in older people. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: A total of 24 general practices in England. PARTICIPANTS: Anonymized electronic health record data from all individuals aged 80 and older. MEASUREMENTS: Descriptive statistics were used to define the proportion and characteristics of patients eligible for two previous medication intensification trials (HYVET, SPRINT) and one medication reduction trial (OPTiMISE). A logistic regression model was constructed to estimate predictors of eligibility for each trial. RESULTS: Of 15,376 patients identified, 268 (1.7%; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.5-2.0%), 5,290 (34.4%; 95%CI = 33.7-35.2%), and 3,940 (25.6%; 95%CI = 24.9-26.3%) were eligible for the HYVET, SPRINT, and OPTiMISE trials, respectively. Between 5.6% and 30.7% of exclusions from each trial were due to eligibility criteria excluding those with high or uncontrolled blood pressure. Frailty (odds ratio [OR] = .44; 95%CI = .36-.54 [OPTiMISE]), cardiovascular polypharmacy (OR = .61; 95%CI = .55-.68 [SPRINT]) and multimorbidity (OR = .72; 95%CI = .64-.82 [SPRINT]) were associated with a lower likelihood of being eligible for one or more of the trials. CONCLUSION: A possible unintended consequence of blood pressure criteria used by trials attempting to answer different primary questions is that for many older patients, no trial evidence exists to inform treatment decisions in routine practice. Caution should be exercised when applying results from existing trials to patients with frailty or multimorbidity.