Efficacy and safety of LDL-lowering therapy among men and women: meta-analysis of individual data from 174,000 participants in 27 randomised trials.

BACKGROUND: Whether statin therapy is as effective in women as in men is debated, especially for primary prevention. We undertook a meta-analysis of statin trials in the Cholesterol Treatment Trialists' (CTT) Collaboration database to compare the effects of statin therapy between women and men. METHODS: We performed meta-analyses on data from 22 trials of statin therapy versus control (n=134,537) and five trials of more-intensive versus less-intensive statin therapy (n=39,612). Effects on major vascular events, major coronary events, stroke, coronary revascularisation and mortality were weighted per 1.0 mmol/L reduction in LDL cholesterol and effects in men and women compared with a Cox model that adjusted for non-sex differences. For subgroup analyses, we used 99% CIs to make allowance for the multiplicity of comparisons. FINDINGS: 46,675 (27%) of 174,149 randomly assigned participants were women. Allocation to a statin had similar absolute effects on 1 year lipid concentrations in both men and women (LDL cholesterol reduced by about 1.1 mmol/L in statin vs control trials and roughly 0.5 mmol/L for more-intensive vs less-intensive therapy). Women were generally at lower cardiovascular risk than were men in these trials. The proportional reductions per 1.0 mmol/L reduction in LDL cholesterol in major vascular events were similar overall for women (rate ratio [RR] 0.84, 99% CI 0.78-0.91) and men (RR 0.78, 99% CI 0.75-0.81, adjusted p value for heterogeneity by sex=0.33) and also for those women and men at less than 10% predicted 5 year absolute cardiovascular risk (adjusted heterogeneity p=0.11). Likewise, the proportional reductions in major coronary events, coronary revascularisation, and stroke did not differ significantly by sex. No adverse effect on rates of cancer incidence or non-cardiovascular mortality was noted for either sex. These net benefits translated into all-cause mortality reductions with statin therapy for both women (RR 0.91, 99% CI 0.84-0.99) and men (RR 0.90, 99% CI 0.86-0.95; adjusted heterogeneity p=0.43). INTERPRETATION: In men and women at an equivalent risk of cardiovascular disease, statin therapy is of similar effectiveness for the prevention of major vascular events. FUNDING: UK Medical Research Council, British Heart Foundation, Australian National Health and Medical Research Council, European Community Biomed Program.

Impact of sex on cardiovascular outcome in patients at high cardiovascular risk: analysis of the Telmisartan Randomized Assessment Study in ACE-Intolerant Subjects With Cardiovascular Disease (TRANSCEND) and the Ongoing Telmisartan Alone and in Combination With Ramipril Global End Point Trial (ONTARGET).

BACKGROUND: Epidemiological data suggest that sex independently contributes to cardiovascular risk. Clinical trials are often hampered by the enrollment of few female patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: The Ongoing Telmisartan Alone and in Combination With Ramipril Global End Point Trial (ONTARGET) and the parallel Telmisartan Randomized Assessment Study in ACE Intolerant Subjects With Cardiovascular Disease (TRANSCEND) included a large proportion of female patients (9378 female versus 22 168 male patients). Differences in male and female patients enrolled in ONTARGET/TRANSCEND were analyzed for the primary 4-fold end point (composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or admission to hospital for heart failure), a secondary 3-fold end point (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke), and individual components of the primary composite. Baseline characteristics included age, ethnicity, body mass index, physical activity, tobacco use, alcohol consumption, formal education, clinical diagnosis for study entry, patient history, and concomitant medication. Patients were followed up until death or the end of the study (median, 56 months). Compared with male patients, female patients had a 19% significantly lower risk for the 4-fold end point and 21% for the 3-fold end point (after adjustment for study, treatment, and the above baseline values). Similarly, the adjusted risk for cardiovascular death (17%) and myocardial infarction (22%), but not for stroke and hospitalization for heart failure, was also significantly lower in women. Diabetic female patients were characterized by a higher risk for acute myocardial infarction compared with diabetic male patients, whereas alcohol consumption resulted in significantly lower risk in women. CONCLUSIONS: In our analysis made up of 70.3% male and 29.7% female patients, an ≈20% lower risk for the combined cardiovascular end points in female patients was observed despite treatment with cardioprotective agents. This difference was driven primarily by a significantly lower incidence of myocardial infarction. Thus, we demonstrate in a large interventional trial that sex greatly affects the occurrence of cardiovascular events in patients with vascular disease or high-risk diabetes mellitus. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00153101.

Influenza vaccination and major adverse vascular events in high-risk patients.

BACKGROUND: We sought to determine the association between influenza vaccination and major adverse vascular events because the association remains uncertain. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 31 546 participants were enrolled from 40 countries. Eligibility included age ≥55 years and known vascular disease. The primary outcome was a composite of death resulting from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, or stroke during 4 influenza seasons (2003-2007). Influenza vaccination was associated with a lower risk of the outcome during 3 influenza seasons (defined using World Health Organization FluNet reports): 2004 to 2005 (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.62; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.50-0.77), 2005 to 2006 (adjusted OR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.53-0.91), and 2006 to 2007 (adjusted OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.42-0.65), the same years that circulating influenza matched the vaccine antigen. In 2003 to 2004, there was an incomplete match between circulating influenza and the vaccine antigen, and there was no association between influenza vaccination and the outcome (adjusted OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.73-1.27). However, tests of potential biases in the analyses revealed associations between influenza vaccination and outcome during noninfluenza seasons except 2003 to 2004. The summary ORs in the influenza season (OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.58-0.74]) and noninfluenza season (OR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.57-0.76) were almost identical. The reduction in risk of noncardiovascular death associated with the influenza vaccine ranged from 73% to 79%. CONCLUSION: Although initial analyses suggest that influenza vaccination was associated with reduced risk of major adverse vascular events during influenza seasons when the influenza vaccine matched the circulating virus, sensitivity analyses revealed that risk of bias remained. A randomized trial is needed to definitively address this question.

Cognitive impairment and risk of cardiovascular events and mortality.

BACKGROUND: Cognitive impairment may increase the risk of all cardiovascular (CV) events. We prospectively evaluated the independent association between Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score and myocardial infarction, stroke, hospital admission for heart failure and mortality, and their CV composite (major CV events), in a large high-risk CV population. METHODS AND RESULTS: Mini-Mental State Examination was recorded at baseline in 30 959 individuals enrolled into two large parallel trials of patients with prior cardiovascular disease or high-risk diabetes and followed for a median of 56 months. We used a Cox regression model to determine the association between MMSE score and incident CV events and non-CV mortality, adjusted for age, sex, education, history of vascular events, dietary factors, blood pressure, smoking, glucose, low-density lipoprotein, high-density lipoprotein, CV medications, exercise, alcohol intake pattern, depression, and psychosocial stress. Patients were categorized into four groups based on baseline MMSE; 30 (reference), 29-27, 26-24, and <24. Compared with patients with an MMSE of 30 (n = 9624), those with scores of 29-27 [n = 13 867; hazard ratio (HR) 1.08; 95% confidence intervals (CI) 1.01-1.16], 26-24 (n = 4764; HR: 1.15; 95% CI: 1.05-1.26) and <24 (n = 2704; HR: 1.35; 95% CI: 1.21-1.50) had a graded increase in the risk of major vascular events (P < 0.0001). Mini-Mental State Examination score was significantly associated with each of the individual components of the composite, except myocardial infarction. There was also no association between baseline MMSE and hospitalization for unstable or new angina. Within MMSE domains, impairments in orientation to place (HR: 1.52; 1.25-1.85), attention-calculation (HR: 1.10; 1.02-1.18), recall (HR: 1.10; 1.04-1.16), and design copy (HR: 1.15; 1.06-1.24) were the most predictive of major vascular events and mortality. The magnitude of increased risk of CV events associated with an MMSE <24 was similar to a previous history of stroke. CONCLUSION: In people at increased CV risk, impairments on baseline cognitive testing are associated with a graded increase in the risk of stroke, congestive heart failure, and CV death, but not coronary events. An MMSE score of <24 increased CV disease risk to the same extent as a previous stroke.

The effects of lowering LDL cholesterol with simvastatin plus ezetimibe in patients with chronic kidney disease (Study of Heart and Renal Protection): a randomised placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Lowering LDL cholesterol with statin regimens reduces the risk of myocardial infarction, ischaemic stroke, and the need for coronary revascularisation in people without kidney disease, but its effects in people with moderate-to-severe kidney disease are uncertain. The SHARP trial aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of the combination of simvastatin plus ezetimibe in such patients. METHODS: This randomised double-blind trial included 9270 patients with chronic kidney disease (3023 on dialysis and 6247 not) with no known history of myocardial infarction or coronary revascularisation. Patients were randomly assigned to simvastatin 20 mg plus ezetimibe 10 mg daily versus matching placebo. The key prespecified outcome was first major atherosclerotic event (non-fatal myocardial infarction or coronary death, non-haemorrhagic stroke, or any arterial revascularisation procedure). All analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00125593, and ISRCTN54137607. FINDINGS: 4650 patients were assigned to receive simvastatin plus ezetimibe and 4620 to placebo. Allocation to simvastatin plus ezetimibe yielded an average LDL cholesterol difference of 0·85 mmol/L (SE 0·02; with about two-thirds compliance) during a median follow-up of 4·9 years and produced a 17% proportional reduction in major atherosclerotic events (526 [11·3%] simvastatin plus ezetimibe vs 619 [13·4%] placebo; rate ratio [RR] 0·83, 95% CI 0·74-0·94; log-rank p=0·0021). Non-significantly fewer patients allocated to simvastatin plus ezetimibe had a non-fatal myocardial infarction or died from coronary heart disease (213 [4·6%] vs 230 [5·0%]; RR 0·92, 95% CI 0·76-1·11; p=0·37) and there were significant reductions in non-haemorrhagic stroke (131 [2·8%] vs 174 [3·8%]; RR 0·75, 95% CI 0·60-0·94; p=0·01) and arterial revascularisation procedures (284 [6·1%] vs 352 [7·6%]; RR 0·79, 95% CI 0·68-0·93; p=0·0036). After weighting for subgroup-specific reductions in LDL cholesterol, there was no good evidence that the proportional effects on major atherosclerotic events differed from the summary rate ratio in any subgroup examined, and, in particular, they were similar in patients on dialysis and those who were not. The excess risk of myopathy was only two per 10,000 patients per year of treatment with this combination (9 [0·2%] vs 5 [0·1%]). There was no evidence of excess risks of hepatitis (21 [0·5%] vs 18 [0·4%]), gallstones (106 [2·3%] vs 106 [2·3%]), or cancer (438 [9·4%] vs 439 [9·5%], p=0·89) and there was no significant excess of death from any non-vascular cause (668 [14·4%] vs 612 [13·2%], p=0·13). INTERPRETATION: Reduction of LDL cholesterol with simvastatin 20 mg plus ezetimibe 10 mg daily safely reduced the incidence of major atherosclerotic events in a wide range of patients with advanced chronic kidney disease. FUNDING: Merck/Schering-Plough Pharmaceuticals; Australian National Health and Medical Research Council; British Heart Foundation; UK Medical Research Council.

Effects of homocysteine-lowering with folic acid plus vitamin B12 vs placebo on mortality and major morbidity in myocardial infarction survivors: a randomized trial.

CONTEXT: Blood homocysteine levels are positively associated with cardiovascular disease, but it is uncertain whether the association is causal. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effects of reducing homocysteine levels with folic acid and vitamin B(12) on vascular and nonvascular outcomes. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Double-blind randomized controlled trial of 12,064 survivors of myocardial infarction in secondary care hospitals in the United Kingdom between 1998 and 2008. INTERVENTIONS: 2 mg folic acid plus 1 mg vitamin B(12) daily vs matching placebo. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: First major vascular event, defined as major coronary event (coronary death, myocardial infarction, or coronary revascularization), fatal or nonfatal stroke, or noncoronary revascularization. RESULTS: Allocation to the study vitamins reduced homocysteine by a mean of 3.8 micromol/L (28%). During 6.7 years of follow-up, major vascular events occurred in 1537 of 6033 participants (25.5%) allocated folic acid plus vitamin B(12) vs 1493 of 6031 participants (24.8%) allocated placebo (risk ratio [RR], 1.04; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.97-1.12; P = .28). There were no apparent effects on major coronary events (vitamins, 1229 [20.4%], vs placebo, 1185 [19.6%]; RR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.97-1.13), stroke (vitamins, 269 [4.5%], vs placebo, 265 [4.4%]; RR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.86-1.21), or noncoronary revascularizations (vitamins, 178 [3.0%], vs placebo, 152 [2.5%]; RR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.95-1.46). Nor were there significant differences in the numbers of deaths attributed to vascular causes (vitamins, 578 [9.6%], vs placebo, 559 [9.3%]) or nonvascular causes (vitamins, 405 [6.7%], vs placebo, 392 [6.5%]) or in the incidence of any cancer (vitamins, 678 [11.2%], vs placebo, 639 [10.6%]). CONCLUSION: Substantial long-term reductions in blood homocysteine levels with folic acid and vitamin B(12) supplementation did not have beneficial effects on vascular outcomes but were also not associated with adverse effects on cancer incidence. TRIAL REGISTRATION: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN74348595.

The joint effects of apolipoprotein B, apolipoprotein A1, LDL cholesterol, and HDL cholesterol on risk: 3510 cases of acute myocardial infarction and 9805 controls.

AIMS: Plasma levels of apolipoprotein B (apoB), the main surface protein on LDL particles, and LDL-C, the amount of cholesterol in those particles, are closely correlated and, considered separately, are positive risk factors. Plasma levels of apolipoprotein A(1), the main surface protein on HDL particles, and HDL-C, the amount of cholesterol in those particles, are also closely correlated with each other and, considered separately, are negative risk factors. The interdependence of these four risk factors is unclear. METHODS AND RESULTS: Case-control study among 3510 acute myocardial infarction patients (without prior vascular disease, diabetes, or statin use) in UK hospitals and 9805 controls. Relative risks (age, sex, smoking, and obesity-adjusted) were more strongly related to apoB than to LDL-C and, given apoB, more strongly negatively related to apoA(1) than to HDL-C. The ratio apoB/apoA(1) was uncorrelated with time since symptom onset in cases, was reproducible in samples collected a few years apart in controls (correlation 0.81), and encapsulated almost all the predictive power of these four measurements. Its effect was continuous, substantial throughout the UK normal range [relative risk, top vs. bottom decile of this ratio, 7.3 (95% CI 5.8-9.2)] and varied little with age. The ratio apoB/apoA(1) was substantially more informative about risk (chi(1)(2) = 550) than were commonly used measures such as LDL-C/HDL-C, total/HDL cholesterol, non-HDL cholesterol, and total cholesterol (chi(1)(2) = 407, 334, 204, and 105, respectively). Given apoB and apoA(1), the relationship with risk of LDL-C was reversed, and this reversal was strengthened by appropriate allowance for random measurement errors in two correlated variables. Given usual apoB, lower LDL-C (consistent with smaller LDL particles) was associated with higher risk (P < 0.0001). During the first 8 h after symptom onset HDL-C increased by about 10%, precluding reliable assessment of the joint relationship of apoA(1) and pre-onset HDL-C with risk in such retrospective case-control studies. CONCLUSION: Apolipoprotein ratios are more informative about risk than lipid fractions are. This suggests that, among lipoprotein particles of a particular type (LDL or HDL), some smaller and larger subtypes differ in their effects on risk. Direct measurements of even more specific subtypes of lipoprotein particles may be even more informative about risk.

Benefits, challenges, and registerability of the polypill.

Guidelines for the management of cardiovascular disease (CVD) stress the importance of treating global risk, rather than individual risk, factors. Patients at high cardiovascular (CV) risk, for example, benefit from a combination of aspirin, antihypertensive agents, lipid-lowering drugs, and possibly folic acid. As the number of medications that a patient requires increases, adherence and compliance to therapy are likely to decrease. The use of affordable, multiple-target, fixed-combination 'polypills', which concomitantly reduce multiple risk factors without increasing the pill burden or the risk of adverse effects, has the potential to improve CV risk factor management, thereby reducing the incidence of CVD. This review discusses the benefits of the polypill and the challenges and requirements for its success and registerability. Discussions with regulatory bodies are required in order to obtain some 'balance' between an overcautious registration approach and the potentially large public health benefits that are likely to arise from the use of polypills.

Predictors of adverse outcome among patients with hypertension and coronary artery disease.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to determine predictors for adverse outcomes in hypertensive patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). BACKGROUND: Factors leading to adverse outcomes in hypertensive patients with CAD are poorly understood. The INternational VErapamil-trandolapril STudy (INVEST) compared outcomes in hypertensive patients with CAD that were assigned randomly to either a verapamil sustained-release (SR)- or an atenolol-based strategy for blood pressure (BP) control. Trandolapril and hydrochlorothiazide were used as added agents. During follow-up (61,835 patient-years), BP control and the primary outcome (death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and nonfatal stroke) were not different between strategies. METHODS: We investigated risk for adverse outcome associated with baseline factors, follow-up BP, and drug treatments using Cox modeling. RESULTS: Previous heart failure (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.96), as well as diabetes (HR 1.77), increased age (HR 1.63), U.S. residency (HR 1.61), renal impairment (HR 1.50), stroke/transient ischemic attack (HR 1.43), smoking (HR 1.41), myocardial infarction (HR 1.34), peripheral vascular disease (HR 1.27), and revascularization (HR 1.15) predicted increased risk. Follow-up systolic BP <140 mm Hg or diastolic BP <90 mm Hg (HRs 0.82 or 0.70, respectively) and trandolapril with verapamil SR (HRs 0.78 and 0.79) were associated with reduced risk. CONCLUSIONS: In hypertensive patients with CAD, increased risk for adverse outcomes was associated with conditions related to the severity of CAD and diminished left ventricular function. Lower follow-up BP and addition of trandolapril to verapamil SR each were associated with reduced risk.

Effects of long-term vitamin E supplementation on cardiovascular events and cancer: a randomized controlled trial.

CONTEXT: Experimental and epidemiological data suggest that vitamin E supplementation may prevent cancer and cardiovascular events. Clinical trials have generally failed to confirm benefits, possibly due to their relatively short duration. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether long-term supplementation with vitamin E decreases the risk of cancer, cancer death, and major cardiovascular events. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled international trial (the initial Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation [HOPE] trial conducted between December 21, 1993, and April 15, 1999) of patients at least 55 years old with vascular disease or diabetes mellitus was extended (HOPE-The Ongoing Outcomes [HOPE-TOO]) between April 16, 1999, and May 26, 2003. Of the initial 267 HOPE centers that had enrolled 9541 patients, 174 centers participated in the HOPE-TOO trial. Of 7030 patients enrolled at these centers, 916 were deceased at the beginning of the extension, 1382 refused participation, 3994 continued to take the study intervention, and 738 agreed to passive follow-up. Median duration of follow-up was 7.0 years. INTERVENTION: Daily dose of natural source vitamin E (400 IU) or matching placebo. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes included cancer incidence, cancer deaths, and major cardiovascular events (myocardial infarction, stroke, and cardiovascular death). Secondary outcomes included heart failure, unstable angina, and revascularizations. RESULTS: Among all HOPE patients, there were no significant differences in the primary analysis: for cancer incidence, there were 552 patients (11.6%) in the vitamin E group vs 586 (12.3%) in the placebo group (relative risk [RR], 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.84-1.06; P = .30); for cancer deaths, 156 (3.3%) vs 178 (3.7%), respectively (RR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.71-1.09; P = .24); and for major cardiovascular events, 1022 (21.5%) vs 985 (20.6%), respectively (RR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.96-1.14; P = .34). Patients in the vitamin E group had a higher risk of heart failure (RR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.01-1.26; P = .03) and hospitalization for heart failure (RR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.00-1.47; P = .045). Similarly, among patients enrolled at the centers participating in the HOPE-TOO trial, there were no differences in cancer incidence, cancer deaths, and major cardiovascular events, but higher rates of heart failure and hospitalizations for heart failure. CONCLUSION: In patients with vascular disease or diabetes mellitus, long-term vitamin E supplementation does not prevent cancer or major cardiovascular events and may increase the risk for heart failure.

Impact of cigarette smoking in high-risk patients participating in a clinical trial. A substudy from the Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation (HOPE) trial.

BACKGROUND: In recent large cardiovascular trials done in stable patients, 14-31% of the participants were smokers; the consequences of smoking in these trials using medications known to reduce cardiovascular events, have not been assessed. DESIGN: We evaluated the cardiovascular outcomes according to smoking status of men and women participating in the Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation trial. METHODS: The occurrence of cardiovascular events was documented among participants who did not change their smoking status during the trial. There were 2728 'never smokers', 5241 'former smokers' and 936 'current smokers', and all had stable cardiovascular disease or diabetes with at least one other risk factor. None had previous congestive heart failure or known left ventricular ejection fraction < 0.40. RESULTS: During the 4.5-year follow-up, there were 641 cardiovascular deaths, 978 myocardial infarctions, 358 strokes and 1021 deaths. In comparison to 'never smokers', smokers had relative risks adjusted for confounding variables including medications known to reduce cardiovascular mortality and morbidity, for cardiovascular death of 1.65 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.28-2.14], for myocardial infarction of 1.26 (95% CI, 1.01-1.58), for stroke of 1.42 (95% CI, 1.00-2.04), and for total mortality of 1.99 (95% CI, 1.63-2.44). The rates of these events among 'former smokers' were not different from those of 'never smokers'. CONCLUSIONS: Smoking increased the risk of mortality and morbidity among high-risk patients despite the use of medications known to reduce cardiovascular events. Smoking cessation programs should be reinforced even for patients participating in clinical trials.

Current options in the management of coronary artery disease.

World Health Organization projections suggest that, for the foreseeable future, coronary artery disease (CAD) will remain the largest element of global disease burden, reflecting the aging of the population. Recent American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines estimate that 16.6 million Americans currently have stable angina. Chronic stable angina is associated with significant morbidity and mortality, thus highlighting the need for accurate and early detection and treatment. Clinical examination is the single most important step in evaluating risk. Age, sex, pain type, coexisting diabetes mellitus, hypertension, or known vascular disease are powerful predictors of prognosis and, except for special patient groups, are more reliable than ambulatory electrocardiographic recording, exercise testing, or electron-beam computed tomography. Cost-effective methods for screening the general population for "silent" risk factors predisposing them to atherosclerotic disease in later life are nevertheless required. Aspirin, beta-blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, and lipid-lowering agents are currently the backbone of pharmacologic therapy, supplemented by lifestyle changes aimed at promoting exercise, weight reduction, and increased fruit and vegetable intake. However, side effects of chronic drug treatment, especially for those taking multidrug regimens, may affect quality of life and are the principal reason for poor compliance. Coronary bypass surgery and angioplasty are frequently used interventional procedures for CAD, although they can be invasive and costly, and they often need to be repeated. Current options for the management of CAD have their limitations, thus confirming the appropriateness of continuing the search for improved therapies to reverse the disease process and reduce the global burden.

Principal results of the Controlled Onset Verapamil Investigation of Cardiovascular End Points (CONVINCE) trial.

CONTEXT: Hypertensive patients are often given a calcium antagonist to reduce cardiovascular disease risk, but the benefit compared with other drug classes is controversial. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether initial therapy with controlled-onset extended-release (COER) verapamil is equivalent to a physician's choice of atenolol or hydrochlorothiazide in preventing cardiovascular disease. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Double-blind, randomized clinical trial conducted at 661 centers in 15 countries. A total of 16 602 participants diagnosed as having hypertension and who had 1 or more additional risk factors for cardiovascular disease were enrolled between September 1996 and December 1998 and followed up until December 31, 2000. After a mean of 3 years of follow-up, the sponsor closed the study before unblinding the results. INTERVENTION: Initially, 8241 participants received 180 mg of COER verapamil and 8361 received either 50 mg of atenolol or 12.5 mg of hydrochlorothiazide. Other drugs (eg, diuretic, beta-blocker, or an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor) could be added in specified sequence if needed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: First occurrence of stroke, myocardial infarction, or cardiovascular disease-related death. RESULTS: Systolic and diastolic blood pressure were reduced by 13.6 mm Hg and 7.8 mm Hg for participants assigned to the COER verapamil group and by 13.5 and 7.1 mm Hg for partcipants assigned to the atenolol or hydrochlorothiazide group. There were 364 primary cardiovascular disease-related events that occurred in the COER verapamil group vs 365 in atenolol or hydrochlorothiazide group (hazard ratio [HR], 1.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.88-1.18; P =.77). For fatal or nonfatal stroke, the HR was 1.15 (95% CI, 0.90-1.48); for fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction, 0.82 (95% CI, 0.65-1.03); and for cardiovascular disease-related death, 1.09 (95% CI, 0.87-1.37). The HR was 1.05 (95% CI, 0.95-1.16) for any prespecified cardiovascular disease-related event and 1.08 (95% CI, 0.93-1.26) for all-cause mortality. Nonstroke hemorrhage was more common with participants in the COER-verapamil group (n = 118) compared with the atenolol or hydrochlorothiazide group (n = 79) (HR, 1.54 [95% CI, 1.16-2.04]; P =.003). More cardiovascular disease-related events occurred between 6 AM and noon in both the COER verapamil (99/277) and atenolol or hydrochlorothiazide (88/274) groups; HR, 1.15 (95% CI, 0.86-1.53). CONCLUSIONS: The CONVINCE trial did not demonstrate equivalence of a COER verapamil-based antihypertensive regimen compared with a regimen beginning with a diuretic or beta-blocker. When considered in the context of other trials of calcium antagonists, these data indicate that the effectiveness of calcium-channel therapy in reducing cardiovascular disease is similar but not better than diuretic or beta-blocker treatment.