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.

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.

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.

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.

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).

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.

Systematic review of safety and tolerability of a complex micronutrient formula used in mental health.

BACKGROUND: Theoretically, consumption of complex, multinutrient formulations of vitamins and minerals should be safe, as most preparations contain primarily the nutrients that have been in the human diet for millennia, and at safe levels as defined by the Dietary Reference Intakes. However, the safety profile of commercial formulae may differ from foods because of the amounts and combinations of nutrients they contain. As these complex formulae are being studied and used clinically with increasing frequency, there is a need for direct evaluation of safety and tolerability. METHODS: All known safety and tolerability data collected on one complex nutrient formula was compiled and evaluated. RESULTS: Data were assembled from all the known published and unpublished studies for the complex formula with the largest amount of published research in mental health. Biological safety data from 144 children and adults were available from six sources: there were no occurrences of clinically meaningful negative outcomes/effects or abnormal blood tests that could be attributed to toxicity. Adverse event (AE) information from 157 children and adults was available from six studies employing the current version of this formula, and only minor, transitory reports of headache and nausea emerged. Only one of the studies permitted a direct comparison between micronutrient treatment and medication: none of the 88 pediatric and adult participants had any clinically meaningful abnormal laboratory values, but tolerability data in the group treated with micronutrients revealed significantly fewer AEs and less weight gain. CONCLUSIONS: This compilation of safety and tolerability data is reassuring with respect to the broad spectrum approach that employs complex nutrient formulae as a primary treatment.

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.

Supramaximal dose of candesartan in proteinuric renal disease.

High levels of proteinuria predict renal deterioration, suggesting that interventions to reduce proteinuria may postpone the development of severe renal impairment. This multicenter Canadian trial evaluated whether supramaximal dosages of candesartan would reduce proteinuria to a greater extent than the maximum approved antihypertensive dosage. The authors randomly assigned 269 patients who had persistent proteinuria (> or =1 g/d) despite 7 wk of treatment with the highest approved dosage of candesartan (16 mg/d) to 16, 64, or 128 mg/d candesartan for 30 wk. The median serum creatinine level was 130.0 micromol/L (1.47 mg/dl), and the median urinary protein excretion was 2.66 g/d; most (53.9%) patients had diabetic nephropathy. The mean difference of the percentage change in proteinuria for patients receiving 128 mg/d candesartan compared with those receiving 16 mg/d candesartan was -33.05% (95% confidence interval -45.70 to -17.44; P < 0.0001). Reductions in BP were not different across the three treatment groups. Elevated serum potassium levels (K+ > 5.5 mEq/L) led to the early withdrawal of 11 patients, but there were no dosage-related increases in adverse events. In conclusion, proteinuria that persists despite treatment with the maximum recommended dosage of candesartan can be reduced by increasing the dosage of candesartan further, but serum potassium levels should be monitored during treatment.

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.

Smoking cessation initiated during hospital stay for patients with coronary artery disease: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Programs for smoking cessation for cardiac patients are underused in Canada. We examined the efficacy of an intervention for smoking cessation for patients admitted to hospital for coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) or because of acute myocardial infarction (MI). METHODS: Nurses randomly assigned 276 sequential patients admitted because of acute MI or for CABG who met the inclusion criteria. Participants received an intensive or minimal smoking-cessation intervention. The minimal intervention included advice from physicians and nurses and 2 pamphlets. The intensive intervention included the minimal intervention plus 60 minutes of bedside counselling, take-home materials and 7 nurse-initiated counselling calls for 2 months after discharge. The outcomes were point prevalence of abstinence at 3, 6 and 12 months after discharge. RESULTS: The 12-month self-reported rate of abstinence was 62% among patients in the intensive group and 46% among those in the minimal group (odds ratio [OR] 2.0, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2-3.1). Abstinence was confirmed for 54% of patients in the intensive group and 35% in the minimal group (OR 2.0, 95% CI 1.3-3.6). Abstinence was significantly lower among those who used pharmacotherapy than among those who did not (p < 0.001). Continuous 12-month abstinence was 57% in the intensive group and 39% in the minimal group (p < 0.01). It was significantly higher among patients admitted for CABG than among those admitted because of acute MI (p < 0.05). INTERPRETATION: Providing intensive programs for smoking cessation for patients admitted for CABG or because of acute MI could have a major impact on health and health care costs.

Telmisartan is more effective than losartan in reducing proteinuria in patients with diabetic nephropathy.

In patients with diabetic nephropathy, lowering blood pressure and reducing proteinuria by over 30% correlates with a slower progression to kidney failure. We compared two different angiotensin receptor-blockers in a double blind, prospective trial of 860 patients with type 2 diabetes whose blood pressure levels was over 130/80 mmHg or who were receiving antihypertensive medication(s) and who had a morning spot urinary protein to creatinine ratio of 700 or more. Patients were randomized to telmisartan (a highly lipophilic agent with a long half-life) or losartan (with low lipophilicity and short half-life). The primary endpoint was the difference in the urinary albumin to creatinine ratio between the groups at 52 weeks. The geometric coefficient of variation and the mean of the urinary albumin to creatinine ratio fell in both groups at 52 weeks but both were significantly greater for the telmisartan compared to the losartan cohort. Mean systolic blood pressure reductions were not significantly different between groups at trial end. We conclude that telmisartan is superior to losartan in reducing proteinuria in hypertensive patients with diabetic nephropathy, despite a similar reduction in blood pressure.

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.

A 26-week, prospective, open-label, uncontrolled, multicenter study to evaluate the effect of an escalating-dose regimen of trandolapril on change in blood pressure in treatment-naive and concurrently treated adult hypertensive subjects (TRAIL).

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the effectiveness of an escalating-dose regimen of trandolapril in subjects with stage 1 or stage 2 hypertension. METHODS: This was a 26-week, prospective, open-label,multicenter study in Canadian primary care centers. Subjects with hypertension who were treatment naive or whose disease was uncontrolled on current first-line antihypertensive monotherapy were treated with trandolapril for 26 weeks alone or in addition to their current treatment. Uncontrolled hypertension was defined as systolic/diastolic blood pressure (SBP/DBP) >or=140/90 mm Hg in subjects with no other risk factors or >or=130/80 mm Hg in subjects with diabetes or kidney disease. Trandolapril therapy was initiated at 1 mg/d and was titrated as required to 2 or 4 mg at 4 and 9 weeks after initiation of treatment, respectively, in those not achieving BP targets. At 14 weeks after treatment initiation, subjects not achieving BP targets could receive a combination of trandolapril 4 mg plus a calcium channel blocker (verapamil 240 mg) with or without a diuretic. Primary outcome was the percentage of patients reaching target BP after 14 weeks. RESULTS: A total of 1683 subjects from 192 general practice clinics across Canada completed the 14-week trandolapril dose-optimization phase, and 1650 completed the full 26-week follow-up. Mean (SD) age was 56.6 (12.6) years, and 49.2% of the subjects were men. At baseline, 82.4% (1359/1650) of subjects were antihypertensive-treatment naive. At the trial end, 73.4% (95% CI, 70.9-75.9) of subjects achieved a target level of SBP/DBP <140/90 mm Hg. The mean (SD) reductions in SBP and DBP were -21.5 (14.0) and -11.9 (9.1) mm Hg, respectively (P < 0.001), and -22.4 (14.0) and -12.7 (9.0) mm Hg, respectively (P < 0.001), at 26 weeks. A total of 343 predominantly mild, nonserious adverse events were attributed to the study drugs, reported by 252 (15.3%) of the 1650 subjects. The most frequently reported nonserious adverse events were cough (6.3%); gastrointestinal disorders (2.3%), predominantly nausea; and headache (2.1%). No serious adverse events were attributed to the study treatment. Trandolapril was generally well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: A titration-based, escalating-dose regimen of trandolapril was effective and well tolerated in the management of these subjects who were antihypertensive-treatment naive or whose disease was uncontrolled on a diuretic or a calcium channel blocker in this open-label, uncontrolled, multicenter study. Overall, 73.4% of subjects achieved their target blood pressure goal (<140/90 mm Hg).