Association of Proton Pump Inhibitor Use With Incident Dementia and Cognitive Decline in Older Adults: A Prospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Prior studies have suggested that proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use is associated with increased risk of dementia; however, these have been limited by incomplete assessment of medication use and failure to account for confounders. Furthermore, prior studies have relied on claims-based diagnoses for dementia, which can lead to misclassification. We investigated the associations of PPI and histamine-2 receptor antagonist (H2RA) use with dementia and cognitive decline. METHODS: We conducted a post hoc analysis of ASPirin in Reducing Events in the Elderly (ASPREE), a randomized trial of aspirin in the United States and Australia, including 18,934 community-based adults ≥65 years of all races/ethnicities. Baseline and recent PPI and H2RA use were determined according to review of medications during annual in-person study visits. Incident dementia was defined according to Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, criteria. Secondary endpoints include cognitive impairment, no dementia (CIND) and changes in cognition. Associations of medication use with dementia and CIND outcomes were examined using Cox proportional hazards models. Changes in cognitive test scores were examined using linear mixed-effects models. RESULTS: Baseline PPI use vs nonuse was not associated with incident dementia (multivariable hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% confidence interval, 0.72-1.08), CIND (multivariable hazard ratio, 1.00; 95% confidence interval, 0.92-1.09), or with changes in overall cognitive test scores over time (multivariable B, -0.002; standard error, 0.01; P = .85). Similarly, no associations were observed between H2RA use and all cognitive endpoints. CONCLUSIONS: In adults ≥65 years of age, PPI and H2RA use were not associated with incident dementia, CIND, or decline in cognition over time. These data provide reassurance about the safety of long-term use of PPIs among older adults.

Angiotensin Receptor Blockers and Cognition: a Scoping Review.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To provide an overview of the association between angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB) use and cognitive outcomes. RECENT FINDINGS: ARBs have previously shown greater neuroprotection compared to other anti-hypertensive classes. The benefits are primarily attributed to the ARB's effect on modulating the renin-angiotensin system via inhibiting the Ang II/AT1R pathway and activating the Ang II/AT2R, Ang IV/AT4R, and Ang-(1-7)/MasR pathways. These interactions are associated with pleiotropic neurocognitive benefits, including reduced ß-amyloid accumulation and abnormal hyperphosphorylation of tau, ameliorated brain hypo-fusion, reduced neuroinflammation and synaptic dysfunction, better neurotoxin clearing, and blood-brain barrier function restoration. While ACEis also inhibit AT1R, they simultaneously lower Ang II and block the Ang II/AT2R and Ang IV/AT4R pathways that counterbalance the potential benefits. ARBs may be considered an adjunctive approach for neuroprotection. This preliminary evidence, coupled with their underlying mechanistic pathways, emphasizes the need for future long-term randomized trials to yield more definitive results.

Prediabetes, diabetes and loss of disability-free survival in a community-based older cohort: a post-hoc analysis of the ASPirin in Reducing Events in the Elderly trial.

BACKGROUND: Evidence for the prognostic implications of hyperglycaemia in older adults is inconsistent. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate disability-free survival (DFS) in older individuals by glycaemic status. METHODS: This analysis used data from a randomised trial recruiting 19,114 community-based participants aged ≥70 years, who had no prior cardiovascular events, dementia and physical disability. Participants with sufficient information to ascertain their baseline diabetes status were categorised as having normoglycaemia (fasting plasma glucose [FPG] < 5.6 mmol/l, 64%), prediabetes (FPG 5.6 to <7.0 mmol/l, 26%) and diabetes (self-report or FPG ≥ 7.0 mmol/l or use of glucose-lowering agents, 11%). The primary outcome was loss of disability-free survival (DFS), a composite of all-cause mortality, persistent physical disability or dementia. Other outcomes included the three individual components of the DFS loss, as well as cognitive impairment-no dementia (CIND), major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and any cardiovascular event. Cox models were used for outcome analyses, with covariate adjustment using inverse-probability weighting. RESULTS: We included 18,816 participants (median follow-up: 6.9 years). Compared to normoglycaemia, participants with diabetes had greater risks of DFS loss (weighted HR: 1.39, 95% CI 1.21-1.60), all-cause mortality (1.45, 1.23-1.72), persistent physical disability (1.73, 1.35-2.22), CIND (1.22, 1.08-1.38), MACE (1.30, 1.04-1.63) and cardiovascular events (1.25, 1.02-1.54) but not dementia (1.13, 0.87-1.47). The prediabetes group did not have an excess risk for DFS loss (1.02, 0.93-1.12) or other outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Among older people, diabetes was associated with reduced DFS, and higher risk of CIND and cardiovascular outcomes, whereas prediabetes was not. The impact of preventing or treating diabetes in this age group deserves closer attention.

The Association between Frailty and Dementia-Free and Physical Disability-Free Survival in Community-Dwelling Older Adults.

INTRODUCTION: Frailty is a common geriatric syndrome that adversely impacts health outcomes. This study examined correlates of physical frailty in healthy community-dwelling older adults and studied the effect of frailty on disability-free survival (DFS), defined as survival free of independence-limiting physical disability or dementia. METHODS: This is a post hoc analysis of 19,114 community-dwelling older adults (median age: 74.0 years, interquartile range or IQR: 6.1 years) from Australia and the USA enrolled in the "ASPirin in Reducing Events in the Elderly (ASPREE)" clinical trial. Frailty was assessed using a modified Fried phenotype and a deficit accumulation frailty index (FI) utilizing a ratio score derived from 66 items. Multinomial logistic regression was used to examine the correlates of frailty and Cox regression to analyze the association between frailty and DFS (and its components). RESULTS: At study enrollment, 39.0% were prefrail, and 2.2% of participants were frail, according to Fried phenotype. Older age, higher waist circumference, lower education, ethnoracial origin, current smoking, depression, and polypharmacy were associated with prefrailty and frailty according to Fried phenotype and FI. Fried phenotype defined prefrailty and frailty predicted reduced DFS (prefrail: HR: 1.67; 95% CI: 1.50-1.86 and frail: HR: 2.80; 95% CI: 2.27-3.46), affecting each component of DFS including dementia, physical disability, and mortality. Effect sizes were larger, according to FI. CONCLUSION: Our study showed that prefrailty is common in community-dwelling older adults initially free of cardiovascular disease, dementia, or independence-limiting physical disability. Prefrailty and frailty significantly reduced disability-free survival. Addressing modifiable correlates, like depression and polypharmacy, might reduce the adverse impact of frailty on dementia-free and physical disability-free survival.

The association of frailty with chronic kidney disease in older adults using the ASPirin in reducing events in the elderly cohort.

Frailty and chronic kidney disease (CKD) both increase with age and are prevalent in older adults. However, studies in older adults examining the relationship between frailty and milder impairments of kidney function are relatively sparse. We examined the cross-sectional association of baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), albuminuria and CKD ([eGFR <60 ml/min/1.73 m2 ] and/or albuminuria [>3.0 mg/mmol]) with prefrailty and frailty in the ASPirin in Reducing Events in the Elderly (ASPREE) trial cohort of healthy older participants. Univariate logistic regression models measured the unadjusted odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for prevalent combined prefrailty and frailty (respectively defined as presence of 1-2 or 3+ of 5 modified fried criteria) for the association between CKD, eGFR, albuminuria and other potential risk factors. Multivariable models calculated OR for prefrailty-frailty adjusted for potential confounders and either CKD, (i) eGFR and albuminuria measured as either continuous variables; (ii) or categorical variables; (iii). Of 17 759 eligible participants, 6934 were classified as prefrail, 389 were frail. CKD, eGFR and albuminuria were all associated with combined prefrailty-frailty on univariate analysis. In the multivariable modelling, neither CKD (reduced eGFR and/or albuminuria), nor eGFR (either continuous or categorical variables) were associated with prefrailty-frailty. However, albuminuria, either as a continuous variable (OR [95% CI] 1.07 [1.04-1.10]; p < .001), or categorical variable (OR 1.21 [1.08-1.36]; p = .001) was consistently associated with prefrailty-frailty. The complex relationship between albuminuria (which may be a biomarker for vascular inflammation), ageing, progressive CKD and frailty requires further investigation.

Comparison of statins for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease and persistent physical disability in older adults.

PURPOSE: Recent epidemiological evidence has suggested that use of lipid-lowering medications, particularly statins, was associated with reduced cardiovascular disease (CVD) events and persistent physical disability in healthy older adults. However, the comparative efficacy of different statins in this group remains unclear. This study aimed to compare different forms of statins in their associations with CVD and physical disability in healthy older adults. METHODS: This post hoc analysis included data from 5981 participants aged ≥ 70 years (≥ 65 if US minorities; median age:74.0) followed for a median of 4.7 years, who had no prior CVD events or physical disability and reported using a statin at baseline. The incidence of the composite and components of major adverse cardiovascular events and persistent physical disability were compared across different statins according to their type, potency, and lipophilicity using multivariable Cox proportional-hazards models. RESULTS: Atorvastatin was the most used statin type at baseline (37.9%), followed by simvastatin (29.6%), rosuvastatin (25.5%), and other statins (7.0%, predominantly pravastatin). In comparisons of specific statins according to type and lipophilicity (lipophilic vs. hydrophilic statin), observed differences in all outcomes were small and not statistically significant (all p values > 0.05). High-potency statin use (atorvastatin and rosuvastatin) was marginally associated with lower risk of fatal CVD events compared with low-/moderate-potency statin use (hazard ratio: 0.59; 95% confidence interval: 0.35, 1.00). CONCLUSION: There were minimal differences in CVD outcomes and no significant difference in persistent physical disability between various forms of statins in healthy older adults. Future investigations are needed to confirm our results.

Major GI bleeding in older persons using aspirin: incidence and risk factors in the ASPREE randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: There is a lack of robust data on significant gastrointestinal bleeding in older people using aspirin. We calculated the incidence, risk factors and absolute risk using data from a large randomised, controlled trial. DESIGN: Data were extracted from an aspirin versus placebo primary prevention trial conducted throughout 2010-2017 ('ASPirin in Reducing Events in the Elderly (ASPREE)', n=19 114) in community-dwelling persons aged ≥70 years. Clinical characteristics were collected at baseline and annually. The endpoint was major GI bleeding that resulted in transfusion, hospitalisation, surgery or death, adjudicated independently by two physicians blinded to trial arm. RESULTS: Over a median follow-up of 4.7 years (88 389 person years), there were 137 upper GI bleeds (89 in aspirin arm and 48 in placebo arm, HR 1.87, 95% CI 1.32 to 2.66, p<0.01) and 127 lower GI bleeds (73 in aspirin and 54 in placebo arm, HR 1.36, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.94, p=0.08) reflecting a 60% increase in bleeding overall. There were two fatal bleeds in the placebo arm. Multivariable analyses indicated age, smoking, hypertension, chronic kidney disease and obesity increased bleeding risk. The absolute 5-year risk of bleeding was 0.25% (95% CI 0.16% to 0.37%) for a 70 year old not on aspirin and up to 5.03% (2.56% to 8.73%) for an 80 year old taking aspirin with additional risk factors. CONCLUSION: Aspirin increases overall GI bleeding risk by 60%; however, the 5-year absolute risk of serious bleeding is modest in younger, well individuals. These data may assist patients and their clinicians to make informed decisions about prophylactic use of aspirin. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ASPREE. NCT01038583.

Subgroup analysis of the ASPirin in Reducing Events in the Elderly randomized clinical trial suggests aspirin did not improve outcomes in older adults with chronic kidney disease.

The role of aspirin for primary prevention in older adults with chronic kidney disease (CKD) is unclear. Therefore, post hoc analysis of the randomized controlled trial ASPirin in Reducing Events in the Elderly (ASPREE) was undertaken comparing 100 mg of enteric-coated aspirin daily against matching placebo. Participants were community dwelling adults aged 70 years and older in Australia, 65 years and older in the United States, all free of a history of dementia or cardiovascular disease and of any disease expected to lead to death within five years. CKD was defined as present at baseline if either eGFR under 60mL/min/1.73m2 or urine albumin to creatinine ratio 3 mg/mmol or more. In 4758 participants with and 13004 without CKD, the rates of a composite endpoint (dementia, persistent physical disability or death), major adverse cardiovascular events and clinically significant bleeding in the CKD participants were almost double those without CKD. Aspirin's effects as estimated by hazard ratios were generally similar between CKD and non-CKD groups for dementia, persistent physical disability or death, major adverse cardiovascular events and clinically significant bleeding. Thus, in our analysis aspirin did not improve outcomes in older people while increasing the risk of bleeding, with mostly consistent effects in participants with and without CKD.

Effect of Aspirin on Cardiovascular Events and Bleeding in the Healthy Elderly.

BACKGROUND: Aspirin is a well-established therapy for the secondary prevention of cardiovascular events. However, its role in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease is unclear, especially in older persons, who have an increased risk. METHODS: From 2010 through 2014, we enrolled community-dwelling men and women in Australia and the United States who were 70 years of age or older (or ≥65 years of age among blacks and Hispanics in the United States) and did not have cardiovascular disease, dementia, or disability. Participants were randomly assigned to receive 100 mg of enteric-coated aspirin or placebo. The primary end point was a composite of death, dementia, or persistent physical disability; results for this end point are reported in another article in the Journal. Secondary end points included major hemorrhage and cardiovascular disease (defined as fatal coronary heart disease, nonfatal myocardial infarction, fatal or nonfatal stroke, or hospitalization for heart failure). RESULTS: Of the 19,114 persons who were enrolled in the trial, 9525 were assigned to receive aspirin and 9589 to receive placebo. After a median of 4.7 years of follow-up, the rate of cardiovascular disease was 10.7 events per 1000 person-years in the aspirin group and 11.3 events per 1000 person-years in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83 to 1.08). The rate of major hemorrhage was 8.6 events per 1000 person-years and 6.2 events per 1000 person-years, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.18 to 1.62; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The use of low-dose aspirin as a primary prevention strategy in older adults resulted in a significantly higher risk of major hemorrhage and did not result in a significantly lower risk of cardiovascular disease than placebo. (Funded by the National Institute on Aging and others; ASPREE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01038583 .).

Effect of Aspirin on All-Cause Mortality in the Healthy Elderly.

BACKGROUND: In the primary analysis of the Aspirin in Reducing Events in the Elderly (ASPREE) trial, now published in the Journal, we report that the daily use of aspirin did not provide a benefit with regard to the primary end point of disability-free survival among older adults. A numerically higher rate of the secondary end point of death from any cause was observed with aspirin than with placebo. METHODS: From 2010 through 2014, we enrolled community-dwelling persons in Australia and the United States who were 70 years of age or older (or ≥65 years of age among blacks and Hispanics in the United States) and did not have cardiovascular disease, dementia, or disability. Participants were randomly assigned to receive 100 mg of enteric-coated aspirin or placebo. Deaths were classified according to the underlying cause by adjudicators who were unaware of trial-group assignments. Hazard ratios were calculated to compare mortality between the aspirin group and the placebo group, and post hoc exploratory analyses of specific causes of death were performed. RESULTS: Of the 19,114 persons who were enrolled, 9525 were assigned to receive aspirin and 9589 to receive placebo. A total of 1052 deaths occurred during a median of 4.7 years of follow-up. The risk of death from any cause was 12.7 events per 1000 person-years in the aspirin group and 11.1 events per 1000 person-years in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 1.14; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01 to 1.29). Cancer was the major contributor to the higher mortality in the aspirin group, accounting for 1.6 excess deaths per 1000 person-years. Cancer-related death occurred in 3.1% of the participants in the aspirin group and in 2.3% of those in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.10 to 1.56). CONCLUSIONS: Higher all-cause mortality was observed among apparently healthy older adults who received daily aspirin than among those who received placebo and was attributed primarily to cancer-related death. In the context of previous studies, this result was unexpected and should be interpreted with caution. (Funded by the National Institute on Aging and others; ASPREE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01038583 .).

Effect of Aspirin on Disability-free Survival in the Healthy Elderly.

BACKGROUND: Information on the use of aspirin to increase healthy independent life span in older persons is limited. Whether 5 years of daily low-dose aspirin therapy would extend disability-free life in healthy seniors is unclear. METHODS: From 2010 through 2014, we enrolled community-dwelling persons in Australia and the United States who were 70 years of age or older (or ≥65 years of age among blacks and Hispanics in the United States) and did not have cardiovascular disease, dementia, or physical disability. Participants were randomly assigned to receive 100 mg per day of enteric-coated aspirin or placebo orally. The primary end point was a composite of death, dementia, or persistent physical disability. Secondary end points reported in this article included the individual components of the primary end point and major hemorrhage. RESULTS: A total of 19,114 persons with a median age of 74 years were enrolled, of whom 9525 were randomly assigned to receive aspirin and 9589 to receive placebo. A total of 56.4% of the participants were women, 8.7% were nonwhite, and 11.0% reported previous regular aspirin use. The trial was terminated at a median of 4.7 years of follow-up after a determination was made that there would be no benefit with continued aspirin use with regard to the primary end point. The rate of the composite of death, dementia, or persistent physical disability was 21.5 events per 1000 person-years in the aspirin group and 21.2 per 1000 person-years in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.92 to 1.11; P=0.79). The rate of adherence to the assigned intervention was 62.1% in the aspirin group and 64.1% in the placebo group in the final year of trial participation. Differences between the aspirin group and the placebo group were not substantial with regard to the secondary individual end points of death from any cause (12.7 events per 1000 person-years in the aspirin group and 11.1 events per 1000 person-years in the placebo group), dementia, or persistent physical disability. The rate of major hemorrhage was higher in the aspirin group than in the placebo group (3.8% vs. 2.8%; hazard ratio, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.18 to 1.62; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Aspirin use in healthy elderly persons did not prolong disability-free survival over a period of 5 years but led to a higher rate of major hemorrhage than placebo. (Funded by the National Institute on Aging and others; ASPREE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01038583 .).

A Cohort Study of Anticholinergic Medication Burden and Incident Dementia and Stroke in Older Adults.

BACKGROUND: Anticholinergic medications may increase risk of dementia and stroke, but prospective studies in healthy older people are lacking. OBJECTIVE: Compare risk of incident dementia and stroke by anticholinergic burden among initially healthy older people. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Primary care (Australia and USA). PARTICIPANTS: 19,114 community-dwelling participants recruited for the ASPREE trial, aged 70+ years (65+ if US minorities) without major cardiovascular disease, dementia diagnosis, or Modified Mini-Mental State Examination score below 78/100. MEASUREMENTS: Baseline anticholinergic exposure was calculated using the Anticholinergic Cognitive Burden (ACB) score. Dementia was adjudicated using Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders volume IV criteria, and stroke using the World Health Organization definition. RESULTS: At baseline, 15,000 participants (79%) had an ACB score of zero, 2930 (15%) a score of 1-2, and 1184 (6%) a score of ≥ 3 (indicating higher burden). After a median follow-up of 4.7 years and adjusting for baseline covariates, a baseline ACB score of ≥ 3 was associated with increased risk of ischemic stroke (adjusted HR 1.58, 95% CI 1.06, 2.35), or dementia (adjusted HR 1.36, 95% CI 1.01, 1.82), especially of mixed etiology (adjusted HR 1.53, 95% CI 1.06, 2.21). Results were similar for those exposed to moderate/highly anticholinergic medications. LIMITATIONS: Residual confounding and reverse causality are possible. Assessment of dose or duration was not possible. CONCLUSIONS: High anticholinergic burden in initially healthy older people was associated with increased risk of incident dementia and ischemic stroke. A vascular effect may underlie this association. These findings highlight the importance of minimizing anticholinergic exposure in healthy older people.

Evaluation of the Pain Impact Index for Community-Dwelling Older Adults Through the Application of Rasch Modelling.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the Pain Impact Index, a simple, brief, easy-to-use, and novel tool to assess the impact of chronic pain in community-dwelling older adults. METHODS: A Rasch modelling analysis was undertaken in Stata using a partial credit model suited to the Likert-type items that comprised the Index. The Index was evaluated for ordering of category thresholds, unidimensionality, overall fit to the Rasch model, measurement bias (Differential Item Functioning, DIF), targeting, and construct validity. RESULTS: The four-item Pain Impact Index was self-completed by 6454 community-dwelling Australians who were aged at least 70 years and experienced pain on most days. Two items showed evidence of threshold disordering, and this was resolved by collapsing response categories (from 5 to 3) for all items. The rescored Index conformed to the unidimensionality assumption and had satisfactory fit with the Rasch model (analyses conducted on a reduced sample size to mitigate the potential for overpowering: n = 377, P > 0.0125, power > 77%). When considering uniform DIF, the most frequent sources of measurement bias were age, knee pain, and upper back pain. When considering nonuniform DIF, the most frequent source of measurement bias was knee pain. The Index had good ability to differentiate between respondents with different levels of pain impact and had highest measurement precision for respondents located around the average level of pain impact in the study sample. Both convergent and discriminant validity of the Index were supported. CONCLUSION: The Pain Impact Index showed evidence of unidimensionality, was able to successfully differentiate between levels of pain impact, and had good evidence of construct validity.

From Clinical Trials to Bedside: the Use of Antihypertensives in Aged Individuals. Part 2: Approach to Treatment.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Use of antihypertensives in older adults can be complicated by the potential for undesired effects on comorbidities, adverse effects of the drugs, and overall medication burden. The purpose of this two-part review is to discuss contemporary issues encountered in the management of hypertension in aged individuals, with a particular focus on considerations for the individualization of treatment. In Part 2, we discuss the individualized approach to treating hypertension in the elderly. RECENT FINDINGS: Achieving lower blood pressure goals in older adults has the potential to increase risks for complications such as hypotension and acute renal insufficiency, especially in those less healthy. Because elderly exhibit many different phenotypes, a one-size-fits-all approach to treatment goals and choice of antihypertensives is problematic. Many areas of uncertainty remain, including what the optimal goal blood pressure should be in frail or institutionalized elderly, whether there is an upper age limit for treatment initiation where benefits and risks overlap, and when de-escalation of antihypertensives should be considered. Hypertension is a major modifiable risk factor, and the benefits of treatment in lowering cardiovascular events are realized for most individuals, even at advanced ages. Areas of uncertainty in the management of hypertension in this group mandate a cautious, individualized approach to treatment which relies on careful assessment of biologic or phenotypic age, rather than chronologic age alone.

From Clinical Trials to Bedside: the Use of Antihypertensives in Aged Individuals. Part 1: Evaluation and Evidence of Treatment Benefit.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Use of antihypertensives in older adults can be complicated by the potential for undesired effects on comorbidities, adverse effects of the drugs, and overall medication burden. The purpose of this two-part review is to discuss contemporary issues encountered in the management of hypertension in aged individuals, with a particular focus on the individualization of treatment. In part 1, we discuss the evaluation of the aged hypertensive patient and review the clinical trial evidence for treatment benefit of hypertension in the elderly. RECENT FINDINGS: Elderly patients with suspected hypertension need careful evaluation of their blood pressure, as errors in measurement technique, inaccurate devices, or overreliance on office blood pressure readings may lead to under- or over-treatment, thereby increasing risks of adverse medication effects and/or cardiovascular events. Epidemiologic evidence in older adults suggests a link between low blood pressure and increased mortality. However, key prospective hypertension trials such as HYVET and SPRINT, which were focused in mostly healthy, community-dwelling elderly cohorts, have unequivocally demonstrated benefits of lowering blood pressure in reducing cardiovascular events in the very elderly. Recent evidence also suggests benefit in reducing the risks of cognitive impairment. Hypertension is a major modifiable risk factor and the benefits of treatment in lowering cardiovascular events are realized for most individuals, even at advanced ages.

Quality of Life for 19,114 participants in the ASPREE (ASPirin in Reducing Events in the Elderly) study and their association with sociodemographic and modifiable lifestyle risk factors.

PURPOSE: To explore the relationship between sociodemographic and lifestyle variables with health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of a large cohort of 'healthy' older individuals. METHODS: The sample included individuals aged 65+ years from Australia (N = 16,703) and the USA (N = 2411) enrolled in the ASPirin in Reducing Events in the Elderly (ASPREE) multicentre placebo-controlled trial study and free of cardiovascular disease, dementia, serious physical disabilities or 'fatal' illnesses. The associations with the physical (PCS) and mental component scores (MCS) of HRQoL (SF-12 questionnaire) were explored using multiple linear regression models from data collected at baseline (2010-2014). RESULTS: The adjusted PCS mean was slightly higher in the USA (49.5 ± 9.1) than Australia (48.2 ± 11.6; p < 0.001), but MCS was similar in both samples (55.7 ± 7.5 and 55.7 ± 9.6, respectively; p = 0.603). Males, younger participants, better educated, more active individuals, or those currently drinking 1-2 alcoholic drinks/day showed a better HRQoL (results more evident for PCS than MCS), while current heavy smokers had the lowest physical HRQoL in both countries. Neither age, walking time, nor alcohol intake was associated with MCS in either cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Baseline HRQoL of ASPREE participants was higher than that reported in population-based studies of older individuals, but the associations between sociodemographic and lifestyle variables were consistent with the published literature. As the cohort ages and develops chronic diseases, ASPREE will be able to document HRQoL changes.

Drug-Induced Hypertension: Focus on Mechanisms and Management.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review is intended to briefly describe the primary mechanistic pathways by which several common drugs can increase blood pressure. We also propose potential management strategies based on the underlying mechanisms responsible for the blood pressure elevation. RECENT FINDINGS: As hypertension is a significant risk factor for cardiovascular events, healthcare providers must evaluate patients' concomitant medications that may contribute to elevations in blood pressure. The presence of these medications, if not properly addressed, can lead to consequences such as an inadvertent diagnosis of hypertension, as well as the potential need for unnecessary intensification of antihypertensive regimens in those already treated. Blood pressure elevation is an unfortunate by-product of multiple medications. The substances discussed in this review can elicit significant and persistent elevations in blood pressure, and health care providers must first evaluate whether the drug is necessary. If one exists, it is best to select a similar agent with lower risk of increasing blood pressure; if unavoidable, then clinicians should select an appropriate management strategy to compensate for the rise in blood pressure.