Ambulatory Blood Pressure Values in the Ongoing Telmisartan Alone and in Combination with Ramipril Global Endpoint Trial (ONTARGET)

In the Ongoing Telmisartan Alone and in Combination with Ramipril Global Endpoint Trial, telmisartan (T; 80 mg daily) and ramipril (R; 10 mg daily) caused similar clinic blood pressure (BP) reductions, with a similar incidence of cardiovascular and renal events. The R+T combination lowered clinic BP somewhat more with no further cardiovascular or renal protection. The aim of this substudy was to see whether these clinic BP changes reflected the changes of 24-hour BP, a BP with a better prognostic value. In 422 patients in whom 24-hour BP monitoring was performed either before or after 6 to 24 months of treatment, demographic and clinical characteristics were similar in the 3 treated groups. Twenty-four-hour systolic BP was similarly reduced by R (−2.0 mm Hg) and T (−2.1 mm Hg), whereas the reduction was more than twice as large in the T+R group (−5.3 mm Hg), which showed a lower on-treatment 24-hour BP also in additional patients (n=408) in whom ambulatory BP was performed only on-treatment. Twenty-four-hour systolic BP was ≈14 mm Hg lower than clinic systolic BP at baseline, whereas during treatment the 2 values became progressively closer as clinic systolic BP was more tightly controlled and superimposable when clinic systolic BP was <120 mm Hg. Similar results were obtained for diastolic BP. These findings provide evidence on the relationship of clinic and ambulatory BP target drug treatment. They also show that in the Ongoing Telmisartan Alone and in Combination with Ramipril Global Endpoint Trial, failure of the R+T combination to enhance cardiovascular and renal protection was not because of inability to more effectively control daily life BP.

[1]  Michael Böhm,et al.  2013 ESH/ESC Guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension: the Task Force for the management of arterial hypertension of the European Society of Hypertension (ESH) and of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). , 2007, Journal of hypertension.

[2]  G. Mancia,et al.  Longing for clinical excellence: a critical outlook into the NICE recommendations on hypertension management – is nice always good? , 2012, Journal of hypertension.

[3]  G. Parati,et al.  Blood pressure control by the nifedipine GITS–telmisartan combination in patients at high cardiovascular risk: the TALENT study , 2011, Journal of hypertension.

[4]  Kevin A Peterson,et al.  Effects of Intensive Blood-Pressure Control in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus , 2011 .

[5]  G. Parati,et al.  PA.NET International Quality Certification Protocol for blood pressure monitors , 2008, Blood pressure monitoring.

[6]  S. Yusuf,et al.  Renal outcomes with telmisartan, ramipril, or both, in people at high vascular risk (the ONTARGET study): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, controlled trial , 2008, The Lancet.

[7]  S. Yusuf,et al.  Telmisartan, ramipril, or both in patients at high risk for vascular events. , 2008, The New England journal of medicine.

[8]  J. Staessen,et al.  Diagnostic thresholds for ambulatory blood pressure monitoring based on 10-year cardiovascular risk. , 2007, Blood pressure monitoring.

[9]  R. Fagard,et al.  Incidence of cardiovascular events in white-coat, masked and sustained hypertension versus true normotension: a meta-analysis , 2007, Journal of hypertension.

[10]  G. Mancia,et al.  Blood Pressure Control and Improved Cardiovascular Outcomes in the International Verapamil SR-Trandolapril Study , 2007, Hypertension.

[11]  A. Dominiczak,et al.  2007 Guidelines for the Management of Arterial Hypertension: The Task Force for the Management of Arterial Hypertension of the European Society of Hypertension (ESH) and of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) , 2007, European heart journal.

[12]  Giuseppe Mancia,et al.  Assessment of long-term antihypertensive treatment by clinic and ambulatory blood pressure: data from the European Lacidipine Study on Atherosclerosis , 2007, Journal of hypertension.

[13]  J. Staessen,et al.  Diagnostic Thresholds for Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring Based on 10-Year Cardiovascular Risk , 2007, Circulation.

[14]  Paolo Verdecchia,et al.  Impact of blood pressure variability on cardiac and cerebrovascular complications in hypertension. , 2007, American journal of hypertension.

[15]  Alice Stanton,et al.  Superiority of Ambulatory Over Clinic Blood Pressure Measurement in Predicting Mortality: The Dublin Outcome Study , 2005, Hypertension.

[16]  Roberto Sega,et al.  Prognostic Value of Ambulatory and Home Blood Pressures Compared With Office Blood Pressure in the General Population: Follow-Up Results From the Pressioni Arteriose Monitorate e Loro Associazioni (PAMELA) Study , 2005, Circulation.

[17]  S. Yusuf,et al.  Rationale, design, and baseline characteristics of 2 large, simple, randomized trials evaluating telmisartan, ramipril, and their combination in high-risk patients: the Ongoing Telmisartan Alone and in Combination with Ramipril Global Endpoint Trial/Telmisartan Randomized Assessment Study in ACE Int , 2004, American heart journal.

[18]  N. Hollenberg Prognostic value of ambulatory blood pressure recordings in patients with treated hypertension. , 2004, Current hypertension reports.

[19]  G. Parati,et al.  Office compared with ambulatory blood pressure in assessing response to antihypertensive treatment: a meta-analysis , 2004, Journal of hypertension.

[20]  L. Hansson Antihypertensive Treatment: Does the J-curve Exist? , 2000, Cardiovascular Drugs and Therapy.

[21]  F. Turnbull Effects of different blood-pressure-lowering regimens on major cardiovascular events: results of prospectively-designed overviews of randomised trials , 2003, The Lancet.

[22]  Peter W de Leeuw,et al.  Prognostic value of ambulatory blood-pressure recordings in patients with treated hypertension. , 2003, The New England journal of medicine.

[23]  Yutaka Imai,et al.  European Society of Hypertension recommendations for conventional, ambulatory and home blood pressure measurement , 2003, Journal of hypertension.

[24]  G. Parati,et al.  Twenty-four hour ambulatory blood pressure in the International Nifedipine GITS Study Intervention as a Goal in Hypertension Treatment (INSIGHT) , 2002, Journal of hypertension.

[25]  G Parati,et al.  Twenty-four hour ambulatory blood pressure in the Hypertension Optimal Treatment (HOT) study , 2001, Journal of hypertension.

[26]  E. Porteri,et al.  The smoothness index, but not the trough-to-peak ratio predicts changes in carotid artery wall thickness during antihypertensive treatment , 2001, Journal of hypertension.

[27]  B. Neal The Blood Pressure Lowering Treatment Trialists' Collaboration , 2001 .

[28]  M. Kikuya,et al.  Prognostic Significance of Blood Pressure and Heart Rate Variabilities: The Ohasama Study , 2000, Hypertension.

[29]  B. Conrad,et al.  Relationship Between Circadian Blood Pressure Patterns and Progression of Early Carotid Atherosclerosis: A 3-Year Follow-Up Study , 2000, Circulation.

[30]  S. Yusuf,et al.  Effects of an angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor, ramipril, on cardiovascular events in high-risk patients. The Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation Study Investigators. , 2000 .

[31]  S. Yusuf,et al.  Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation Study Investigators. Effects of an angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor, ramipril, on cardiovascular events in high-risk patients. N Engl J Med 2000;342:145-53. , 2000 .

[32]  S S Franklin,et al.  Ageing and hypertension: the assessment of blood pressure indices in predicting coronary heart disease. , 1999, Journal of hypertension. Supplement : official journal of the International Society of Hypertension.

[33]  Gianfranco Parati,et al.  Predicting cardiovascular risk using conventional vs ambulatory blood pressure in older patients with systolic hypertension. , 1999 .

[34]  G Parati,et al.  Predicting cardiovascular risk using conventional vs ambulatory blood pressure in older patients with systolic hypertension. Systolic Hypertension in Europe Trial Investigators. , 1999, JAMA.

[35]  S. Pede,et al.  Ambulatory pulse pressure: a potent predictor of total cardiovascular risk in hypertension. , 1998, Hypertension.

[36]  R. Senior,et al.  Cardiovascular outcome in white-coat versus sustained mild hypertension: a 10-year follow-up study. , 1998, Circulation.

[37]  G. Parati,et al.  The smoothness index: A new, reproducible and clinically relevant measure of the homogeneity of the blood pressure reduction with treatment for hypertension , 1998, Journal of hypertension.

[38]  R. Senior,et al.  Cardiovascular Outcome in WhiteCoat Versus Sustained Mild Hypertension A 10-Year Follow-Up Study , 1998 .

[39]  F. Mee,et al.  Evaluation of blood pressure measuring devices. , 1993, Clinical and experimental hypertension.

[40]  G. Parati,et al.  Reproducibility of non-invasive and intra-arterial blood pressure monitoring: implications for studies on antihypertensive treatment. , 1991, Journal of hypertension.

[41]  A. Coats,et al.  The use of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring to improve the accuracy and reduce the numbers of subjects in clinical trials of antihypertensive agents. , 1988, Journal of hypertension.

[42]  C. Goodman Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation , 1988 .

[43]  Giuseppe Mancia,et al.  EFFECTS OF BLOOD-PRESSURE MEASUREMENT BY THE DOCTOR ON PATIENT'S BLOOD PRESSURE AND HEART RATE , 1983, The Lancet.