2008
DOI: 10.2337/dc07-1768
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Determinants of New-Onset Diabetes Among 19,257 Hypertensive Patients Randomized in the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial–Blood Pressure Lowering Arm and the Relative Influence of Antihypertensive Medication

Abstract: OBJECTIVE -The purpose of this study was to determine the baseline predictors of newonset diabetes (NOD) in hypertensive patients and to develop a risk score to identify those at high risk of NOD. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS -Among 19,257 hypertensive patients in theAnglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial-Blood Pressure Lowering Arm (ASCOT-BPLA) who were randomly assigned to receive one of two antihypertensive regimens (atenolol Ϯ thiazide or amlodipine Ϯ perindopril), 14,120 were at risk of developing diabe… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

4
111
1
11

Year Published

2008
2008
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 143 publications
(127 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
4
111
1
11
Order By: Relevance
“…10 Fourth, we used a validated BMI cutoff as a substitute for abdominal obesity in the MetS, as there is now agreement about the validity of that surrogate approach. 39 Fifth, a substantial portion of our patients was on antihypertensive treatment with a possible impact of some specific drug classes on metabolic variables, 3,35 but unfortunately our records were not detailed enough to draw meaningful statistics on this point. An additional limitation relates to the imprecision of Framingham's CHD risk algorithms as predicting tools when applied to European hypertensive patients.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…10 Fourth, we used a validated BMI cutoff as a substitute for abdominal obesity in the MetS, as there is now agreement about the validity of that surrogate approach. 39 Fifth, a substantial portion of our patients was on antihypertensive treatment with a possible impact of some specific drug classes on metabolic variables, 3,35 but unfortunately our records were not detailed enough to draw meaningful statistics on this point. An additional limitation relates to the imprecision of Framingham's CHD risk algorithms as predicting tools when applied to European hypertensive patients.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…36 Furthermore, ACEIs or ARBs combined with CCBs has been shown to particularly reduce the risk of hyperkalemia and other metabolic problems. 37 In conclusion, CCBs did not increase all-cause mortality in patients with CKD though they displayed less renoprotection effect in reducing the occurrence of ESRD, compared with ACEIs or ARBs therapy. Although the long-term efficacy of the combination of a CCB and an ACEI or ARB therapy needs further confirmation, our results suggest this combined antihypertensive therapy could be a more preferable antihypertensive therapy in patients with CKD, considering its effective blood pressure controlling, an assured antiproteinuria effect and fewer adverse metabolic problems.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Likewise, insulin resistance and hyperinsulinemia increase the risk of hypertension, and it usually accompanies DM, early in type 2 (DM2) and delayed in type 1 (DM1). Moreover, among patients being treated for hypertension, the risk of new-onset diabetes is doubled in those with uncontrolled blood pressure (BP) (Gress et al;Gupta et al;Izzo et al;2009). Although effective antihypertensive agents are available, achieving adequate BP control remains difficult in hypertensive patients, particularly in the context of concomitant diabetes.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%