清晨好,您是今天最早来到科研通的研友!由于当前在线用户较少,发布求助请尽量完整的填写文献信息,科研通机器人24小时在线,伴您科研之路漫漫前行!

Can blood pressure-lowering therapy reduce the risk of cognitive decline in the elderly?

痴呆 医学 认知功能衰退 血压 乐观 主义 老年学 糖尿病 血管性痴呆 人口 疾病 认知 风险因素 内科学 精神科 心理学 环境卫生 内分泌学 社会心理学
作者
John Chalmers
出处
期刊:Journal of Hypertension [Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer)]
卷期号:33 (10): 2029-2031 被引量:2
标识
DOI:10.1097/hjh.0000000000000671
摘要

Cognitive decline and dementia are inextricably associated with ageing and are increasingly contributing to the global burden of disease, as our populations live longer, right across the world. The most common forms of dementia are Alzheimer's disease, vascular dementia and mixed forms, and unfortunately, there are no proven treatments at present, once these are established. Our hopes for prevention are only marginally stronger and depend on treatment or avoidance of risk factors such as hypertension, diabetes, high total cholesterol and smoking. Indeed, the links between high blood pressure and cognition provide some cause for optimism, but at this time, there is no clear evidence that lowering the blood pressure will reduce the risk of dementia or cognitive decline. The optimism is mainly based on observational studies demonstrating a link between raised blood pressure or hypertension and the risk of dementia or cognitive decline in later life [1–10]. One of the main sources of evidence has come from ‘The Honolulu-Asia Aging Study’, which first demonstrated that higher levels of SBP (but not diastolic) in Japanese-American men living in Hawaii, and aged in their late forties or fifties, were associated with reduced cognitive function in later life, as observed in their late seventies [1,2]. They also demonstrated that the risks of both Alzheimer's disease and vascular dementia were much greater in men without antihypertensive therapy than those receiving treatment [1,2]. Very similar associations have been reported in studies from Finland, France, the Netherlands and North America in predominantly white population [3–6]. A recent report from the ARIC study (Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities) has taken this further by demonstrating that the relationship between dementia and risk factors such as hypertension is much stronger in men and women in middle life (<55 years) than those in later life (≥70 years) [7]. Similar findings were reported for diabetes, smoking and hypercholesterolemia [7]. These findings help to explain the lack of convincing evidence from randomized clinical trials that blood pressure lowering will prevent or reduce the risk of cognitive decline and dementia [11–20]. The main difficulty is that as most clinical trials span a maximum of 5 years, it is very difficult for them to bridge the time from maximum influence of risk factors (midlife) to the time of maximum incidence of cognitive decline or dementia (later life). To be successful, trials should either span a much longer period, which poses both logistic and financial problems, or finely balanced in the middle, with little guarantee of success. The main positive results have come from the Systolic Hypertension in Europe (Syst-Eur) trial and the Perindopril Protection against Recurrent Stroke Study (PROGRESS) [11–14]: In Syst-Eur, treatment with a regimen based on nitrendipine as well as enalapril and hydrochlorothiazide reduced the incidence of dementia by 50%, with only 11 cases versus 21 cases in the placebo group [11–13]. These benefits were maintained during posttrial follow-up of a further 2 years, with 21 cases versus 43 in the placebo group [13]. However, these numbers are very small and clearly in need of confirmation. In PROGRESS, a regimen based on perindopril as well as indapamide clearly reduced the risk of dementia and cognitive decline, associated with recurrent stroke, but did not do so in the absence of recurrent stroke [14]. A number of other large trials have failed to find significant evidence that blood pressure lowering per se will reduce the risk of cognitive decline in dementia. These include the Systolic Hypertension in the Elderly Programme (SHEP) trial, the Study on Cognition and Prognosis in the Elderly (SCOPE) trial, the Hypertension in the Very Elderly Trial Cognitive function assessment (HYVET-COG) trial, the Prevention Regimen for Effectively Avoiding Second Strokes (PRoFESS) trial, the On-going Telemisartan Alone and in Combination with Ramipril Global Endpoint (ON-TARGET) trial, the Telemisartan Randomised Assessment Study in ACE Intolerant Subjects with Cardiovascular Disease (TRANSCEND) trial and the Secondary Prevention of Small Subcortical Strokes (SPS3) trial [15–20]. A number of authors have also performed systematic reviews and meta-analysis of various groups of these studies, and these have generally shown little effect of blood pressure-lowering treatment or nonsignificant reductions of the order of 5 or 10% in the relative risk of cognitive decline or dementia [17,19,21,22]. In this issue of the Journal of Hypertension, Ruth Peters et al. [23] present observational evidence from the Newcastle 85+ Study. This addresses an important issue, whether the choice of blood pressure-lowering drug class can influence the rate of cognitive decline in very old people, aged 85 years. The authors perform an analysis of 238 white individuals, constituting an established population-based cohort of people born in 1921, living in the Newcastle/Tyneside area of the UK, including some living in institutions. This cohort was limited to people with a diagnosis of hypertension who were taking blood pressure medications and who had completed a ‘standardised Mini-Mental State Exam’ (SMMSE) at both baseline and after 3 years of follow-up [23]. Following extensive multivariable adjustment, the authors report that the use of calcium channel blockers (CCBs) was associated with a slower rate of decline of the SMMSE over 3 years, than the use of the other four classes analysed angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs), angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), beta-blockers and thiazide-like diuretics [23]. The results were similar when all individuals were included and when only those with an SMMSE over 24 at baseline were included in the analysis. There was no formal control group, not taking any blood pressure-lowering medications, but a number of sensitivity analyses were reported, with comparisons against patients without hypertension and patients not receiving blood pressure-lowering treatment, and these are reported as being confirmatory [23]. The study has many positive features. It was a longitudinal study conducted in a stable population at community level, with meticulous follow-up and monitoring, and is rigorously analysed. However, it has some limitations. The first and most obvious is the very small sample size with only 238 individuals, and these split into five subgroups, in a field wherein large studies with many thousands of individuals have failed to find convincing evidence that blood pressure lowering per se will prevent or reduce the onset of cognitive decline or dementia. The second is that most individuals were taking more than one class of blood pressure-lowering drug, so that the comparisons are confounded by the use of combination therapy. Another is the inevitable confounding that is inherent in an observational study, and particularly the lack of a formal, matched control group not taking any blood pressure-lowering therapy. In assessing the weight that should be given to the present report, it is difficult to go past the conclusions of the systematic review by Ruth Peters herself published in this Journal a year ago, viz. ‘At present, there is no clear convincing evidence to suggest that CCB use increases or decreases the risk of cognitive decline or dementia in the very elderly. A robust clinical trial is now required to resolve this’ [24]. That remains the case today. Furthermore, it seems rather premature to be comparing the efficacy of various classes of blood pressure-lowering drugs before we have definitive evidence that the treatment of hypertension does indeed prevent, reduce or retard the onset of cognitive decline and dementia. That being said, there are now a few straws in the wind, each with its own limitations and each far from definitive. The results of the present study fit well with the positive effects obtained with CCB in the Syst-Eur trial [11–13], while the results from the PROGRESS trial support the use of ACEI along with diuretics in patients with recurrent stroke [14]. On the other hand, the results from the Honolulu-Asia Aging Study support the use of beta-blockers in elderly Japanese-Americans in Hawaii [25]. The problem of course is that like everyone else working in this field, I have an opinion and a wish. The opinion is one that many of us share that lowering blood pressure will eventually be shown to reduce the incidence of cognitive decline and dementia, and the wish is that robust clinical trials should be mounted to produce hard evidence that this is so. Unfortunately, there are considerable hurdles facing us all in providing this evidence. Partly because it is daunting to fund a study that reconciles the need to start treating those with raised blood pressure in middle age (or at least the young elderly, say between 60 and 70 years), and the fact that the incidence of significant cognitive decline and dementia is much greater in older adults, say those over 75 years. Another is that without a good new drug as a candidate, industry sponsorship is very unlikely and funding must rely on the public purse, and at present, the evidence to support the major outlay of funds that would be needed is likely to be insufficient. This suggests that we need to mount some smaller ‘proof-of-concept’ randomized trials as a first step, before we can hope to conduct large-scale, definitive trials. The sting in the tail of course is that convincing evidence that treating hypertension in middle age prevented dementia in old age would pose a major challenge for health economists and even bigger problems for government treasuries and health systems. We can only hope that they have to meet this challenge sooner, rather than later! ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Conflicts of interest J.C. has received research grants, administered through the University of Sydney, as Principal Investigator for the PROGRESS and ADVANCE trials, and also received honoraria and travel support for speaking about these studies at scientific meetings.
最长约 10秒,即可获得该文献文件

科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI
更新
大幅提高文件上传限制,最高150M (2024-4-1)

科研通是完全免费的文献互助平台,具备全网最快的应助速度,最高的求助完成率。 对每一个文献求助,科研通都将尽心尽力,给求助人一个满意的交代。
实时播报
风秋杨完成签到 ,获得积分10
10秒前
Richardisme完成签到 ,获得积分10
15秒前
小鱼女侠完成签到 ,获得积分10
25秒前
蓝莲花完成签到 ,获得积分10
27秒前
joycelin完成签到,获得积分10
34秒前
呐殇完成签到,获得积分10
38秒前
福尔摩曦完成签到,获得积分10
42秒前
Ksharp10完成签到,获得积分10
46秒前
xczhu完成签到,获得积分10
54秒前
海子完成签到,获得积分10
1分钟前
wuyan204完成签到 ,获得积分10
1分钟前
jinni完成签到,获得积分10
1分钟前
贝贝完成签到,获得积分0
1分钟前
zijingsy完成签到 ,获得积分10
1分钟前
mrwang完成签到 ,获得积分10
1分钟前
深情的凝云完成签到 ,获得积分10
1分钟前
黄橙子完成签到 ,获得积分10
1分钟前
木可完成签到,获得积分10
2分钟前
研友_shuang完成签到,获得积分0
2分钟前
SwapExisting完成签到 ,获得积分10
2分钟前
科研狗完成签到 ,获得积分10
3分钟前
小强完成签到 ,获得积分10
3分钟前
白白嫩嫩完成签到,获得积分10
3分钟前
Skywings完成签到,获得积分10
3分钟前
堇笙vv完成签到,获得积分0
3分钟前
Hiram完成签到,获得积分10
4分钟前
终究是残念完成签到,获得积分10
4分钟前
天行健完成签到,获得积分10
4分钟前
CC完成签到,获得积分10
4分钟前
俊逸的白梦完成签到 ,获得积分10
4分钟前
yuyuyu完成签到,获得积分10
5分钟前
5分钟前
cai白白完成签到,获得积分0
5分钟前
5分钟前
al完成签到 ,获得积分10
5分钟前
lielizabeth完成签到 ,获得积分0
6分钟前
聪明的嘉熙完成签到,获得积分10
6分钟前
doreen完成签到 ,获得积分10
6分钟前
一一完成签到 ,获得积分0
7分钟前
干净思远完成签到,获得积分10
7分钟前
高分求助中
Tracking and Data Fusion: A Handbook of Algorithms 1000
Models of Teaching(The 10th Edition,第10版!)《教学模式》(第10版!) 800
La décision juridictionnelle 800
Rechtsphilosophie und Rechtstheorie 800
Nonlocal Integral Equation Continuum Models: Nonstandard Symmetric Interaction Neighborhoods and Finite Element Discretizations 600
Academic entitlement: Adapting the equity preference questionnaire for a university setting 500
Arkiv för kemi 400
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 医学 材料科学 生物 工程类 有机化学 生物化学 物理 内科学 纳米技术 计算机科学 化学工程 复合材料 基因 遗传学 物理化学 催化作用 免疫学 细胞生物学 电极
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 2876916
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 2489250
关于积分的说明 6737817
捐赠科研通 2171335
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 1153671
版权声明 585969
科研通“疑难数据库(出版商)”最低求助积分说明 566445