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 [Lippincott Williams & Wilkins]
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
PDF的下载单位、IP信息已删除 (2025-6-4)

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
2秒前
2秒前
2秒前
2秒前
田様应助MZ采纳,获得10
2秒前
3秒前
breaddog完成签到,获得积分10
3秒前
4秒前
4秒前
夏夏完成签到 ,获得积分10
4秒前
Qing完成签到,获得积分10
4秒前
yutonghuan发布了新的文献求助10
5秒前
李健应助li采纳,获得10
5秒前
sxm1004发布了新的文献求助10
5秒前
李雨泽完成签到,获得积分20
5秒前
li完成签到,获得积分10
6秒前
量子星尘发布了新的文献求助10
6秒前
孙意冉发布了新的文献求助10
7秒前
7秒前
研友_VZG7GZ应助WangZhen采纳,获得10
8秒前
8秒前
lyx发布了新的文献求助10
8秒前
自觉的猫咪完成签到,获得积分10
9秒前
重要手机完成签到 ,获得积分10
9秒前
9秒前
11秒前
情怀应助张兮远采纳,获得10
12秒前
伶俐的甜瓜完成签到,获得积分10
12秒前
曾无忧完成签到,获得积分10
13秒前
FashionBoy应助yilu采纳,获得10
13秒前
14秒前
14秒前
15秒前
曾无忧发布了新的文献求助10
15秒前
阳佟听荷完成签到,获得积分10
16秒前
滴滴嘟完成签到,获得积分10
16秒前
16秒前
SYLH应助完美的翠丝采纳,获得30
17秒前
hansJAMA发布了新的文献求助10
18秒前
18秒前
高分求助中
【提示信息,请勿应助】关于scihub 10000
Les Mantodea de Guyane: Insecta, Polyneoptera [The Mantids of French Guiana] 3000
The Mother of All Tableaux: Order, Equivalence, and Geometry in the Large-scale Structure of Optimality Theory 3000
徐淮辽南地区新元古代叠层石及生物地层 2000
A new approach to the extrapolation of accelerated life test data 1000
Robot-supported joining of reinforcement textiles with one-sided sewing heads 400
北师大毕业论文 基于可调谐半导体激光吸收光谱技术泄漏气体检测系统的研究 390
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 材料科学 医学 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 遗传学 基因 物理化学 催化作用 冶金 细胞生物学 免疫学
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 4023660
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 3563646
关于积分的说明 11343307
捐赠科研通 3295026
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 1814943
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 889579
科研通“疑难数据库(出版商)”最低求助积分说明 813023