The Study on Cognition and Prognosis in the Elderly (SCOPE): principal results of a randomized double-blind intervention trial. Impact of the treatment of isolated systolic hypertension on behavioral variables. Results from the systolic hypertension in the elderly program. Mortality and morbidity results from the European Working Party on High Blood Pressure in the Elderly trial. Controlling hypertension and hypotension immediately post-stroke (CHHIPS): a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind pilot trial.
The prognostic benefits of blood pressure lowering treatment in elderly hypertensive patients were established more than a decade ago, but are less clear in those with mildly to moderately elevated blood pressure.
                To assess whether candesartan-based antihypertensive treatment in elderly patients with mildly to moderately elevated blood pressure confers a reduction in cardiovascular events, cognitive decline and dementia.
                Prospective, double-blind, randomized, parallel-group study conducted in 1997-2002.
                The study was of 4964 patients aged 70-89 years, with systolic blood pressure 160-179 mmHg, and/or diastolic blood pressure 90-99 mmHg, and a Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) test score >or= 24. A total of 527 centres in 15 countries participated in the study.
                Patients were assigned randomly to receive the angiotensin receptor blocker candesartan or placebo, with open-label active antihypertensive therapy added as needed. As a consequence, active antihypertensive therapy was extensively used in the control group (84% of patients). Mean follow-up was 3.7 years.
                The primary outcome measure was major cardiovascular events, a composite of cardiovascular death, non-fatal stroke and non-fatal myocardial infarction. Secondary outcome measures included cardiovascular death, non-fatal and fatal stroke and myocardial infarction, cognitive function measured by the MMSE and dementia.
                Blood pressure fell by 21.7/10.8 mmHg in the candesartan group and by 18.5/9.2 mmHg in the control group. A first major cardiovascular event occurred in 242 candesartan patients and in 268 control patients; risk reduction with candesartan was 10.9% [95% confidence interval (CI), -6.0 to 25.1, P = 0.19]. Candesartan-based treatment reduced non-fatal stroke by 27.8% (95% CI, 1.3 to 47.2, P = 0.04), and all stroke by 23.6% (95% CI, -0.7 to 42.1, P = 0.056). There were no significant differences in myocardial infarction and cardiovascular mortality. Mean MMSE score fell from 28.5 to 28.0 in the candesartan group and from 28.5 to 27.9 in the control group (P = 0.20). The proportions of patients who had a significant cognitive decline or developed dementia were not different in the two treatment groups.
                In elderly hypertensive patients, a slightly more effective blood pressure reduction during candesartan-based therapy, compared with control therapy, was associated with a modest, statistically non-significant, reduction in major cardiovascular events and with a marked reduction in non-fatal stroke. Cognitive function was well maintained in both treatment groups in the presence of substantial blood pressure reductions. Both treatment regimens were generally well tolerated. Little information has been published on the impact of antihypertensive medications on quality of life in older persons. Particular concern has existed that lowering systolic blood pressure in older persons might have adverse consequences on cognition, mood, or leisure activities.
                A multicenter double-blind randomized controlled trial was conducted over an average of 5 years' followup involving 16 academic clinical trial clinics. Participants consisted of 4736 persons (1.06%) selected from 447,921 screenees aged 60 years and older. Systolic blood pressure at baseline ranged from 160 to 219 mm Hg, while diastolic blood pressure was less than 90 mm Hg. Participants were randomized to active antihypertensive drug therapy or matching placebo. Active treatment consisted of 12.5 to 25 mg of chlorthalidone for step 1, while step 2 consisted of 25 to 50 mg of atenolol. If atenolol was contraindicated, 0.05 to 0.10 mg of reserpine could be used for the second-step drug. The impact of drug treatment on measures of cognitive, emotional, and physical function and leisure activities was assessed.
                Our analyses demonstrate that active treatment of isolated systolic hypertension in the Systolic Hypertension in the Elderly Program cohort had no measured negative effects and, for some measures, a slight positive effect on cognitive, physical, and leisure function. The positive findings in favor of the treatment group were small. There was no effect on measures related to emotional state. Measures of cognitive and emotional function were stable in both groups for the duration of the study. Both treatment groups showed a modest trend toward deterioration of some measures of physical and leisure function over the study period.
                The overall study cohort exhibited decline over time in activities of daily living, particularly the more strenuous ones, and some decline in certain leisure activities. However, mood, cognitive function, basic self-care, and moderate leisure activity were remarkably stable for both the active and the placebo groups throughout the entire study. Results of this study support the inference that medical treatment of isolated systolic hypertension does not cause deterioration in measures of cognition, emotional state, physical function, or leisure activities. A double-blind randomised placebo-controlled trial of antihypertensive treatment was conducted in patients over the age of 60. Entry criteria included both a sitting diastolic blood pressure on placebo treatment in the range 90-119 mm Hg and a systolic pressure in the range 160-239 mm Hg. 840 patients were randomised either to active treatment (hydrochlorothiazide + triamterene) or to matching placebo. If the blood pressure remained raised, methyldopa was added to the active regimen and matching placebo in the placebo group. An overall intention-to-treat analysis, combining the double-blind part of the trial and all subsequent follow-up, revealed a non-significant change in total mortality rate (-9%, p = 0.41) but a significant reduction in cardiovascular mortality rate (-27%, p = 0.037). The latter was due to a reduction in cardiac mortality (-38%, p = 0.036) and a non-significant decrease in cerebrovascular mortality (-32%, p = 0.16). In the double-blind part of the trial, total mortality rate was not significantly reduced (-26%, p = 0.077). Cardiovascular mortality was reduced in the actively treated group (-38%, p = 0.023), owing to a reduction in cardiac deaths (-47%, p = 0.048) and a non-significant decrease in cerebrovascular mortality (-43%, p = 0.15). Deaths from myocardial infarction were reduced (-60%, p = 0.043). Study-terminating morbid cardiovascular events were significantly reduced by active treatment (-60%, p = 0.0064). Non-terminating cerebrovascular events were reduced (-52%, p = 0.026), but the non-terminating cardiac events were not (+3%, p = 0.98). In the patients randomised to active treatment there were 29 fewer cardiovascular events and 14 fewer cardiovascular deaths per 1000 patient years during the double-blind part of the trial. Raised blood pressure is common after acute stroke and is associated with an adverse prognosis. We sought to assess the feasibility, safety, and effects of two regimens for lowering blood pressure in patients who have had a stroke.
                Patients who had cerebral infarction or cerebral haemorrhage and were hypertensive (systolic blood pressure [SBP] >160 mm Hg) were randomly assigned by secure internet central randomisation to receive oral labetalol, lisinopril, or placebo if they were non-dysphagic, or intravenous labetalol, sublingual lisinopril, or placebo if they had dysphagia, within 36 h of symptom onset in this double-blind pilot trial. The doses were titrated up if target blood pressure was not reached. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with the National Research Register, number N0484128008.
                179 patients (mean age 74 [SD 11] years; SBP 181 [SD 16] mm Hg; diastolic blood pressure [DBP] 95 [SD 13] mm Hg; median National Institutes of Health stroke scale [NIHSS] score 9 [IQR 5-16] points) were randomly assigned to receive labetolol (n=58), lisinopril (n=58), or placebo (n=63) between January, 2005, and December, 2007. The primary outcome--death or dependency at 2 weeks--occurred in 61% (69) of the active and 59% (35) of the placebo group (relative risk [RR] 1.03, 95% CI 0.80-1.33; p=0.82). There was no evidence of early neurological deterioration with active treatment (RR 1.22, 0.33-4.54; p=0.76) despite the significantly greater fall in SBP within the first 24 h in this group compared with placebo (21 [17-25] mm Hg vs 11 [5-17] mm Hg; p=0.004). No increase in serious adverse events was reported with active treatment (RR 0.91, 0.69-1.12; p=0.50) but 3-month mortality was halved (9.7%vs 20.3%, hazard ratio [HR] 0.40, 95% CI 0.2-1.0; p=0.05).
                Labetalol and lisinopril are effective antihypertensive drugs in acute stroke that do not increase serious adverse events. Early lowering of blood pressure with lisinopril and labetalol after acute stroke seems to be a promising approach to reduce mortality and potential disability. However, in view of the small sample size, care must be taken when these results are interpreted and further evaluation in larger trials is needed.
There is no convincing evidence from the trials identified that blood pressure lowering in late-life prevents the development of dementia or cognitive impairment in hypertensive patients with no apparent prior cerebrovascular disease. There were significant problems identified with analysing the data, however, due to the number of patients lost to follow-up and the number of placebo patients who received active treatment. This introduced bias. More robust results may be obtained by conducting a meta-analysis using individual patient data.