Incorporating Individual‐Level Treatment Effects and Outcome Preferences Into Personalized Blood Pressure Target Recommendations

Author:

Ascher Simon B.12ORCID,Kravitz Richard L.2ORCID,Scherzer Rebecca1ORCID,Berry Jarett D.3ORCID,de Lemos James A.4ORCID,Estrella Michelle M.1ORCID,Tancredi Daniel J.5ORCID,Killeen Anthony A.6ORCID,Ix Joachim H.78ORCID,Shlipak Michael G.1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Internal Medicine, Kidney Health Research Collaborative San Francisco Veterans Affairs Health Care System and University of California San Francisco San Francisco CA

2. Department of Internal Medicine University of California Davis Sacramento CA

3. Department of Internal Medicine University of Texas at Tyler Health Science Center Tyler TX

4. Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center Dallas TX

5. Department of Pediatrics University of California Davis Sacramento CA

6. Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology University of Minnesota Minneapolis MN

7. Division of Nephrology‐Hypertension University of California San Diego La Jolla CA

8. Nephrology Section, Veterans Affairs San Diego Healthcare System San Diego CA

Abstract

Background There are no shared decision‐making frameworks for selecting blood pressure (BP) targets for individuals with hypertension. This study addressed whether results from the SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial) could be tailored to individuals using predicted risks and simulated preferences. Methods and Results Among 8202 SPRINT participants, Cox models were developed and internally validated to predict each individual's absolute difference in risk from intensive versus standard BP lowering for cardiovascular events, cognitive impairment, death, and serious adverse events (AEs). Individual treatment effects were combined using simulated preference weights into a net benefit, which represents a weighted sum of risk differences across outcomes. Net benefits were compared among those above versus below the median AE risk. In simulations for which cardiovascular, cognitive, and death events had much greater weight than the AEs of BP lowering, the median net benefit was 3.3 percentage points (interquartile range [IQR], 2.0–5.7), and 100% of participants had a net benefit favoring intensive BP lowering. When simulating benefits and harms to have similar weights, the median net benefit was 0.8 percentage points (IQR, 0.2–2.2), and 87% had a positive net benefit. Compared with participants at lower risk of AEs from BP lowering, those at higher risk had a greater net benefit from intensive BP lowering despite experiencing more AEs ( P <0.001 in both simulations). Conclusions Most SPRINT participants had a predicted net benefit that favored intensive BP lowering, but the degree of net benefit varied considerably. Tailoring BP targets using each patient's risks and preferences may provide more refined BP target recommendations.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Reference34 articles.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3