The 1984 report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure recognized that patients with diabetes mellitus represented a special population.¹ In 1993, the fifth report of the Joint National Committee recommended that the treatment goal for patients with diabetes should reduce blood pressure (BP) to less than 130/85 mm Hg.² This lower goal was based primarily on data from the 1501-patient cohort with diabetes enrolled in the Hypertension Optimal Treatment (HOT) trial,³ which suggested reduced cardiovascular outcomes for 501 patients assigned to a diastolic treatment goal of less than 80 mm Hg compared with those assigned to treatment goals that allowed for higher BP. Data from the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) group^4,5 showed that patients with diabetes and hypertension assigned to a tight BP goal group had reduced macrovascular and microvascular outcomes. In 2002, the American Diabetes Association recommended that the BP treatment goal for patients with diabetes should be less than 130/80 mm Hg, which it reaffirmed in 2010.^6-8

Thiazide and thiazide-like diuretics are among the most commonly used antihypertensives and have been available for over 50 years. However, the mechanism by which these drugs chronically lower bloo...

To realize potential public health benefits from genetic and genomic innovations, understanding how best to implement the innovations into clinical care is important. The objective of this study was to synthesize data on challenges identified by six diverse projects that are part of a National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI)-funded network focused on implementing genomics into practice and strategies to overcome these challenges. We used a multiple-case study approach with each project considered as a case and qualitative methods to elicit and describe themes related to implementation challenges and strategies. We describe challenges and strategies in an implementation framework and typology to enable consistent definitions and cross-case comparisons. Strategies were linked to challenges based on expert review and shared themes. Three challenges were identified by all six projects, and strategies to address these challenges varied across the projects. One common challenge was to increase the relative priority of integrating genomics within the health system electronic health record (EHR). Four projects used data warehousing techniques to accomplish the integration. The second common challenge was to strengthen clinicians’ knowledge and beliefs about genomic medicine. To overcome this challenge, all projects developed educational materials and conducted meetings and outreach focused on genomic education for clinicians. The third challenge was engaging patients in the genomic medicine projects. Strategies to overcome this challenge included use of mass media to spread the word, actively involving patients in implementation (e.g., a patient advisory board), and preparing patients to be active participants in their healthcare decisions. This is the first collaborative evaluation focusing on the description of genomic medicine innovations implemented in multiple real-world clinical settings. Findings suggest that strategies to facilitate integration of genomic data within existing EHRs and educate stakeholders about the value of genomic services are considered important for effective implementation. Future work could build on these findings to evaluate which strategies are optimal under what conditions. This information will be useful for guiding translation of discoveries to clinical care, which, in turn, can provide data to inform continual improvement of genomic innovations and their applications.

Objective: Resistant hypertension (res-HTN) is a challenging problem, but little is known of res-HTN in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). In this post-hoc INternational VErapamil SR-Trandolapril STudy (INVEST) analysis, we assessed prevalence, predictors, and impact on outcomes of res-HTN in CAD patients with hypertension. Methods: Participants (n = 17 190) were divided into three groups according to achieved blood pressure (BP): controlled (BP <140/90 mmHg on three or fewer drugs); uncontrolled (BP ≥140/90 mmHg on two or fewer drugs); or resistant (BP ≥140/90 mmHg on three drugs or any patient on at least four drugs). Results: The prevalence of res-HTN was 38%: significant predictors of res-HTN included heart failure [odds ratio (OR) 1.73], diabetes (OR 1.63), Black race (OR 1.50), and US residence (OR 1.50). Compared with controlled HTN, res-HTN had multivariate-adjusted association with higher risk of adverse outcomes {first occurrence of all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke [hazard ratio 1.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.13–1.43], and individual outcomes of all-cause death (hazard ratio 1.29, 95% CI 1.13–1.48), cardiovascular mortality (hazard ratio 1.47, 95% CI 1.21–1.78), and nonfatal stroke (hazard ratio 1.61, 95% CI 1.17–2.22), but not nonfatal myocardial infarction (hazard ratio 0.98, 95% CI 0.72–1.34)}. Adverse outcomes, except nonfatal stroke, did not differ in patients with res-HTN compared to uncontrolled HTN. Conclusions: Res-HTN is common in patients with CAD and hypertension, associated with poor prognosis, and linked with a number of conditions. Emphasis should be placed on recognizing those at risk for res-HTN and future studies should examine whether more aggressive treatment of res-HTN improves outcomes.

We assessed adverse metabolic effects of atenolol and hydrochlorothiazide among hypertensive patients with and without abdominal obesity using data from a randomized, open-label study of hypertensive patients without evidence of cardiovascular disease or diabetes mellitus. Intervention included randomization to 25 mg of hydrochlorothiazide or 100 mg of atenolol monotherapy followed by their combination. Fasting glucose, insulin, triglycerides, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and uric acid levels were measured at baseline and after monotherapy and combination therapy. Outcomes included new occurrence of and predictors for new cases of glucose ≥100 mg/dL (impaired fasting glucose), triglyceride ≥150 mg/dL, high-density lipoprotein ≤40 mg/dL for men or ≤50 mg/dL for women, or new-onset diabetes mellitus according to the presence or absence of abdominal obesity. Abdominal obesity was present in 167 (58%) of 395 patients. Regardless of strategy, in those with abdominal obesity, 20% had impaired fasting glucose at baseline compared with 40% at the end of study ( P <0.0001). Proportion with triglycerides ≥150 mg/dL increased from 33% at baseline to 46% at the end of study ( P <0.01). New-onset diabetes mellitus occurred in 13 patients (6%) with and in 4 patients (2%) without abdominal obesity. Baseline levels of glucose, triglyceride, and high-density lipoprotein predicted adverse outcomes, and predictors for new-onset diabetes mellitus after monotherapy in those with abdominal obesity included hydrochlorothiazide strategy (odds ratio: 46.91 [95% CI: 2.55 to 862.40]), female sex (odds ratio: 31.37 [95% CI: 2.10 to 468.99]), and uric acid (odds ratio: 3.19 [95% CI: 1.35 to 7.52]). Development of adverse metabolic effect, including new-onset diabetes mellitus associated with short-term exposure to hydrochlorothiazide and atenolol was more common in those with abdominal obesity.

Background: PCSK9 (proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9) inhibitors effectively lower LDL (low‐density lipoprotein) cholesterol and have been shown to reduce cardiovascular outcomes in high‐risk patients. We used real‐world electronic health record data to characterize use of PCSK9 inhibitors, in addition to standard therapies, according to cardiovascular risk status. Methods and Results: Data were obtained from 18 health systems with data marts within the National Patient‐Centered Clinical Research Network (PCORnet) using a common data model. Participating sites identified >17.5 million adults, of whom 3.6 million met study criteria. Patients were categorized into 3 groups: (1) dyslipidemia, (2) untreated LDL ≥130 mg/dL, and (3) coronary artery disease or coronary heart disease. Demographics, comorbidities, estimated 10‐year atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk, and lipid‐lowering pharmacotherapies were summarized for each group. Participants’ average age was 62 years, 50% were female, and 11% were black. LDL cholesterol ranged from 85 to 151 mg/dL. Among patients in groups 1 and 3, 54% received standard lipid‐lowering therapies and a PCSK9 inhibitor was prescribed in <1%. PCSK9 inhibitor prescribing was greatest for patients with coronary artery disease or coronary heart disease and, although prescribing increased during the study period, overall PCSK9 inhibitor prescribing was low. Conclusions: We successfully used electronic health record data from 18 PCORnet data marts to identify >3.6 million patients meeting criteria for 3 patient groups. Approximately half of patients had been prescribed lipid‐lowering medication, but <1% were prescribed PCSK9 inhibitors. PCSK9 inhibitor prescribing increased over time for patients with coronary artery disease or coronary heart disease but not for those with dyslipidemia.