Objectives The longitudinal relationship between coffee use and hypertension is still controversial. Cytochrome P450 1A2 (CYP1A2) is the main responsible enzyme for the metabolism of caffeine. The aim of the present study was to investigate the effect of coffee intake on the risk of developing hypertension needing antihypertensive treatment in individuals stratified by CYP1A2 genotype. Design We assessed prospectively 553 young White individuals screened for stage 1 hypertension. Coffee intake was ascertained from regularly administered questionnaires. Incident physician-diagnosed hypertension was the outcome measure. Genotyping of CYP1A2 SNP was performed by real time PCR. Results During a median follow-up of 8.2 years, 323 individuals developed hypertension. For carriers of the slow *1F allele (59%), hazard ratios of hypertension from multivariable Cox analysis were 1.00 in abstainers (reference), 1.72 (95%CI, 1.21–2.44) in moderate coffee drinkers (P = 0.03), and 3.00 (1.53–5.90) in heavy drinkers (P = 0.001). In contrast, hazard ratios for coffee drinkers with the rapid *1A/*1A genotype were 0.80 (0.52–1.23, P = 0.29) for moderate drinkers and 0.36 (0.14–0.89, P = 0.026) for heavy drinkers. In a two-way ANCOVA, a gene × coffee interactive effect was found on follow-up changes in systolic (P = 0.000) and diastolic (P = 0.007) blood pressure. Urinary epinephrine was higher in coffee drinkers than abstainers but only among individuals with slow *1F allele (P = 0.001). Conclusion These data show that the risk of hypertension associated with coffee intake varies according to CYP1A2 genotype. Carriers of slow *1F allele are at increased risk and should thus abstain from coffee, whereas individuals with *1A/*1A genotype can safely drink coffee.

Automated ‘oscillometric’ blood pressure (BP) measuring devices (BPMDs) were developed in the 1970s to replace manual auscultatory BP measurement by mercury sphygmomanometer. Automated BPMDs that have passed accuracy testing versus a reference auscultatory sphygmomanometer using a scientifically accepted validation protocol are recommended for clinical use globally. Currently, there are many thousands of unique automated BPMDs manufactured by hundreds of companies, with each device using proprietary algorithms to estimate BP and using a method of operation that is largely unchanged since inception. Validated automated BPMDs provide similar BP values to those recorded using manual auscultation albeit with potential sources of error mostly associated with using empirical algorithms to derive BP from waveform pulsations. Much of the work to derive contemporary BP thresholds and treatment targets used to manage cardiovascular disease risk was obtained using automated BPMDs. While there is room for future refinement to improve accuracy for better individual risk stratification, validated BPMDs remain the recommended standard for office and out-of-office BP measurement to be used in hypertension diagnosis and management worldwide.

Peer reviewed article authored by (Palatini P, Casiglia E, Gąsowski J, Głuszek J, Jankowski P, Narkiewicz K, Saladini F, Stolarz-Skrzypek K, Tikhonoff V, Van Bortel L, Wojciechowska W, Kawecka-Jaszcz K). Read article or submit your manuscript for publishing.