Key result
Intensive BP control linked to up to ~5% lower absolute risk of MACE.
Why the study?
It is unclear whether the effects of intensive vs standard BP targets observed in trials generalize to adults with CKD in everyday clinical practice.
Does intensive blood pressure control reduce major cardiovascular events and all-cause death in real-world adults with chronic kidney disease?
Observational (n=99,921)
Yes
Does intensive blood pressure control reduce major cardiovascular events and all-cause death in real-world adults with chronic kidney disease?
Effect estimate: ARR 5.1% (VHA) and 3.0% (KPSC) (95% CI -9.8% to 3.2% (VHA); -6.3% to 0.3% (KPSC))
The cardiovascular benefits and adverse event risks of intensive blood pressure control observed in SPRINT are largely transportable to real-world CKD populations, supporting the implementation of intensive BP targets in clinical practice.
Associated lower MACE risk in real-world CKD; extends SPRINT findings but leaves open causal confirmation.
Importance: It is unclear whether the effects of intensive vs standard blood pressure (BP) targets seen in clinical trials generalize to patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) encountered in everyday practice due to differences in the distribution of cardiovascular risk factors and coexisting conditions. Objective: To evaluate whether the beneficial and adverse effects of intensive vs standard BP control observed in the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) are transportable to a target population of adults with CKD in clinical practice. Design, Setting, and Participants: This comparative effectiveness study identified 2 populations with CKD who met the eligibility criteria for SPRINT between January 1 and December 31, 2019, in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) and Kaiser Permanente of Southern California (KPSC). Baseline covariate, treatment, and outcome data from SPRINT were combined with covariate data from these populations to estimate the treatment effects in the target population, applying models that estimated outcomes using distributions in the trial. Analysis was performed between May 2023 and October 2024. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were major cardiovascular events, all-cause death, cognitive impairment, CKD progression, and adverse events at 4 years. Results: A total of 85 938 patients (mean [SD] age, 75.7 [10.0] years; 81 628 [95.0%] male) from the VHA and 13 983 patients (mean [SD] age, 77.4 [9.6] years; 5371 [38.4%] male) from KPSC were included. Compared with 9361 SPRINT participants (mean [SD] age, 67.9 [9.4] years; 6029 [64.4%] male), these patients were older, had less prevalent cardiovascular disease, higher albuminuria, and used more statins. The associations of intensive vs standard BP control with major cardiovascular events, all-cause death, and adverse events were transportable from the trial to the VHA and KPSC populations; however, the trial's effects on cognitive and CKD outcomes were not transportable in 1 or both clinical populations. Intensive vs standard BP treatment was associated with lower absolute risks for major cardiovascular events at 4 years by 5.1% (95% CI, -9.8% to 3.2%) in the VHA population and 3.0% (95% CI, -6.3% to 0.3%) in the KPSC population and higher risks for adverse events by 1.3% (95% CI, -5.5% to 7.7%) in the VHA population and 3.1% (95% CI, -1.5% to 8.3%) in the KPSC population. Conclusions and Relevance: In this comparative effectiveness study, the reduction in fatal and nonfatal cardiovascular end points and the increase in adverse events observed in SPRINT were largely transportable to trial-eligible CKD populations from clinical practice, suggesting benefits of implementing intensive BP targets.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tamura et al. (2025) conducted an observational in Chronic Kidney Disease (n=99,921). Intensive blood pressure control vs. Standard blood pressure control was evaluated on Major cardiovascular events (ARR 5.1% (VHA) and 3.0% (KPSC), 95% CI -9.8% to 3.2% (VHA); -6.3% to 0.3% (KPSC)). Intensive blood pressure control was associated with lower absolute risks for major cardiovascular events at 4 years by 5.1% in the VHA population and 3.0% in the KPSC population.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: