Comment on Buckley et al. Intensive Versus Standard Blood Pressure Control in SPRINT-Eligible Participants of ACCORD-BP. Diabetes Care 2017;40:1733–1738

Buckley et al. (1) suggest that Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT)-eligible patients from the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes Blood Pressure (ACCORD-BP) trial who did not receive intensive glycemic control may have benefited from intensive blood pressure (BP) control and that therefore the studies share consistent results. Here, we report results of a similar analysis comparing SPRINT and ACCORD with a different conclusion. We specifically address whether varying patient characteristics between the trials account for the clear benefit of intensive BP control in SPRINT and the lack of benefit in ACCORD. We compared SPRINT-eligible ACCORD patients with ACCORD-eligible SPRINT patients by applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria from both trials to each other (2,3). Of note, we excluded those with a history of stroke and used the Framingham 10-year cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk calculator for eligibility (4). We then calculated propensity scores for the likelihood of being assigned to one trial over another …