From the publishers of The New England Journal of Medicine

Save time and stay informed. Our physician-editors offer you clinical perspectives on key research and news.

  1. Home>
  2. Specialties>
  3. General Medicine>
  4. Summary and Comment

A Large Hypertension Trial, Focused on CAD Patients

No significant differences in outcome were found between a treatment regimen that included a calcium-channel antagonist and one that included a ß-blocker.

None of the large hypertension trials to date have been focused exclusively on patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). In this multicenter, open-label, randomized trial, researchers compared a calcium-channel-antagonist-based regimen with a ß-blocker-based regimen in 22,576 patients with both CAD and hypertension.

Patients received either sustained-release verapamil (a calcium-channel antagonist) or atenolol (a ß-blocker). If needed, the angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor trandolapril and hydrochlorothiazide were added (in that order) in the verapamil group, and hydrochlorothiazide and trandolapril were added (in that order) in the atenolol group. However, trandolapril was added immediately for patients in both groups who had diabetes, renal impairment, or heart failure. At 24 months, most patients in both groups were receiving ACE inhibitors, and half were receiving at least 3 hypertension drugs.

During a mean follow-up of 2.7 years, no significant differences were found between the 2 groups in a combined endpoint (death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke) or in any of the individual endpoints. Subgroup analyses generally were unrevealing. Blood pressure control and side effect profiles were similar in the 2 groups.

Comment: In these patients with CAD and hypertension, initial therapy with a calcium-channel antagonist or with a ß-blocker yielded similar outcomes. The sequencing of add-on therapy in this trial might be explained by the fact that the supporting drug company makes a combined verapamil-trandolapril tablet, which was used by patients in the verapamil arm. An editorialist concludes that this study -- which appropriately ended up as a comparison of 3-drug regimens for many patients -- adds little insight about any single drug.

— Allan S. Brett, MD

Published in Journal Watch General Medicine December 23, 2003

Citation(s):

Pepine CJ et al. A calcium antagonist vs a non-calcium antagonist hypertension treatment strategy for patients with coronary artery disease. The International Verapamil-Trandolapril Study (INVEST): A randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2003 Dec 3; 290:2805-16.

Alderman MH. The return on INVEST. JAMA 2003 Dec 3; 290:2859-61.

Your Remark:

Reader Remarks are intended to encourage lively discussion of clinical topics with your peers in the medical community. Please consider this when composing your remark.

Fields marked with an * are required.

Name as you'd like it to appear:

Submitting a comment indicates you have read and agreed to the remark guidelines and declare:*

PRIVACY: We will not use your email address, submitted for a comment, for any other purpose nor sell, rent, or share your e-mail address with any third parties. Please see our Privacy Policy.

 

CLEAR erases anything you've added in any part of the form. CONTINUE allows you to check your entire post (and edit it if necessary) before submitting.

To ensure that your Reader Remark is not formatted as one long paragraph, precede new paragraphs with either a blank line or an indentation.

Search

Advanced

Article Tools

Reader Remarks

Sign-In

Forgot your password?

New to Journal Watch?

E-mail Alerts

Delivered to your inbox.
Tailored to your interests. Free.

Sign Up Now!

Journal Watch Newsletters

Available in 13 specialties with convenient delivery and 10 free online CME exams.

Subscribe Now!

Copyright © 2003. Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.