Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Systematic Reviews
Published in: Systematic Reviews 1/2013

Open Access 01-12-2013 | Protocol

Comparative effectiveness of monotherapies and combination therapies for patients with hypertension: protocol for a systematic review with network meta-analyses

Authors: Brian Hutton, Jennifer Tetzlaff, Fatemeh Yazdi, Justin Thielman, Salmaan Kanji, Dean Fergusson, Lise Bjerre, Edward Mills, Kristian Thorlund, Andrea Tricco, Sharon Straus, David Moher, Frans HH Leenen

Published in: Systematic Reviews | Issue 1/2013

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Hypertension has been cited as the most common attributable risk factor for death worldwide, and in Canada more than one of every five adults had this diagnosis in 2007. In addition to different lifestyle modifications, such as diet and exercise, there exist many pharmaco-therapies from different drug classes which can be used to lower blood pressure, thereby reducing the risk of serious clinical outcomes. In moderate and severe cases, more than one agent may be used. The optimal mono- and combination therapies for mild hypertension and moderate/severe hypertension are unclear, and clinical guidelines provide different recommendations for first line therapy. The objective of this review is to explore the relative benefits and safety of different pharmacotherapies for management of non-diabetic patients with hypertension, whether of a mild or moderate to severe nature.

Methods/Design

Searches involving MEDLINE and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews will be used to identify related systematic reviews and relevant randomized trials. The outcomes of interest include myocardial infarction, stroke, incident diabetes, heart failure, overall and cardiovascular related death, and important side effects (cancers, depression, syncopal episodes/falls and sexual dysfunction). Randomized controlled trials will be sought. Two reviewers will independently screen relevant reviews, titles and abstracts resulting from the literature search, and also potentially relevant full-text articles in duplicate. Data will be abstracted and quality will be appraised by two team members independently. Conflicts at all levels of screening and abstraction will be resolved through team discussion. Random effect pairwise meta-analyses and network meta-analyses will be conducted where deemed appropriate. Analyses will be geared toward studying treatment of mild hypertension and moderate/severe hypertension separately.

Discussion

Our systematic review results will assess the extent of currently available evidence for single agent and multi-agent pharmacotherapies in patients with mild, moderate and severe hypertension, and will provide a rigorous and updated synthesis of a range of important clinical outcomes for clinicians, decision makers and patients.

Systematic review registration

PROSPERO Registration Number: CRD42013004459
Literature
1.
2.
3.
Ezzati M, Lopez A, Rodgers A, Vander Hoorn S, Murray CJ: Comparative Risk Assessment Collaborating Group: Selected major risk factors and global and regional burden of disease. Lancet. 2002, 360: 1347-1360. 10.1016/S0140-6736(02)11403-6.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Neaton JD, Wentworth D: Serum cholesterol, blood pressure, cigarette smoking, and death from coronary heart disease. Overall findings and differences by age for 316,099 white men. Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial Research Group. Arch Intern Med. 1992, 152: 56-64. 10.1001/archinte.1992.00400130082009.CrossRefPubMed
5.
6.
McAlister F, Wilkins K, Joffres M, Leenen FH, Fodor G, Gee M, Tremblay MS, Walker R, Johansen H, Campbell N: Changes in the rates of awareness, treatment and control of hypertension in Canada over the past two decades. CMAJ. 2011, 183: 1007-1013.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
7.
Leenen FH, Dumais J, McInnis NH, Turton P, Stratychuk L, Nemeth K, Lum-Kwong M, Fodor G: Results of the Ontario survey on the prevalence and control of hypertension. CMAJ. 2008, 178: 1441-1449.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
8.
Pearce KA, Furberg CD, Rushing J: Does antihypertensive treatment of the elderly prevent cardiovascular events or prolong life? A meta-analysis of hypertension treatment trials. Arch Fam Med. 1995, 4: 943-949. 10.1001/archfami.4.11.943.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Collins R, Peto R, MacMahon S, Hebert P, Fiebach NH, Eberlein KA, Godwin J, Qizilbash N, Taylor JO, Hennekens CH: Blood pressure, stroke, and coronary heart disease. Part 2. Short-term reductions in blood pressure: overview of randomised drug trials in their epidemiological context. Lancet. 1990, 335: 827-838. 10.1016/0140-6736(90)90944-Z.CrossRefPubMed
10.
US Department of Health and Human Services: The Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. 2004
11.
12.
Klarenbach SW, McAlister FA, Johansen H, Tu K, Hazel M, Walker R, Zarnke KB, Campbell NR, Canadian Hypertension Education Program: Identification of factors driving differences in cost effectiveness of first-line pharmacological therapy for uncomplicated hypertension. Can J Cardiol. 2010, 26: e158-e163. 10.1016/S0828-282X(10)70383-4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
13.
National Institute for Clinical Excellence: Clinical Management of Primary Hypertension in Adults. 2011
14.
Moher D, Pham B, Lawson ML, Klassen TP: The inclusion of reports of randomised trials published in languages other than English in systematic reviews. Health Technol Assess. 2003, 7: 1-90.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Moher D, Pham B, Klassen TP, Schulz KF, Berlin JA, Jadad AR, Liberati A: What contributions do languages other than English make on the results of meta-analyses?. J Clin Epidemiol. 2000, 53: 964-972. 10.1016/S0895-4356(00)00188-8.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Psaty BM, Lumley T, Furberg CD, Schellenbaum G, Pahor M, Alderman MH, Weiss NS: Health outcomes associated with various hypertensive therapies used as first line agents: a network meta-analysis. JAMA. 2003, 289: 2534-2544. 10.1001/jama.289.19.2534.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Sciarretta S, Palano F, Tocci G, Baldini R, Volpe M: Antihypertensive treatment and development of heart failure in hypertension: a Bayesian network meta-analysis of studies in patients with hypertension and high cardiovascular risk. Arch Intern Med. 2011, 171: 384-394. 10.1001/archinternmed.2010.427.PubMed
18.
Elliott WJ, Meyer PM: Incident diabetes in clinial trials of antihypertensive drugs: a network meta-analysis. Lancet. 2007, 369: 201-207. 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60108-1.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Tropeano AI, Saleh N, Hawajri N, Macquin-Mavier I, Maison P: Do all antihypertensive drugs improve carotid intima-media thickness? A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Fundam Clin Pharmacol. 2011, 25: 395-404. 10.1111/j.1472-8206.2010.00832.x.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Roush GC, Holford TR, Guddati AK: Chlorthalidone compared with hydrochlorothiazide in reducing cardiovascular events: systematic review and network meta-analyses. Hypertension. 2012, 59: 1110-1117. 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.112.191106.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Bangalore S, Kumar S, Kjeldsen SE, Makani H, Grossman E, Wetterslev J, Gupta AK, Sever PS, Gluud C, Messerli FH: Antihypertensive drugs and risk of cancer: network meta-analyses and trial sequential analyses of 324,168 participants from randomised trials. Lancet Oncol. 2011, 12: 65-82. 10.1016/S1470-2045(10)70260-6.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Sampson M, McGowan J, Cogo E, Grimshaw J, Moher D, Lefebvre C: An evidence-based practice guideline for the peer review of electronic search strategies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009, 62: 944-952. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.10.012.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Sampson M, Shojania KG, McGowan J, Daniel R, Rader T, Iansavichene AE, Ji J, Ansari MT, Moher D: Surveillance search techniques identified the need to update systematic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008, 61: 755-762. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.10.003.CrossRefPubMed
24.
Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gøtzsche PC, Ioannidis JP, Clarke M, Devereaux PJ, Kleijnen J, Moher D: The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. Arch Intern Med. 2009, 151: W65-W94.
25.
Higgins JP, Altman DG, Gotzsche PC, Juni P, Moher D, Oxman AD, Savovic J, Schulz KF, Weeks L: Sterne JA; Cochrane Bias Methods Group; Cochrane Statistical Methods Group: The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ. 2011, 343: d5928-10.1136/bmj.d5928.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
26.
Song F, Loke YK, Walsh T, Glenny AM, Eastwood AJ, Altman DG: Methodological problems in the use of indirect comparisons for evaluating healthcare interventions: survey of published systematic reviews. BMJ. 2009, 338: b1147-10.1136/bmj.b1147.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
27.
Bucher HC, Guyatt GH, Griffith LE, Walter SD: The results of direct and indirect treatment comparisons in meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Clin Epidemiol. 1997, 50: 683-691. 10.1016/S0895-4356(97)00049-8.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Lumley T: Network meta-analysis for indirect treatment comparisons. Stat Med. 2002, 21: 2313-2324. 10.1002/sim.1201.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Lu G, Ades AE: Combination of direct and indirect evidence in mixed treatment comparisons. Stat Med. 2004, 23: 3105-3124. 10.1002/sim.1875.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Thorlund K, Mills E: Stability of additive treatment effects in multiple treatment comparison meta-analysis: a simulation study. Clin Epidemiol. 2012, 4: 75-85.PubMedPubMedCentral
31.
Dias S, Welton NJ, Caldwell DM, Ades AE: Checking consistency in mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis. Stat Med. 2010, 29: 932-944. 10.1002/sim.3767.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Salanti G, Marinho V, Higgins JP: A case study of multiple-treatments meta-analysis demonstrates that covariates should be considered. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009, 62: 857-864. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.10.001.CrossRefPubMed
33.
Dias S, Welton NJ, Sutton AJ, Caldwell DM, Lu G, Ades AE: NICE DSU Technical Support Document 4: Inconsistency in Networks of Evidence Based on Randomised Controlled Trials. 2011, http://​www.​nicedsu.​org.​uk,
34.
Salanti G, Ades AE, Ioannidis JP: Graphical methods and numerical summaries for presenting results from multiple-treatment meta-analysis: an overview and tutorial. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011, 64: 163-171. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.03.016.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Comparative effectiveness of monotherapies and combination therapies for patients with hypertension: protocol for a systematic review with network meta-analyses
Authors
Brian Hutton
Jennifer Tetzlaff
Fatemeh Yazdi
Justin Thielman
Salmaan Kanji
Dean Fergusson
Lise Bjerre
Edward Mills
Kristian Thorlund
Andrea Tricco
Sharon Straus
David Moher
Frans HH Leenen
Publication date
01-12-2013
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Systematic Reviews / Issue 1/2013
Electronic ISSN: 2046-4053
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-2-44

Other articles of this Issue 1/2013

Systematic Reviews 1/2013 Go to the issue

Methodology

Risk of bias: a simulation study of power to detect study-level moderator effects in meta-analysis

Protocol

Defining publication bias: protocol for a systematic review of highly cited articles and proposal for a new framework

Protocol

An empirical investigation of the potential impact of selective inclusion of results in systematic reviews of interventions: study protocol

Protocol

A protocol for a systematic review of birth preparedness and complication readiness programs

Protocol

Predicting OptimaL cAncer RehabIlitation and Supportive care (POLARIS): rationale and design for meta-analyses of individual patient data of randomized controlled trials that evaluate the effect of physical activity and psychosocial interventions on health-related quality of life in cancer survivors

Protocol

A systematic review investigating fatigue, psychological and cognitive impairment following TIA and minor stroke: protocol paper