Relationship of Antihypertensive Treatment Regimens and Change in Blood Pressure to Risk for Heart Failure in Hypertensive Patients Randomly Assigned to Doxazosin or Chlorthalidone: Further Analyses from the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering treatment to prevent Heart Attack Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering treatment to prevent Heart Attack Trial reported that treatment initiated with doxazosin compared with chlorthalidone doubled the risk for heart failure in high-risk hypertensive patients (relative risk, 2.04 [95% CI, 1.79 to 2.32]). Patients assigned to doxazosin therapy had a mean in-trial systolic/diastolic blood pressure 3/0 mm Hg higher than that in patients assigned to chlorthalidone. Sixty-eight percent (6167 of 9061) of the former patients and 59% (9081 of 15 256) of the latter patients were given additional medications to achieve a target blood pressure of less than 140/90 mm Hg. OBJECTIVE: To ascertain the influence of open-label antihypertensive drugs and subsequent blood pressure on relative risk for heart failure. DESIGN: Randomized, double-blind, active-controlled clinical trial. SETTING: 623 sites in the United States and Canada. PATIENTS: Hypertensive patients 55 years of age or older with at least one additional risk factor for cardiovascular disease. INTERVENTION: Chlorthalidone (12.5 to 25 mg/d) or doxazosin (2 to 8 mg/d) for a planned follow-up of 4 to 8 years. MEASUREMENTS: Data on blood pressure, medication, and incident heart failure (treated outside hospital, hospitalized, or fatal) from February 1994 through December 1999. RESULTS: After the treatment groups were categorized as having no exposure to open-label medications (monotherapy) or exposure to open-label therapy, the relative risk for heart failure with doxazosin versus chlorthalidone was 3.10 (CI, 2.51 to 3.82) and 1.42 (CI, 1.20 to 1.69), respectively. After adjustment for follow-up systolic/diastolic blood pressure, the overall relative risk was 2.00 (CI, 1.72 to 2.32). CONCLUSION: In high-risk patients with hypertension, the higher risk for heart failure while taking doxazosin compared with chlorthalidone is attenuated but not eliminated by adding other antihypertensive drugs. The small observed difference in systolic blood pressure does not explain this increased risk.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".