Clin Diabetes
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Goff, D. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Goff, D. C., Jr.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Clinical Diabetes 21:102-104, 2003
© American Diabetes Association ®, Inc., 2003


Landmark Study

The ALLHAT Study

Reviewed by David C. Goff, Jr., MD, PhD

The first 20% of the full text of this article appears below.


    STUDY
 
The ALLHAT Officers and Coordinators for the ALLHAT Collaborative Research Group: Major outcomes in high-risk hypertensive patients randomized to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or calcium channel blocker vs diuretic. The Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT). JAMA 288:2981–2997, 2002[Abstract/Free Full Text]


    SUMMARY
 
Design. A randomized, double-blind, active-controlled clinical trial conducted from February 1994 through March 2002. Participants with hypertension were randomly assigned to receive chlorthalidone, 12.5–25 mg/day (n = 15,255); amlodipine, 2.5–10 mg/day (n = 9,048); or lisinopril, 10–40 mg/day (n = 9,054) for planned follow-up of ~4–8 years.

Participants. A total of 33,357 participants aged >=55 years with hypertension and at least one other coronary heart disease (CHD) risk factor from 623 North American centers; 12,063 participants had diabetes.

Primary hypothesis. The primary outcome was combined fatal CHD or nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), analyzed by intent-to-treat.

Secondary hypotheses. Secondary outcomes were total mortality, stroke, combined CHD (primary outcome, coronary revascularization, or angina with hospitalization), and combined cardiovascular disease (CVD) (combined CHD, stroke, treated angina without hospitalization, heart failure [HF], and peripheral arterial disease).

Results. Mean follow-up was 4.9 years. The primary outcome occurred in 2,956 participants, with no difference between treatments. Compared with chlorthalidone, the relative risks (RRs) were 0.98 (95% CI, 0.90–1.07) for amlodipine and 0.99 (95% CI, 0.91–1.08) for lisinopril. Likewise, all-cause mortality did not differ between groups. For amlodipine versus chlorthalidone, secondary outcomes were similar except for a higher 6-year rate of HF with amlodipine (10.2 vs. 7.7%; RR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.25–1.52). For lisinopril . . . [Full Text of this Article]


    COMMENTARY
 

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Diabetes Diabetes Care Clinical Diabetes Diabetes Spectrum
Copyright © 2003 by the American Diabetes Association.