Donate Help Contact The AHA Sign In Home
American Heart Association
Hypertension
Search: search_blue_button Advanced Search
Hypertension. 1997;29:659-667

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Staessen, J. A.
Right arrow Articles by Fagard, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Staessen, J. A.
Right arrow Articles by Fagard, R.

(Hypertension. 1997;29:659-667.)
© 1997 American Heart Association, Inc.


Articles

Determining the Trough-to-Peak Ratio in Parallel-Group Trials

Jan A. Staessen; Lutgarde Thijs; Geert Bijttebier; Denis Clement; Eoin T. O'Brien; Paolo Palatini; Jose L. Rodicio; Joseph Rosenfeld; Robert Fagard; on Behalf of the Systolic Hypertension in Europe (SYST-EUR) Trial Investigators

the SYST-EUR Trial Investigators; a complete list of the participants in this research study appears at the end of this article.

Correspondence to Jan A. Staessen, MD, PhD, Klinisch Laboratorium Hypertensie, Inwendige Geneeskunde-Cardiologie, UZ Gasthuisberg, Herestraat 49, B-3000 Leuven, Belgium.

We explored how in parallel-group trials interindividual variability, correction for placebo effects, and smoothing of blood pressure profiles can be handled in measuring the trough-to-peak ratio in 244 individuals with isolated systolic hypertension (>=60 years) enrolled in the placebo-controlled Systolic Hypertension in Europe Trial. Net treatment effects were computed by subtracting the mean changes from baseline during placebo (n=133) from those during active treatment (n=111). At entry, systolic/diastolic pressures averaged 176/86 mm Hg in the clinic and 149/80 mm Hg on 24-hour ambulatory monitoring. With corrections applied for baseline and placebo, nitrendipine (10 to 40 mg/d), with the possible addition of enalapril (5 to 20 mg/d) and/or hydrochlorothiazide (12.5 to 25 mg/d), reduced (P<.001) these blood pressure values by 16.6/7.3 and 9.8/4.7 mm Hg, respectively. The net trough-to-peak ratios were first determined from blood pressure profiles (12 hours) with 1-hour precision, synchronized by the morning and evening doses of the double-blind medication. According to the usual approach, disregarding interindividual variability, the systolic/diastolic net trough-to-peak ratios were 0.46/0.40 in the morning and 0.77/0.99 in the evening. In individual subjects, the baseline-adjusted trough-to-peak ratios were nonnormally distributed. We therefore used a nonparametric technique to calculate the net trough-to-peak ratios from the results in individual subjects. In the morning, these ratios averaged 0.25 systolic (95% confidence interval, 0.09 to 0.41) and 0.15 diastolic (95% confidence interval, 0.00 to 0.31) and in the evening, 0.19 and 0.36 (95% confidence intervals, 0.00 to 0.38 and 0.14 to 0.56), respectively. When the blood pressure profiles were smoothed by substituting the 1-hour averages by moving or fixed 2-hour averages or by Fourier modeling, the trough-to-peak ratios remained unchanged after the morning dose (0.20/0.13, 0.20/0.14, and 0.16/0.21, respectively) but tended to increase in the evening (0.32/0.38, 0.28/0.40, and 0.48/0.49). In conclusion, the parallel-group analysis proposed makes it possible for one to correct the trough-to-peak ratio for baseline as well as placebo, to account for interindividual variability, and to calculate a confidence interval for the net trough-to-peak ratio. Accounting for interindividual variability reduces the trough-to-peak ratio. Smoothing affects the individualized net trough-to-peak ratios in an unpredictable way and should therefore be avoided.


Key Words: blood pressure monitoring, ambulatory • blood pressure • clinical trials




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
NEJMHome page
J. Tuomilehto, D. Rastenyte, W. H. Birkenhager, L. Thijs, R. Antikainen, C. J. Bulpitt, A. E. Fletcher, F. Forette, A. Goldhaber, P. Palatini, et al.
Effects of Calcium-Channel Blockade in Older Patients with Diabetes and Systolic Hypertension
N. Engl. J. Med., March 4, 1999; 340(9): 677 - 684.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
HypertensionHome page
J. A. Staessen, L. Thijs, R. H. Fagard, W. H. Birkenhager, G. Arabidze, S. Babeanu, B. Gil-Extremera, C. J. Bulpitt, C. Davidson, P. W. de Leeuw, et al.
Calcium Channel Blockade and Cardiovascular Prognosis in the European Trial on Isolated Systolic Hypertension
Hypertension, September 1, 1998; 32(3): 410 - 416.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]