Monitoring ocular hypertension, how much and how often? A cost-effectiveness perspective

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficiency of alternative monitoring services for people with ocular hypertension (OHT), a glaucoma risk factor.

DESIGN: Discrete event simulation model comparing five alternative care pathways: treatment at OHT diagnosis with minimal monitoring; biennial monitoring (primary and secondary care) with treatment if baseline predicted 5-year glaucoma risk is ≥6%; monitoring and treatment aligned to National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) glaucoma guidance (conservative and intensive).

SETTING: UK health services perspective.

PARTICIPANTS: Simulated cohort of 10 000 adults with OHT (mean intraocular pressure (IOP) 24.9 mm Hg (SD 2.4).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Costs, glaucoma detected, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs).

RESULTS: Treating at diagnosis was the least costly and least effective in avoiding glaucoma and progression. Intensive monitoring following NICE guidance was the most costly and effective. However, considering a wider cost-utility perspective, biennial monitoring was less costly and provided more QALYs than NICE pathways, but was unlikely to be cost-effective compared with treating at diagnosis (£86 717 per additional QALY gained). The findings were robust to risk thresholds for initiating monitoring but were sensitive to treatment threshold, National Health Service costs and treatment adherence.

CONCLUSIONS: For confirmed OHT, glaucoma monitoring more frequently than every 2 years is unlikely to be efficient. Primary treatment and minimal monitoring (assessing treatment responsiveness (IOP)) could be considered; however, further data to refine glaucoma risk prediction models and value patient preferences for treatment are needed. Consideration to innovative and affordable service redesign focused on treatment responsiveness rather than more glaucoma testing is recommended.

Epigenetic Therapy for the Treatment of Hypertension-Induced Cardiac Hypertrophy and Fibrosis

BACKGROUND: The development of heart failure is associated with changes in the size, shape, and structure of the heart that has a negative impact on cardiac function. These pathological changes involve excessive extracellular matrix deposition within the myocardial interstitium and myocyte hypertrophy. Alterations in fibroblast phenotype and myocyte activity are associated with reprogramming of gene transcriptional profiles that likely requires epigenetic alterations in chromatin structure. The aim of our work was to investigate the potential of a currently licensed anticancer epigenetic modifier as a treatment option for cardiac diseases associated with hypertension-induced cardiac hypertrophy and fibrosis.

METHODS AND RESULTS: The effects of DNA methylation inhibition with 5-azacytidine (5-aza) were examined in a human primary fibroblast cell line and in a spontaneously hypertensive rat (SHR) model. The results from this work allude to novel in vivo antifibrotic and antihypertrophic actions of 5-aza. Administration of the DNA methylation inhibitor significantly improved several echocardiographic parameters associated with hypertrophy and diastolic dysfunction. Myocardial collagen levels and myocyte size were reduced in 5-aza-treated SHRs. These findings are supported by beneficial in vitro effects in cardiac fibroblasts. Collagen I, collagen III, and α-smooth muscle actin were reduced in a human ventricular cardiac fibroblast cell line treated with 5-aza.

CONCLUSION: These findings suggest a role for epigenetic modifications in contributing to the profibrotic and hypertrophic changes evident during disease progression. Therapeutic intervention with 5-aza demonstrated favorable effects highlighting the potential use of this epigenetic modifier as a treatment option for cardiac pathologies associated with hypertrophy and fibrosis.

The effects of blood pressure lowering on development of cognitive impairment and dementia in patients without apparent prior cerebrovascular disease

BACKGROUND: Hypertension and cognitive impairment are prevalent in older people. It is known that hypertension is a direct risk factor for vascular dementia and recent studies have suggested hypertension also impacts upon prevalence of Alzheimer's disease. The question is therefore whether treatment of hypertension lowers the rate of cognitive decline. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of blood pressure lowering treatments for the prevention of dementia and cognitive decline in patients with hypertension but no history of cerebrovascular disease. SEARCH STRATEGY: The trials were identified through a search of CDCIG's Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and CINAHL on 27 April 2005. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled trials in which pharmacological or non-pharmacological interventions to lower blood pressure were given for at least six months. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two independent reviewers assessed trial quality and extracted data. The following outcomes were assessed: incidence of dementia, cognitive change from baseline, blood pressure level, incidence and severity of side effects and quality of life. MAIN RESULTS: Three trials including 12,091 hypertensive subjects were identified. Average age was 72.8 years. Participants were recruited from industrialised countries. Mean blood pressure at entry across the studies was 170/84 mmHg. All trials instituted a stepped care approach to hypertension treatment, starting with a calcium-channel blocker, a diuretic or an angiotensin receptor blocker. The combined result of the three trials reporting incidence of dementia indicated no significant difference between treatment and placebo (Odds Ratio (OR) = 0.89, 95% CI 0.69, 1.16). Blood pressure reduction resulted in a 11% relative risk reduction of dementia in patients with no prior cerebrovascular disease but this effect was not statistically significant (p = 0.38) and there was considerable heterogeneity between the trials. The combined results from the two trials reporting change in Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) did not indicate a benefit from treatment (Weighted Mean Difference (WMD) = 0.10, 95% CI -0.03, 0.23). Both systolic and diastolic blood pressure levels were reduced significantly in the two trials assessing this outcome (WMD = -7.53, 95% CI -8.28, -6.77 for systolic blood pressure, WMD = -3.87, 95% CI -4.25, -3.50 for diastolic blood pressure).Two trials reported adverse effects requiring discontinuation of treatment and the combined results indicated a significant benefit from placebo (OR = 1.18, 95% CI 1.06, 1.30). When analysed separately, however, more patients on placebo in SCOPE were likely to discontinue treatment due to side effects; the converse was true in SHEP 1991. Quality of life data could not be analysed in the three studies. There was difficulty with the control group in this review as many of the control subjects received antihypertensive treatment because their blood pressures exceeded pre-set values. In most cases the study became a comparison between the study drug against a usual antihypertensive regimen. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There was no convincing evidence from the trials identified that blood pressure lowering prevents the development of dementia or cognitive impairment in hypertensive patients with no apparent prior cerebrovascular disease. There were significant problems identified with analysing the data, however, due to the number of patients lost to follow-up and the number of placebo patients given active treatment. This introduced bias. More robust results may be obtained by analysing one year data to reduce differential drop-out or by conducting a meta-analysis using individual patient data.