IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pmed00/1002410.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Benefit and harm of intensive blood pressure treatment: Derivation and validation of risk models using data from the SPRINT and ACCORD trials

Author

Listed:
  • Sanjay Basu
  • Jeremy B Sussman
  • Joseph Rigdon
  • Lauren Steimle
  • Brian T Denton
  • Rodney A Hayward

Abstract

Background: Intensive blood pressure (BP) treatment can avert cardiovascular disease (CVD) events but can cause some serious adverse events. We sought to develop and validate risk models for predicting absolute risk difference (increased risk or decreased risk) for CVD events and serious adverse events from intensive BP therapy. A secondary aim was to test if the statistical method of elastic net regularization would improve the estimation of risk models for predicting absolute risk difference, as compared to a traditional backwards variable selection approach. Methods and findings: Cox models were derived from SPRINT trial data and validated on ACCORD-BP trial data to estimate risk of CVD events and serious adverse events; the models included terms for intensive BP treatment and heterogeneous response to intensive treatment. The Cox models were then used to estimate the absolute reduction in probability of CVD events (benefit) and absolute increase in probability of serious adverse events (harm) for each individual from intensive treatment. We compared the method of elastic net regularization, which uses repeated internal cross-validation to select variables and estimate coefficients in the presence of collinearity, to a traditional backwards variable selection approach. Data from 9,069 SPRINT participants with complete data on covariates were utilized for model development, and data from 4,498 ACCORD-BP participants with complete data were utilized for model validation. Participants were exposed to intensive (goal systolic pressure

Suggested Citation

  • Sanjay Basu & Jeremy B Sussman & Joseph Rigdon & Lauren Steimle & Brian T Denton & Rodney A Hayward, 2017. "Benefit and harm of intensive blood pressure treatment: Derivation and validation of risk models using data from the SPRINT and ACCORD trials," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(10), pages 1-26, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:1002410
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002410
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1002410
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1002410&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002410?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Yizhe Xu & Tom H. Greene & Adam P. Bress & Brian C. Sauer & Brandon K. Bellows & Yue Zhang & William S. Weintraub & Andrew E. Moran & Jincheng Shen, 2022. "Estimating the optimal individualized treatment rule from a cost‐effectiveness perspective," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 78(1), pages 337-351, March.
    2. Gal Dinstag & David Amar & Erik Ingelsson & Euan Ashley & Ron Shamir, 2019. "Personalized prediction of adverse heart and kidney events using baseline and longitudinal data from SPRINT and ACCORD," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(8), pages 1-12, August.
    3. Mingyue Xue & Li Liu & Shuxia Wang & Yinxia Su & Kun Lv & Mingchen Zhang & Hua Yao, 2020. "A simple nomogram score for screening patients with type 2 diabetes to detect those with hypertension: A cross-sectional study based on a large community survey in China," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(8), pages 1-15, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:1002410. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosmedicine (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.