Presidential lecture antihypertensive therapy: Pride and prejudice

Alberto Zanchetti

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

13 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Clinical trials: Investigators of hypertension can be proud of the indisputable successes achieved by antihypertensive therapy and of the correct methodology (randomized controlled trials) by which those successes have been proved. However, hypertension experts should not allow pride to turn into prejudice. Numerous aspects of antihypertensive treatment remain to be clarified. Indeed, that all goals of antihypertensive treatment have been achieved is clear prejudice. Although randomized trials have been essential for establishing the benefits of antihypertensive therapy, claiming that randomized trials are the only valid methodology for providing treatment benefits is another instance in which pride might turn into prejudice. Indeed, there is a large gap between trials and practice, and trials may both overestimate and underestimate the benefits of treatment. Furthermore, event-based trials are not the only valid type of trials, as is often claimed. If the goals of treatment are both to prevent events and avoid or reduce organ damage, then we need both event-based and organ damage-based types of trials. Measurements of success: Assessment of the absolute risk and, consequently, calculation of the absolute benefit to be expected from treatment have appropriately been emphasized in recent guidelines for the management of hypertension as instruments to evaluate cost-effectiveness of treatment. However, there is reason for caution against an indiscriminate worship of this concept, because earlier treatment of milder, uncomplicated hypertension is an effective measure by which to prevent development of more severe and complicated hypertension, the treatment of which may be less successful, if success is measured by the residual mortality and morbidity of even well treated patients. Blood pressure measurements: Finally, we are still ignorant of the best way to measure blood pressure in order to decide upon initiation and success of treatment. Supporters both of clinic blood pressure measurements and of home or ambulatory blood pressure monitoring have their own prejudices; the problem can only be solved by further research. As in Jane Austen’s novel, before the happy end both pride and prejudice must be conquered.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1522-1528
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Hypertension
Volume13
Issue number12
Publication statusPublished - 1995

Fingerprint

Antihypertensive Agents
Hypertension
Therapeutics
Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring
Blood Pressure
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Randomized Controlled Trials
Research Personnel
Clinical Trials
Guidelines
Morbidity
Mortality

Keywords

  • Absolute benefit of treatment
  • Ambulatory blood pressure
  • Anti-hypertensive therapy
  • Clinical trials
  • Event-based trials
  • Organ damage-based trials

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Physiology
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
  • Internal Medicine
  • Endocrinology

Cite this

Presidential lecture antihypertensive therapy : Pride and prejudice. / Zanchetti, Alberto.

In: Journal of Hypertension, Vol. 13, No. 12, 1995, p. 1522-1528.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Zanchetti, Alberto. / Presidential lecture antihypertensive therapy : Pride and prejudice. In: Journal of Hypertension. 1995 ; Vol. 13, No. 12. pp. 1522-1528.
@article{c200dd0039d342c6a290e93b9596b7fa,
title = "Presidential lecture antihypertensive therapy: Pride and prejudice",
abstract = "Clinical trials: Investigators of hypertension can be proud of the indisputable successes achieved by antihypertensive therapy and of the correct methodology (randomized controlled trials) by which those successes have been proved. However, hypertension experts should not allow pride to turn into prejudice. Numerous aspects of antihypertensive treatment remain to be clarified. Indeed, that all goals of antihypertensive treatment have been achieved is clear prejudice. Although randomized trials have been essential for establishing the benefits of antihypertensive therapy, claiming that randomized trials are the only valid methodology for providing treatment benefits is another instance in which pride might turn into prejudice. Indeed, there is a large gap between trials and practice, and trials may both overestimate and underestimate the benefits of treatment. Furthermore, event-based trials are not the only valid type of trials, as is often claimed. If the goals of treatment are both to prevent events and avoid or reduce organ damage, then we need both event-based and organ damage-based types of trials. Measurements of success: Assessment of the absolute risk and, consequently, calculation of the absolute benefit to be expected from treatment have appropriately been emphasized in recent guidelines for the management of hypertension as instruments to evaluate cost-effectiveness of treatment. However, there is reason for caution against an indiscriminate worship of this concept, because earlier treatment of milder, uncomplicated hypertension is an effective measure by which to prevent development of more severe and complicated hypertension, the treatment of which may be less successful, if success is measured by the residual mortality and morbidity of even well treated patients. Blood pressure measurements: Finally, we are still ignorant of the best way to measure blood pressure in order to decide upon initiation and success of treatment. Supporters both of clinic blood pressure measurements and of home or ambulatory blood pressure monitoring have their own prejudices; the problem can only be solved by further research. As in Jane Austen’s novel, before the happy end both pride and prejudice must be conquered.",
keywords = "Absolute benefit of treatment, Ambulatory blood pressure, Anti-hypertensive therapy, Clinical trials, Event-based trials, Organ damage-based trials",
author = "Alberto Zanchetti",
year = "1995",
language = "English",
volume = "13",
pages = "1522--1528",
journal = "Journal of Hypertension",
issn = "0263-6352",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "12",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Presidential lecture antihypertensive therapy

T2 - Pride and prejudice

AU - Zanchetti, Alberto

PY - 1995

Y1 - 1995

N2 - Clinical trials: Investigators of hypertension can be proud of the indisputable successes achieved by antihypertensive therapy and of the correct methodology (randomized controlled trials) by which those successes have been proved. However, hypertension experts should not allow pride to turn into prejudice. Numerous aspects of antihypertensive treatment remain to be clarified. Indeed, that all goals of antihypertensive treatment have been achieved is clear prejudice. Although randomized trials have been essential for establishing the benefits of antihypertensive therapy, claiming that randomized trials are the only valid methodology for providing treatment benefits is another instance in which pride might turn into prejudice. Indeed, there is a large gap between trials and practice, and trials may both overestimate and underestimate the benefits of treatment. Furthermore, event-based trials are not the only valid type of trials, as is often claimed. If the goals of treatment are both to prevent events and avoid or reduce organ damage, then we need both event-based and organ damage-based types of trials. Measurements of success: Assessment of the absolute risk and, consequently, calculation of the absolute benefit to be expected from treatment have appropriately been emphasized in recent guidelines for the management of hypertension as instruments to evaluate cost-effectiveness of treatment. However, there is reason for caution against an indiscriminate worship of this concept, because earlier treatment of milder, uncomplicated hypertension is an effective measure by which to prevent development of more severe and complicated hypertension, the treatment of which may be less successful, if success is measured by the residual mortality and morbidity of even well treated patients. Blood pressure measurements: Finally, we are still ignorant of the best way to measure blood pressure in order to decide upon initiation and success of treatment. Supporters both of clinic blood pressure measurements and of home or ambulatory blood pressure monitoring have their own prejudices; the problem can only be solved by further research. As in Jane Austen’s novel, before the happy end both pride and prejudice must be conquered.

AB - Clinical trials: Investigators of hypertension can be proud of the indisputable successes achieved by antihypertensive therapy and of the correct methodology (randomized controlled trials) by which those successes have been proved. However, hypertension experts should not allow pride to turn into prejudice. Numerous aspects of antihypertensive treatment remain to be clarified. Indeed, that all goals of antihypertensive treatment have been achieved is clear prejudice. Although randomized trials have been essential for establishing the benefits of antihypertensive therapy, claiming that randomized trials are the only valid methodology for providing treatment benefits is another instance in which pride might turn into prejudice. Indeed, there is a large gap between trials and practice, and trials may both overestimate and underestimate the benefits of treatment. Furthermore, event-based trials are not the only valid type of trials, as is often claimed. If the goals of treatment are both to prevent events and avoid or reduce organ damage, then we need both event-based and organ damage-based types of trials. Measurements of success: Assessment of the absolute risk and, consequently, calculation of the absolute benefit to be expected from treatment have appropriately been emphasized in recent guidelines for the management of hypertension as instruments to evaluate cost-effectiveness of treatment. However, there is reason for caution against an indiscriminate worship of this concept, because earlier treatment of milder, uncomplicated hypertension is an effective measure by which to prevent development of more severe and complicated hypertension, the treatment of which may be less successful, if success is measured by the residual mortality and morbidity of even well treated patients. Blood pressure measurements: Finally, we are still ignorant of the best way to measure blood pressure in order to decide upon initiation and success of treatment. Supporters both of clinic blood pressure measurements and of home or ambulatory blood pressure monitoring have their own prejudices; the problem can only be solved by further research. As in Jane Austen’s novel, before the happy end both pride and prejudice must be conquered.

KW - Absolute benefit of treatment

KW - Ambulatory blood pressure

KW - Anti-hypertensive therapy

KW - Clinical trials

KW - Event-based trials

KW - Organ damage-based trials

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0029584671&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0029584671&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 8903604

AN - SCOPUS:0029584671

VL - 13

SP - 1522

EP - 1528

JO - Journal of Hypertension

JF - Journal of Hypertension

SN - 0263-6352

IS - 12

ER -