Open AccessThe ANBP2 and ALLHAT: Conflicting or Consistent?
Author(s) -
Cutler Jeffrey A.
Publication year - 2003
Publication title -
the journal of clinical hypertension
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.909
H-Index - 67
eISSN - 1751-7176
pISSN - 1524-6175
DOI - 10.1111/j.1524-6175.2003.02521.x
Subject(s) - medicine , clinical trial , diuretic , intensive care medicine , clinical epidemiology , thiazide , epidemiology
An ongoing debate during the past 2–3 months has centered on the results of two recent clinical trials in hypertension—the ALLHAT and ANBP2 trials. These apparently yielded different outcomes; in the American trial (ALLHAT), the use of a thiazide diuretic resulted in a better outcome with some cardiovascular end points compared to an ACE inhibitor. In the Australian trial (ANBP2), an ACE inhibitor was marginally ( p =0.05) more effective in reducing end points than a diuretic (most of the benefit in men). In the following commentary, Dr. Jeffrey Cutler, the Senior Scientific Advisor to the Division of Epidemiology and Clinical Application of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, compares these two trials. Dr. Cutler has been involved in almost all of the major clinical hypertension trials in the United States over the last 20 years. —Marvin Moser, MD, Editor in Chief