ArticlesCardiovascular morbidity and mortality in patients with diabetes in the Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension study (LIFE): a randomised trial against atenolol
Introduction
The Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction (LIFE) study was designed in the early 1990s1, 2, 3, 4 when no drug class for the treatment of essential hypertension had been shown to be more effective in prevention of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality than β-blockers and diuretics. The main hypothesis of LIFE was that selective angiotensin-II type-1-receptor antagonism with losartan would be more effective than β-blockade with atenolol in reducing cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in patients with essential hypertension and signs of left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) on electrocardiograms.
Diabetes mellitus doubles the risk of cardiovascular disease,5 even in patients with hypertension who are already at high risk because of their high blood pressure.6 Since many patients with hypertension develop diabetes, this combination of risk factors will account for a large proportion of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. The frequency of diabetes mellitus is increasing rapidly worldwide.7 In the LIFE study,1 we compared the long-term effects of once-daily losartan-based with atenolol-based antihypertensive treatment in patients with hypertension and LVH on the frequency of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality (a composite of cardiovascular mortality, stroke and myocardial infarction). The most suitable drug to prevent premature cardiovascular disease in diabetic patients with high blood pressure is unclear. Therefore, we analysed the outcome in the prespecified subgroup of patients who had diabetes mellitus at the start of the LIFE study.
Section snippets
Patients and procedures
The LIFE study1 was a double-masked, randomised, parallel-group study with double dummy drugs. The main outcome1 and the complete study protocol with study design, organisation, clinical measures, endpoint definitions, exclusion criteria, reasons for choice of comparative agents, statistical power calculations, and baseline characteristics have been published.2, 3, 4
We included patients aged 55–80 years with hypertension (either treated or untreated) and signs of LVH on electrocardiograms. We
Results
Groups were closely matched in demographic characteristics, severity of hypertension, prevalence of coexisting cardiovascular conditions, Framingham risk score, and electrocardiogram-based LVH criteria (table 1). Compared with the remaining LIFE participants without diabetes,1 patients with the disease had higher body-mass index, higher Framingham risk score, a higher prevalence of cardiovascular disease at baseline (table 1), higher systolic blood pressure (difference 3 mm Hg), lower diastolic
Discussion
Our results show that losartan was better than atenolol in reducing the risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in patients with diabetes and hypertension. Results were especially marked in the small group (20%) of patients who had not been treated for hypertension before the study. We emphasise that we decided before the start of the study to adjust results for the Framingham risk score and degree of LVH to account for any difference in key risk predictors at baseline and thus accounted
References (30)
- et al.
Cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in the Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension study (LIFE): a randomised trial against atenolol
Lancet
(2002) - et al.
Lowering of blood pressure and predictors of response in patients with left ventricular hypertrophy: the LIFE Study
Am J Hypertens
(2000) - et al.
Effect of angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibition compared with conventional therapy on cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in hypertension: the Captopril Prevention Project (CAPPP) randomised trial
Lancet
(1999) - et al.
Effects of intensive blood-pressure lowering and low-dose aspirin in patients with hypertension: principal results of the Hypertension Optimal Treatment (HOT) randomised trial
Lancet
(1998) - et al.
Randomised trial of effects of calcium antagonists compared with diuretics and beta-blockers on cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in hypertension: the Nordic Diltiazem (NORDIL) study
Lancet
(2000) - et al.
Morbidity and mortality in patients randomised to double-blind treatment with a long-acting calcium-channel blocker or diuretic in the International Nifedipine GITS study: Intervention as a Goal in Hypertension Treatment (INSIGHT)
Lancet
(2000) - et al.
Separate and joint effects of hypertension and diabetes mellitus on left ventricular structure and function: the Strong Heart Study
Am J Cardiol
(2001) - et al.
The renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system: a specific target for hypertension management
Am J Hypertension
(1999) - et al.
The Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction (LIFE) in Hypertension Study: rationale, design, and methods
Am J Hypertens
(1997) - et al.
Characteristics of 9,194 patients with left ventricular hypertrophy: the LIFE Study
Hypertension
(1998)
Diabetes and cardiovascular risk factors in the Framingham study
Circulation
Diabetes, other risk factors and 12-year cardiovascular mortality for men screened in Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial
Diabetes Care
Global and societal implications of the diabetic epidemic
Nature
Diabetes mellitus (technical report series 727)
An updated coronary risk profile: a statement for health professionals
Circulation
Cited by (0)
Members listed at end of reference 1