Overall, 43 percent of patients had all cardiovascular disease risk factors recorded for absolute risk assessment, with women less likely than men to have the risks recorded (41.4 vs. 45.9 percent, respectively). Women were significantly less likely to have smoking status, systolic blood pressure, total cholesterol, HDL cholesterol and body mass index recorded compared with men. When rates of risk factor assessment were compared within age groups, where there were significant differences between women and men, women were consistently less likely to have their risk measured than men.

In the high cardiovascular disease risk group, women and men were prescribed recommended medications in similar proportions (46.9 vs. 48 percent). Younger women (35-54 years) were 37 percent less likely to be prescribed recommended medications than their male peers. Older women were 34 percent more likely to be prescribed medications than men the same age. The authors note that this suggests the “possible presence of age stereotypes in medical management of cardiovascular disease.”

“Despite guidelines … regarding screening for cardiovascular disease risk factors, inequality in cardiovascular disease prevention through assessing risk factors remains between women and men,” the authors conclude. “This indicates that strategies and incentives are needed at the system level, together with education of physicians and the public about this inequality at the individual and social level, to minimize the treatment gap between women and men.”

In an accompanying editorial, Lauren E. Thompson, MD, and Stacie L. Daugherty, MD, FACC, state that the study “adds to the growing evidence that many of the gender differences seen in cardiovascular disease care are age dependent.” They add that moving forward,“comparing whether gender differences in risk estimation and management seen at enrollment into TORPEDO persisted at the end of the trial will improve our understanding of ways to potentially address gender disparities in care.”

<<< Return to top

Primary analyses of 139 patients showed a mean difference between RDN and control in changes in daytime ambulatory systolic BP after six months of 2.0 mm Hg in favor of control. In 80 percent of patients, fewer medications were detected than prescribed and adherence changed during follow-up in 31 percent of patients. In those with stable adherence mean difference between RDN and control for daytime systolic ambulatory BP was −3.3 mm Hg in favor of RDN. The authors also found that RDN as therapy for resistant hypertension “was not superior to usual care.”

"Our data suggest that the direction and the magnitude of the treatment effect considerably changes when medication adherence is taken into account." — Rosa L. de Jager, MD, et al

“Importantly, our data suggest that the direction and the magnitude of the treatment effect considerably changes when medication adherence is taken into account,” the authors explain.

The study’s results “may have considerable societal impact,” the authors conclude. Because patients are filling prescriptions but not using them, they are “staying at increased cardiovascular risk.” The researchers explain the reasons for resistance to prolonged pharmacological therapy are complex, and moving forward, “there is great need to more extensively focus on interventions that potentially improve medication adherence.”

In an editorial, Hillel Sternlicht, MD, and George L. Bakris, MD, note that “Going forward, just because trials of resistant hypertension use ambulatory systolic blood pressure to exclude white coat hypertension, spectrometric evaluation of urine or blood for antihypertensive metabolites should be used to assess adherence before and during a study and should become routine.”

de Jager RL, de Beus E, Beeftink MM, et al. Hypertension 2017;69:678-84.

<<< Return to top

Results showed that after 160 weeks, 2 percent of individuals in the liraglutide group were diagnosed with diabetes while on treatment compared with 6 percent in the placebo group. The mean time from randomization to diagnosis in the liraglutide group was approximately 99 weeks vs. 87 weeks in the placebo group. The liraglutide group also showed greater weight loss and improvements in glycemic control and cardiometabolic risk factors than the placebo group.

“Liraglutide 3.0 mg, as a GLP-1 receptor agonist, provides a different treatment option for individuals with obesity or overweight, with or without type 2 diabetes, having direct glucose-dependent effects on insulin secretion and weight-loss mediated effects on improved insulin resistance,” the authors conclude.

In an accompanying comment, Olivia M. Farr, PhD, and Christos S. Mantzoros, MD, PhD, say that although liraglutide showed positive results, it may not be the most cost-effective method of reducing type 2 diabetes. They suggest lifestyle modification, which reduces the risk of developing diabetes as well as hypertension and hyperlipidemia, appears to be equally as effective as liraglutide. “A direct comparison of intensive lifestyle modification and liraglutide would be required to determine this, and possibly, specifically designed comparative studies would be advisable to assess the effects of one, the other, or a combination of the two to advance the field,” they explain.

le Roux CW, Astrup A, Fujioka K, et al. Lancet 2017;389:1399-1409.

<<< Return to top

Shannon Gravely, PhD, et al., analyzed WHO data from 126 countries to examine the association between the demand-reduction measures implemented between 2007 and 2014 and smoking prevalence estimates between 2005 and 2015. The demand-reduction measures were taxation, smoke-free policies, warning labels, bans on tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship and smoking cessation programs.

Results showed that overall, there was a significant increase in the proportion of countries that implemented each key measure between 2007 and 2014. The mean smoking prevalence for all 126 countries was 24.73 percent in 2005 and 22.18 percent in 2015, an average decrease in prevalence of 2.55 percent. Unadjusted linear regression showed that increases in implementations of key measures between 2007 and 2014 were “significantly associated with a decrease in smoking prevalence between 2005 and 2015.” Further, each additional measure implemented was associated with an average decrease in smoking prevalence of 1.57 percent and an average relative decrease of 7.09 percent.

“[Our study] highlights the importance of tobacco control in two global initiatives that have set goals of markedly reducing non-communicable diseases through reducing tobacco use: WHO’s Global Action Plan, and the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals, which calls on countries to ‘strengthen the implementation of the [WHO FCTC] in all countries, as appropriate,’” the authors conclude.

In an accompanying editorial, Kenneth E. Warner, PhD, notes that the study affirms the validity of the demand-reduction measures, and commends the authors for reinforcing that “tobacco control policy matters.” “Let us hope that this study increases adoption of all of the core evidence-based demand-reduction policy interventions, especially including raising taxes, the highly effective intervention that has lagged in terms of adoption,” he adds.

Gravely S, Giovino GA, Craig L, et al. Lancet Public Health 2017;2:e166-e174.

<<< Return to top