The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Prognostic significance of on-treatment home and clinic blood pressure for predicting cardiovascular events in hypertensive patients in the HONEST study
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We investigated the prognostic significance of morning home SBP (MHSBP) and clinic SBP (CSBP) at baseline and during follow-up in on-treatment hypertensive patients. METHODS: In the Home blood pressure measurement with Olmesartan Naive patients to Establish Standard Target blood pressure study, more than 20 000 Japanese hypertensive patients who started treatment with olmesartan were followed for cardiovascular events for 2 years. MHSBP and CSBP measured at baseline and during follow-up were compared in terms of the prognostic significance in predicting cardiovascular events. RESULTS: The analysis included 21 591 patients (50.6% female; average age 64.9 years; mean follow-up 2.02 years; and 280 cardiovascular events). The mean MHSBP and CSBP were 151.2 and 153.6 mmHg at baseline and 135.2 and 135.2 mmHg during follow-up. Hazard ratios per 1 mmHg increase were 1.011 (95% confidence interval 1.004-1.019) and 1.006 (1.000-1.012) at baseline, and 1.039 (1.029-1.049) and 1.026 (1.016-1.036) during follow-up. When MHSBP and CSBP at baseline and during follow-up were included in the same model, only MHSBP during follow-up was identified as a significant predictive factor. The concordance index of all blood pressure variables showed reasonable discrimination abilities, and that of mean during follow-up were higher than that of SBP at baseline. The results of net reclassification improvement analyses showed that follow-up MHSBP had better reclassification ability than follow-up CSBP. CONCLUSION: SBP during follow-up (as compared with SBP at baseline), particularly MHSBP (as compared with CSBP), had better prognostic significance in predicting cardiovascular events in Japanese hypertensive patients during a 2-year clinical study.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Similar data have been reported for major cardiovascular events in the IDHOCO database and in the HONEST Study [38,39].”
In the citing paper
“while there were no clear differences between the two methods in untreated ones [38].”
In the citing paper
“In the former study, HBP was a stronger predictor of outcome than OBP in treated individuals”
In the citing paper
“In the IDHOCO database, an OBP value of 140/90 mmHg was a significant predictor of increased risk for all outcomes”
In the citing paper
“Several studies found that at lower OBP levels the difference with corresponding HBP values becomes much lower [38,144]”
In the citing paper
“ACC/AHA guidelines proposed that the HBP level to identify grade 1 hypertension is the same as for OBP, that is, 130/80 mmHg [38,145–149]”
In the citing paper
“After analysing only the untreated part of the sample, the proposed approximate HBP thresholds for prehypertension stages 1 and 2 and hypertension stages 1 and 2 amounted to 120/75, 125/80, 130/85 and 145/90 mmHg, respectively”
In the citing paper
“The corresponding HBP values were 131.9/82.4 mmHg for cardiovascular events, 132.4/82.8 mmHg for stroke and 131.7/81.2 mmHg for cardiac events [38]”
In the citing paper
“Studies focusing on treated hypertensive patients have found a higher day-by-day BPV among these individuals compared with untreated individuals [38,140], also reporting higher values of HBPV in case of treatment with beta-blockers, short duration of treatment [246] and increasing number of antihypertensive drugs [247].”
Citations
Cites
Niiranen, T. J., Asayama, K., Thijs, L., Johansson, J. K., Ohkubo, T., Kikuya, M., Boggia, J., Hozawa, A., Sandoya, E., Stergiou, G. S., et al. (2013) · Hypertension · doi:10.1161/hypertensionaha.111.00100 · Cited by 120
Nomura, K., Asayama, K., Thijs, L., Niiranen, T. J., Lujambio, I., Boggia, J., Hozawa, A., Ohkubo, T., Hara, A., Johansson, J. K., et al. (2014) · Hypertension · doi:10.1161/hypertensionaha.114.03839 · Cited by 27 · cited 1×
“Evaluation of absolute risk The IDHOCO study [18], which investigated 10-year cardiovascular disease risk using baseline BP, showed similar results to the present study in that the association with the cardiovascular disease risk was stronger with home BP than clinic BP.”
Result
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 14
- Ohkubo, 1998, Home blood pressure measurement has a stronger predictive power for mortality than does screening blood pressure measurement: a population-based observation in Ohasama, Japan, J Hypertens, 16, 971, 10.1097/00004872-199816070-00010 · DOI
- Bobrie, 2004, Cardiovascular prognosis of ‘masked hypertension’ detected by blood pressure self-measurement in elderly treated hypertensive patients, JAMA, 291, 1342, 10.1001/jama.291.11.1342 · DOI · Paper page
- Niiranen, 2010, Home-measured blood pressure is a stronger predictor of cardiovascular risk than office blood pressure: the Finn-Home study, Hypertension, 55, 1346, 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.109.149336 · DOI · Paper page
- Noguchi, 2013, Predictive power of home blood pressure and clinic blood pressure in hypertensive patients with impaired glucose metabolism and diabetes, J Hypertens, 31, 1593, 10.1097/HJH.0b013e328361732c · DOI
- Sega, 2005, Prognostic value of ambulatory and home blood pressures compared with office blood pressure in the general population: follow-up results from the Pressioni Arteriose Monitorate e Loro Associazioni (PAMELA) study, Circulation, 111, 1777, 10.1161/01.CIR.0000160923.04524.5B · DOI · Paper page
- Stergiou, 2007, Cardiovascular risk prediction based on home blood pressure measurement: the Didima study, J Hypertens, 25, 1590, 10.1097/HJH.0b013e3281ab6c69 · DOI
- Pepe, 2004, Limitations of the odds ratio in gauging the performance of a diagnostic, prognostic, or screening marker, Am J Epidemiol, 159, 882, 10.1093/aje/kwh101 · DOI · Paper page
- Saito, 2013, Rationale, study design, baseline characteristics and blood pressure at 16 weeks in the HONEST Study, Hypertens Res, 36, 177, 10.1038/hr.2012.160 · DOI
- Kario, 2014, Home blood pressure and cardiovascular outcomes in patients during antihypertensive therapy: primary results of HONEST, a large-scale prospective, real-world observational study, Hypertension, 64, 989, 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.114.04262 · DOI · Paper page
- Ogihara, 2009, The Japanese Society of Hypertension Guidelines for the Management of Hypertension (JSH 2009), Hypertens Res, 32, 3, 10.1038/hr.2009.34 · DOI
- Muller, 1989, Circadian variation and triggers of onset of acute cardiovascular disease, Circulation, 79, 733, 10.1161/01.CIR.79.4.733 · DOI · Paper page
- Pencina, 2012, Quantifying discrimination of Framingham risk functions with different survival C statistics, Stat Med, 31, 1543, 10.1002/sim.4508 · DOI
- Pencina, 2008, Evaluating the added predictive ability of a new marker: from area under the ROC curve to reclassification and beyond, Stat Med, 27, 157, 10.1002/sim.2929 · DOI · Paper page
- Pencina, 2011, Extensions of net reclassification improvement calculations to measure usefulness of new biomarkers, Stat Med, 30, 11, 10.1002/sim.4085 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Parati, G., Stergiou, G. S., Bilo, G., Kollias, A., Pengo, M., Ochoa, J. E., Agarwal, R., Asayama, K., Asmar, R., Burnier, M., et al. (2021) · Journal of Hypertension · doi:10.1097/hjh.0000000000002922 · Cited by 178
Self-citationMeasuring and managing blood pressure in a primary care setting: a pragmatic implementation study
Doane, J., Buu, J., Penrod, M. J., Bischoff, M., Conroy, M. B., & Stults, B. (2018) · The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine · doi:10.3122/jabfm.2018.03.170450 · Cited by 23
Metadata
- Authors
- Shimada, K., Kario, K., Kushiro, T., Teramukai, S., Zenimura, N., Ishikawa, Y., Okuda, Y., & Saito, I.
- Affiliations
- Jichi Medical University (JP)
- Corresponding author
- Shimada, Kazuyuki
- ORCID
- Venue
- Journal of Hypertension
- Published
- 2016-08
- Volume
- 34
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 1520-1527
- ISSN
- 0263-6352 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2425970564
- Cited by
- 24
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 2.75
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Hypertension (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Daiichi-Sankyo
- Daiichi Sankyo Europe
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Sodium Intake and Health
- Keywords
- home blood pressure monitoring, morning systolic blood pressure, office blood pressure, hypertension, cardiovascular events, prognostic factors, olmesartan, antihypertensive therapy, Japanese hypertensive patients, net reclassification improvement
- MeSH terms
- Aged, Antihypertensive Agents, Blood Pressure, Blood Pressure Determination, Cardiovascular Diseases, Female, Humans, Hypertension, Imidazoles, Japan, Male, Middle Aged, Office Visits, Prognosis, Self Care, Tetrazoles
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
