ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and

43
Ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and treatment response Prof. Kennedy Cruickshank Cardiovascular Medicine & Diabetes, King’s College & Health Partners = Guy’s & St Thomas’ Hospitals, London, UK RCP - BHS joint symposium I have no disclosures

Upload: others

Post on 18-Dec-2021

3 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and

Ancestry differences in hypertension

risk, progression and

treatment response

Prof. Kennedy Cruickshank

Cardiovascular Medicine & Diabetes,

King’s College & Health Partners

= Guy’s & St Thomas’ Hospitals,

London, UK

RCP - BHS joint symposium

I have no disclosures

Page 2: Ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and

Heart attack and Stroke 20y Incidence by Ethnicity, in west London, 1988-2011

The ‘Sabre’ cohort – Ealing & Brent; Chaturvedi N et al; JACC 2013

N = 2049 630 1517

CHD

STROKE

Page 3: Ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and

Frequency distribution of LV mass indexed to

BSA in black vs white women (A) and men (B)

Mark H. Drazner et al.

Hypertension

2005;46:124-129

Representative

samples in the

Dallas Heart study

Page 4: Ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and

The ‘null’ hypothesis

More (High) Blood Pressure in W Afrs & Caribbeans but for given BP levels (eg: ‘x’), no difference in outcomes..

- Cruickshank 1989

Inci

den

ce r

ate

o

f o

utc

om

es

Europeans

West African / C’bean

Page 5: Ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and

Origins of High Blood Pressure risk

- Genes.. variants?

- Development – life-course exposure..?

- Risk factor burden..?

- Social determinants..?

Page 6: Ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and

Trajectories of systolic blood pressure (A) and body mass index (BMI) (B) from 1 to 20 years

of age in offspring of normotensive (blue), pregnancy-induced hypertension (PIH; orange)

and complicated hypertensive (red) pregnancies.

Esther F Davis et al. BMJ Open 2015;5:e008136

©2015 by British Medical Journal Publishing Group

BM

I –kg

/m2

SBP

- m

mH

g

Page 7: Ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and

Bogalusa Heart Study: multiple regression

on Longitudinal systolic BP at 15y (n= 182, Af.Am 92)

95 % CI Standard beta

coefficients P value

Birth weight -8.6 to 4.1 - 0.36 <0.01

Height 0.27 to 0.57 0.38 <0.01

BMI 0.30 to 0.85 0.3 <0.01

DWT 04 -1.3 to –0.3 - 0.25 0.01

SBP at 4y 0.08 to 0.44 0.19 <0.01

NB. Ethnic difference in 15y BP ‘accounted for’ by birth weight

Cruickshank et al Circulation 2005;111:1932-37

Page 8: Ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and

Adolescence 11-13y & 14-16y, (n=~6000)

CVD, respiratory

& Mental Health

<birth weight linked>

Early life & childhood

+ bio-markers, arterial stiffness, accelerometery, dietary recall, own SEC,

parenting qualitative interviews

21-23y: Pilot study (n=665)

Work life & beyond

health & life trajectories future follow-up linkage of medical data generational studies

DASH - health over the life course, ~1000 in each major ethnic group

Page 9: Ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and

100

105

110

115

120

systo

lic B

P (

mm

Hg

)

■ 13.1 - 18.8 kg/m² ♦ 18.8 - 21.9 kg/m² ● 21.9 - 39.5 kg/m²

White Black

Caribbean

Black

African

Indian Pakistani/

Bangladeshi

MixedWhite

Other

Systolic BP by BMI tertiles among adolescent girls

The MRC DASH Study in London Schools 11-13y olds

Harding S, Maynard M, Cruickshank JK. J Hypertension 2006

Page 10: Ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and

Systolic blood pressure, by age and ethnicity for males and females: means/percentage and 95% confidence

intervals adjusted for gender and ethnicity

Males Females

100

105

110

115

120

125

130

11

-13

y

14

-16

y

21

-23

y

11

-13

y

14

-16

y

21

-23

y

11

-13

y

14

-16

y

21

-23

y

11

-13

y

14

-16

y

21

-23

y

11

-13

y

14

-16

y

21

-23

y

11

-13

y

14

-16

y

21

-23

y

Whites UK BC BA Indian PB Others

Syst

olic

Blo

od

Pre

ssu

re, m

mH

g

11

-13

y

14

-16

y

21

-23

y

11

-13

y

14

-16

y

21

-23

y

11

-13

y

14

-16

y

21

-23

y

11

-13

y

14

-16

y

21

-23

y

11

-13

y

14

-16

y

21

-23

y

11

-13

y

14

-16

y

21

-23

y

Whites UK BC BA Indian PB Others

(BC – Black Caribbean, BA – Black African, PB – Pakistani/Bangladeshi)

Page 11: Ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and

Systolic blood pressure from adolescence to early adulthood for males and females: association with

longitudinal measures of adiposity* - at ages 21-23y

100

105

110

115

120

11-13y 14-16y 21-23y

Syst

olic

Blo

od

Pre

ssu

re, m

mH

g

Males 95% CI Males

Females 95%CI Females

Coeff 95% CI p-value

Males

Waist to height ratio 32.49 (22.05,42.93) <0.001

BMI, kg/m2 0.17 (0.08,0.26) <0.001

Overweight (Normal weight - Ref)

Overweight/Obese 1.74 (-0.31,3.79) 0.097

Females

Waist to height ratio 32.69 (24.84,40.55) <0.001

BMI, kg/m2 0.54 (0.42,0.65) <0.001

Overweight (Normal weight - Ref)

Overweight/Obese 3.75 (2.00,5.50) <0.001

*Mixed-Effects Linear Regression Model coefficients adjusted for age, ethnicity, waist to height ratio (or BMI, or

overweight status), parental/own employment and currently smoking.

Harding S et al.. Cruickshank JK – in preparation

Page 12: Ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and

Relationship of Pulse Wave Velocity with BP

4

6

8

10

12

Pu

lse

Wa

ve

Ve

locity (

m/s

)

80 100 120 140 160 Systolic BP

60 70 80 90 100 Diastolic BP

ρ=0.31 (p<.0001)

ρ=0.18 (p=0.000)

Feasibility Follow-up – ages 22-23y

Many young people

already ‘stiffening’..?

Cruickshank et al Hypertension June 2016

Page 13: Ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and

Individual Patient Meta-analysis of Arterial Stiffness and Mortality – an intermediary

outcome not a risk factor..

Ben-Shlomo Y et al, JACC 2014

Page 14: Ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and

0

10

20

30

40

%

< 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140

Diastolic Blood Pressure mmHg

Manchester 23 Jamaica 15 Cameroon – urban 4.4

% BP (treated)

Cameroon – rural 0.5

Cruickshank et al, J Hypert 2001; 19: 41-46

Age-adjusted blood pressure distributions of

west African-origin populations

Page 15: Ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and

Severe childhood malnutrition (SCM) - still a problem…

- 2 distinct forms - based on

presence or absence of nutritional oedema:

Oedematous

(Kwashiorkor & Marasmic-kwashiorkor)

Non-oedematous

(Marasmus)

15

Page 16: Ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and

Differences in cardiovascular measures (SD scores)

- controls vs. all Malnutrn survivors at ±30y

16

Measurement

(standardised score)

Controls – all SAM survivors

Difference 95%CI, p-value

Controlled for age and sex

Visceral fat mass -0.09 -0.45 to 0.27, 0.6

Systolic blood pressure -0.22 -0.55 to 0.12, 0.2

Diastolic blood pressure -0.40 -0.71 to -0.08, 0.02

Heart rate 0.21 -0.14 to 0.56, 0.2

Pulse Wave Velocity 0.35 0.06 to 0.65, 0.02

Stroke Volume 0.49 0.15 to 0.82, 0.005

Cardiac Output 0.56 0.23 to 0.90, 0.001

Ejection Fraction -0.41 -0.76 to -0.06, 0.02

LV outflow tract diameter 0.71 0.39 to 1.03, <0.001

Systemic Vascular Resistance -0.69 -1.03 to -0.35, <0.001

LV Mass index -0.02 -0.35 to 0.31, 0.9

Central Systolic BP -0.15 -0.47 to 0.18, 0.4

Tennant-Martin et al – Hypertension 2014

Page 17: Ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and

Vascular resistance & LV outflow

tract +/- 30 years after

Malnutrition

17 Tennant-Martin et al – Hypertension 2014

Page 18: Ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and

Lifetime transition..?

Recovered

Kwashiorkor, small

baby…

High BP

Type 2 Diabetes

? Population

Risk ?

Page 19: Ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and

X 2

Expected

NB

Temperature

difference

Page 20: Ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and

Nigerian birth cohort – BP change up to age 3y by maternal

malarial status

Courtesy of Jasmin Farikullah-Mirza, O Ayoola, Clayton P & our team – submitted 2016

Maternal malaria +ve

Unexposed ‘controls’

Increased

Vasc GFs

Page 21: Ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and
Page 22: Ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and

Sick genes, Sick individuals or

Sick populations with chronic

disease? An example from studying

diabetes & hypertension in African-origin

populations.

JK Cruickshank, J-C Mbanya, R Wilks, B Balkau, N McF Anderson, T Forrester

Int J Epidemiol 2001; 30: 111-117

Page 23: Ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and

Developmental & Environmental, rather than genetic-variant, bases for ethnic variation in High Blood Pressure - & Diabetes / Vascular disease

Perspective

1. Natural History of Disease

2. It’s a long way from genome to phenotype:

gene – translation – protein folding, synthesis & turnover – substrate availability & metabolism – tissue lay-down, degradation & repair - individual vs. commonality – social experience & behaviour

- A far cry from genome variants..

Page 24: Ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and

What it’s all about is regulation of

gene expression –

not the genome itself

Page 25: Ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and

Salt + Aldo excess & remodelling?

Catena C et al, Sechi L

- online, July 2016

Page 26: Ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and

PET- CT for Adrenal(micro-)adenoma imaging

Findings: Limited PET with low dose un-enhanced diagnostic CT adrenal glands.

Right Adrenal: >20mm nodule in R adrenal gland, with intense focal tracer uptake

Left Adrenal : Homogenous tracer distribution on the left; no obvious nodularity

IG: 37yo woman, West African descent;

Difficult, poorly controlled BP 3+ line therapy..

R Adrenalectomy - 9/12 later - BP 128/86mmHg on Amlodipine 5mg/d

JKC Guy’s patient – PET-CT courtesy of Morris Brown

Page 27: Ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and

NB:

Adrenal Aldosterone-secreting

Adenomas

are somatic, not germ-line

mutations

Page 28: Ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and

Beta-blockers ineffective alone for BP in

AfC’bean (& Af) patients

Cruickshank JK et al; BMJ 1988 Nov 5;297:1155-9. Cross-over RCT

Plasma Renin

AfC’bean

Europeans

BP

AfC Eurpns

AfC Eur

Page 29: Ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and

Sample of key papers on Ethnic Diffs in Hypert Trtmnt

literature

• Humphreys GS, Delvin DG. Ineffectiveness of propranolol in hypertensive Jamaicans.

Br Med J 1968 ; 2: 601-3.

• Kaplan NM, Kem DC, Holland OB, ..Gomez-Sanchez C. The intravenous furosemide test:

a simple way to evaluate renin responsiveness. Ann Intern Med 1976; 84: 639-45.

• Holland OB, von Kuhnert L, Campbell WB, Anderson RJ. Synergistic effect of captopril

with hydrochlorothiazide for the treatment of low-renin hypertensive black patients.

Hypertension 1983;5:235-9.

• Preston RA, Materson BJ, Reda DJ, Williams DW, Hamburger RJ, Cushman WC, Anderson

RJ. Age-race subgroup compared with renin profile as predictors of blood pressure

response to antihypertensive therapy. Veterans Affairs Coop Study Group on

Hypertensive. JAMA 1998; 280:1168-72.

Page 30: Ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and

Heart Failure by ALLHAT treatment

Wright J et al JAMA

2005;293:1595-1608

Page 31: Ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and

Systematic review: antihypertensive drug therapy in patients of African and South Asian

ethnicity

Brewster LM, van Montfrans GA, Oehlers GP, Seedat YK

Intern Emerg Med (2016) 11:355–374

Page 32: Ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and

32

-20 -10 -5 0 5 10 20 mm Hg

Favours treatment Favours control

(WMD 95%CI)

Effect of different drugs

on

Systolic Blood Pressure in

black people

Ca-blockers

I2 =94%

Diuretics

ACE inhibitors

AT II antagonists

Beta-blockers

-20 -10 -5 0 5 10 20 mm Hg

Favours treatment Favours control Brewster, 2004

Page 33: Ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and

Syst Review – RCTs in African-origin Hypertensive pts (only) vs placebo - 1

Brewster LM et al

Page 34: Ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and

Syst Review – RCTs in African-origin Hypertensive pts (only) vs placebo – 2, Brewster LM et al

Page 35: Ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and

Danish National Registry

Serum K+ and Risk of Death in Hypertension

Page 36: Ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and

1. Spironolactone

2. Amiloride ± HCTZ

3+.. Aldosterone synthase antagonism

- every opportunity in African origin patients

‘Simple’ Future Treatments

Page 37: Ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and

N. Xiao, J.D. Humphrey, C.A. Figueroa. “Computational Model of 3-D Hemodynamics -

a Full-Body Arterial Network."

Journal of Computational Physics. 2012 DOI: 10.1016/j.jcp.2012.09.016

Flow & Pressure

Variation

across the

Arterial tree..

(modelled)

NB:

Pulse Wave

Velocity

changes

(estimated)

Courtesy of

Dr A Figueroa,

King’s College

The

“Restricted

Vascular

Network”

Hypothesis

for High BP

Page 38: Ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and

Intergenerational transmission of CVS RISK -

Examples from Caribbean peoples

Intrauterine Social Position growth early childhood growth adolescent RISK FACTORS Adult Health Outcomes Lifespan--------------------------------------------------------/

maternal

phenotype

genes Individual adaptation Finance

Forces of HISTORY & Society

Slavery & slow escape from post-

emancipation poverty / indentured labour

Nutrition

Page 39: Ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and

Upstream & downstream policies to address ethnic inequalities – the heart of public health debate

Page 40: Ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and

BP distribution in 35-66y olds –

Kilifi, Kenya; ABPM vs Usual

Etyang, Smeeth, Cruickshank & Scott

Page 41: Ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and

BP distribution in 35-66y olds – Kilifi,

Kenya; ABPM vs Usual

Etyang, Smeeth, Cruickshank & Scott

Page 42: Ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and

Waist to height ratio by age and ethnicity for males and females: means/percentage and 95% confidence

intervals by gender and ethnicity

0.40

0.42

0.44

0.46

0.48

0.50

0.52

11

-13

y

14

-16

y

21

-23

y

11

-13

y

14

-16

y

21

-23

y

11

-13

y

14

-16

y

21

-23

y

11

-13

y

14

-16

y

21

-23

y

11

-13

y

14

-16

y

21

-23

y

11

-13

y

14

-16

y

21

-23

y

Whites UK BC BA Indian PB Others

Wai

st h

eig

ht

rati

o

11

-13

y

14

-16

y

21

-23

y

11

-13

y

14

-16

y

21

-23

y

11

-13

y

14

-16

y

21

-23

y

11

-13

y

14

-16

y

21

-23

y

11

-13

y

14

-16

y

21

-23

y

11

-13

y

14

-16

y

21

-23

y

Whites UK BC BA Indian PB Others

Males Females

(BC – Black Caribbean, BA – Black African, PB – Pakistani/Bangladeshi)

Harding S et al.. Cruickshank JK – in preparation

Page 43: Ancestry differences in hypertension risk, progression and

The influence of waist to height ratio at 11-13y and 21-23y on bio-markers at 21-23y

• Allostatic Load: Score derived at 21-23y using high-risk thresholds defined as below the 25th percentile for HDL cholesterol, and above the 75th percentile for all other biomarkers.

• The thresholds were: systolic, 121.0 mmHg; diastolic, 77 mmHg; BMI, 26.8 kg/m2; waist to height ratio male, 0.89, and female, 0.86; total cholesterol, 4.8 mmol/L; HDL cholesterol, 1.8 mmol/L; HbA1c, 37.0 mmol/mol; C-reactive protein, 0.0 mg/L. Linear Regression Model: regression coefficients adjusted for gender, ethnicity, waist to height ratio.

** HbA1c, HDL Cholesterol and Total cholesterol: Linear Regression Model. Regression coefficients adjusted for ethnicity and waist to height ratio at 11-13y and 21-23y.

Allostatic Load HbA1c HDL Cholesterol Total Cholesterol

Coef 95% CI Coef 95% CI Coef 95% CI Coef 95% CI

Males

Waist to height ratio, 11-13y 7.69*** (4.27,11.11) 3.24 (-7.44,13.93) 1.31** (0.49,2.14) -1.47 (-3.55,0.60)

Waist to height ratio, 21-23y - - 0.27 (-9.66,10.21) -1.79*** (-2.55,-1.03) 4.51*** (2.59,6.43)

Females

Waist to height ratio, 11-13y 11.36*** (7.76,17.95) 22.54** (6.36,38.72) 0.25 (-0.90,1.40) -1.95 (-4.31,0.40)

Waist to height ratio, 21-23y - - -0.85 (-11.98,10.28) -1.24** (-2.00,-0.47) 2.93*** (1.31,4.55)

*p<0.05, **p<0.01, ***p<0.001