Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

JNC-7 guidelines: Are they still relevant?

  • Published:
Current Hypertension Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The recommendations of the Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on the Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC 7), published in 2003, are largely relevant today. Lowering blood pressure (BP) to goal in hypertensive patients is of primary importance in reducing cardiovascular risk. Antihypertensive drugs vary in their efficacy to lower BP and can have BP-independent effects on cardiovascular events, as seen especially with regard to preventing heart failure and stroke. Thiazide-type diuretics were recommended as the preferred initial drugs for treatment of hypertension in most patients, and this is still an appropriate recommendation. Several other classes were recommended as next in priority, but β-blockers should now have a lesser role in the management of uncomplicated hypertension. Although a new JNC report would be reassuring to practitioners and should include some changes since JNC 7, I consider most of the recommendations to still be relevant today.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References and Recommended Reading

  1. The ALLHAT Officers and Coordinators for the ALLHAT Collaborative Research Group: Major outcomes in high-risk hypertensive patients randomized to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or calcium channel blocker vs diuretic: the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT). JAMA 2002, 288:2981–2997.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Chobanian AV, Bakris GL, Black HR, et al.: The Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure: the JNC 7 report. JAMA 2003, 289:2560–2571.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. The Sixth Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. Arch Intern Med 1997, 157:2413–2446.

  4. Staessen JA, Fagard R, Thijs L, et al.: Randomised double-blind comparison of placebo and active treatment for older patients with isolated systolic hypertension. The Systolic Hypertension in Europe (Syst-Eur) Trial Investigators. Lancet 1997, 350:757–764.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Lewington S, Clarke R, Qizilbash N, et al.: Age-specific relevance of usual blood pressure to vascular mortality: a meta-analysis of individual data for one million adults in 61 prospective studies. Prospective Studies Collaboration. Lancet 2002, 360:1903–1913.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Veterans Administration Cooperative Study Group on Antihypertensive Agents: Effect of treatment on morbidity in hypertension: results in patients with diastolic blood pressure averaging 115–129 mm Hg. JAMA 1967, 202:116–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Veterans Administration Cooperative Study Group on Antihypertensive Agents: Effects of treatment on morbidity in hypertension II. Results in patients with diastolic blood pressure averaging 90 through 114 mm Hg. JAMA 1970, 213:1143–1152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Hansson L, Zanchetti A, Carruthers SG, 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. HOT Study Group. Lancet 1998, 351:1755–1762.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. SHEP Cooperative Research Group: Prevention of stroke by antihypertensive drug treatment in older persons with isolated systolic hypertension: final results of the Systolic Hypertension in the Elderly Program (SHEP). JAMA 1991, 265:3255–3264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. UK Prospective Diabetes Study Group: Tight blood pressure control and risk of macrovascular and microvascular complications in type 2 diabetes: UKPDS 38. BMJ 1998, 317:703–713.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Zanchetti A, Hansson L, Clement D, et al.: Benefits and risks of more intensive blood pressure lowring in hypertensive patients of the HOT study with different risk profiles: does a J-shaped curve exist in smokers? J Hypertens 2003, 21:797–804.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Cushman WC, Grimm RH, Cutler JA, et al.: Rationale and design for the blood pressure intervention of the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) trial. Am J Cardiol 2007, 99[Suppl]:44i–55i.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Rosendorff C, Black HR, Cannon CP, et al.: Treatment of hypertension in the prevention and management of ischemic heart disease: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association Council for High Blood Pressure Research and the Councils on Clinical Cardiology and Epidemiology and Prevention. Circulation 2007, 115:2761–2788.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Advisory Council, Meeting Minutes, October 26, 2005, section VII, BEA Initiatives. Available at: http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/meetings/nhlbac/oct05min.htm#7. Accessed July 15, 2007.

  15. Vasan RS, Larson MG, Leip EP, et al.: Assessment of frequency of progression to hypertension in nonhypertensive participants in the Framingham Heart Study: a cohort study. Lancet 2001, 358:1682–1686.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Vasan RS, Larson MG, Leip EP, et al.: Impact of high-normal blood pressure on the risk of cardiovascular disease. N Engl J Med 2001, 345:1291–1297.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Hsia J, Margolis KL, Eaton CB, et al.: Prehypertension and cardiovascular disease risk in the Women’s Health Initiative. Circulation 2007, 115:855–860.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Julius S, Nesbitt SD, Egan BM, et al.: Feasibility of treating prehypertension with an angiotensin-receptor blocker. N Engl J Med 2006, 354:1685–1697.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Greenlund KJ, Croft JB, Mensah GA: Prevalence of heart disease and stroke risk factors in persons with prehypertension in the United States, 1999–2000. Arch Intern Med 2004, 164:2113–2118.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Giles TD: Blood pressure goals for hypertension guidelines: what is wrong with “optimal”? J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich) 2006, 8:835–839.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Elliott WJ, Izzo JL Jr: Device-guided breathing to lower blood pressure: case report and clinical overview. Med Gen Med 2006, 8:23.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Logtenberg SJ, Kleefstra N, Houweling ST, et al.: Effect of device-guided breathing exercises on blood pressure in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a randomized controlled trial. J Hypertens 2007, 25:241–246.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Taubert D, Roesen R, Lehmann C, et al.: Effects of low habitual cocoa intake on blood pressure and bioactive nitric oxide: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2007, 298:49–60.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Braunwald E, Domanski MJ, Fowler SE, et al.: Angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibition in stable coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med 2004, 351:2058–2068.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Cushman WC, Ford CE, Cutler JA, et al.: Success and predictors of blood pressure control in diverse North American settings: the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT). J Clin Hypertens 2002, 4:393–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Psaty BM, Smith NL, Siscovick DS, et al.: Health outcomes associated with antihypertensive therapies used as first-line agents: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA 1997, 277:739–745.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Psaty BM, Lumley T, Furberg CD, et al.: Health outcomes associated with various antihypertensive therapies used as first-line agents: a network meta-analysis. JAMA 2003, 289:2534–2544.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. ALLHAT Officers and Coordinators for the ALLHAT Collaborative Research Group: Diuretic versus alpha-blocker as first-step antihypertensive therapy. Final results from the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT). Hypertension 2003, 42:239–246.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Davis BR, Piller LB, Cutler JA, et al.: Role of diuretics in the prevention of heart failure: the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial. Circulation 2006, 113:2201–2210.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Einhorn PT, Davis BR, Massie BM, et al.: The Antihypertensive and Lipid Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT) Heart Failure Validation Study: Diagnosis and prognosis. Am Heart J 2007, 153:42–53.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Barzilay JI, Davis BR, Cutler JA, et al.: Fasting glucose levels and incident diabetes mellitus in older nondiabetic adults randomized to receive 3 different classes of antihypertensive treatment: a report from the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT). Arch Intern Med 2006, 166:2191–2201.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. The ACCORD Study Group: Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) Trial: design and methods. Am J Cardiol 2007, 99:S21–33.

    Google Scholar 

  33. DREAM Trial Investigators—Bosch J, Yusuf S, Gerstein HC, et al.: Effect of ramipril on the incidence of diabetes. N Engl J Med 2006, 355:1551–1562.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Lindholm LH, Carlberg B, Samuelsson O: Should beta blockers remain first choice in the treatment of primary hypertension? A meta-analysis. Lancet 2005, 366:1545–1553.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Preventive Medicine Section (111Q), Veterans Affairs Medical Center, University of Tennessee College of Medicine, 1030 Jefferson Ave, Memphis, TN, 38104, USA

    William C. Cushman

Authors
  1. William C. Cushman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to William C. Cushman.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cushman, W.C. JNC-7 guidelines: Are they still relevant?. Current Science Inc 9, 380–386 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11906-007-0070-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11906-007-0070-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation