Increasing the Precision of Hypertension Treatment Through Personalized Trials: a Pilot Study
There are substantial differences in the effects of blood pressure (BP) medications in individual patients. Yet, the current standard approach to prescribing BP medications is not personalized.
To determine the feasibility of individualizing the selection of BP medications through pragmatic personalized (i.e., N-of-1) trials.
Series of N-of-1 trials.
Hypertensive adults prescribed none or one BP medication.
Participation in a flexible, open-label personalized trial of two to three BP medications (NCT02744456).
BP was measured twice per day with a validated home BP device. Frequency and severity of side effects were assessed at the end of the day via an electronic questionnaire. Patients’ BP medication preference was assessed after reviewing BP lowering and side effect results with a study clinician. Feasibility was assessed by determining the proportion of patients who adhered to self-assessments. Benefit was assessed by asking patients to rate the helpfulness of participation and whether they would recommend personalized trials to other hypertensive patients.
Of ten patients enrolled, two dropped out prior to initiation, one discovered white coat hypertension through ambulatory BP monitoring, and seven (mean age 58 years, 71% of women) completed personalized trials. All seven were compliant with home BP monitoring and side effect tracking. All seven recommended personalized trials of BP medications to others. Thiazides were preferred by three patients, renin-angiotensin system–blocking agents by two patients, a combination of thiazide and beta-blocker by one patient, and any of three classes by one patient.
Personalized trials of BP medications were feasible and led to improved treatment precision. Heterogeneity of patient preferences and of therapeutic BP response for first-line BP medications can be determined through a personalized trial approach.
KEY WORDShypertension primary care clinical trials disease management health care delivery
The study was funded by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (U01 TR001873). Dr. Kronish and Dr. Davidson received additional support from the National Library of Medicine (R01 LM012836).
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they do not have a conflict of interest.
- 1.Tarn DM, Heritage J, Paterniti DA, Hays RD, Kravitz RL, Wenger NS. Physician communication when prescribing new medications. Arch Intern Med. 2006;166(17):1855–62.Google Scholar
- 2.Gu Q, Burt VL, Dillon CF, Yoon S. Trends in antihypertensive medication use and blood pressure control among United States adults with hypertension: the National Health And Nutrition Examination Survey, 2001 to 2010. Circulation. 2012;126(17):2105–14.Google Scholar
- 3.Dickerson JE, Hingorani AD, Ashby MJ, Palmer CR, Brown MJ. Optimisation of antihypertensive treatment by crossover rotation of four major classes. Lancet. 1999;353(9169):2008–13.Google Scholar
- 4.Deary AJ, Schumann AL, Murfet H, Haydock SF, Foo RS, Brown MJ. Double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover comparison of five classes of antihypertensive drugs. J Hypertens. 2002;20(4):771–7.Google Scholar
- 5.Edmonds D, Huss R, Jeck T, Mengden T, Schubert M, Vetter W. Individualizing antihypertensive therapy with enalapril versus atenolol: the Zurich experience. J Hypertens Suppl. 1990;8(4):S49–52.Google Scholar
- 6.Waeber B, Burnier M, Nussberger J, Brunner HR. Trials using a crossover design and ambulatory blood pressure recordings to determine the efficacy of antihypertensive agents in individual patients. J Hypertens Suppl. 1990;8(4):S37–41.Google Scholar
- 7.Gong Y, McDonough CW, Wang Z, Hou W, Cooper-DeHoff RM, Langaee TY, et al. Hypertension susceptibility loci and blood pressure response to antihypertensives: results from the pharmacogenomic evaluation of antihypertensive responses study. Circ Cardiovasc Genet. 2012;5(6):686–91.Google Scholar
- 8.Cooper-DeHoff RM, Johnson JA. Hypertension pharmacogenomics: in search of personalized treatment approaches. Nat Rev Nephrol. 2016;12(2):110–22.Google Scholar
- 9.Duan N, Kravitz RL, Schmid CH. Single-patient (n-of-1) trials: a pragmatic clinical decision methodology for patient-centered comparative effectiveness research. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013;66(8 Suppl):S21–8.Google Scholar
- 10.Kravitz RL DN, eds, and the DEcIDE Methods Center N-of-1 Guidance Panel (Duan N, Eslick I, Gabler NB, Kaplan HC, Kravitz RL, Larson EB, Pace WD, Schmid CH, Sim I, Vohra S). Design and Implementation of N-of-1 Trials: A User’s Guide. AHRQ Publication No.13(14)-EHC122-EF. Rockville: MD; February 2014.Google Scholar
- 11.Guyatt GH, Haynes RB, Jaeschke RZ, Cook DJ, Green L, Naylor CD, et al. Users’ Guides to the Medical Literature: XXV. Evidence-based medicine: principles for applying the Users’ Guides to patient care. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA. 2000;284(10):1290–6.Google Scholar
- 12.Lillie EO, Patay B, Diamant J, Issell B, Topol EJ, Schork NJ. The n-of-1 clinical trial: the ultimate strategy for individualizing medicine? Per Med. 2011;8(2):161–73.Google Scholar
- 13.Shimbo D, Abdalla M, Falzon L, Townsend RR, Muntner P. Role of Ambulatory and Home Blood Pressure Monitoring in Clinical Practice: A Narrative Review. Ann Intern Med. 2015;163(9):691–700.Google Scholar
- 14.Vohra S, Shamseer L, Sampson M, Bukutu C, Schmid CH, Tate R, et al. CONSORT extension for reporting N-of-1 trials (CENT) 2015 Statement. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016;76:9–17.Google Scholar
- 15.Kravitz RL DN, Vohra S, Li J, the DEcIDE Methods Center N-of-1 Guidance Panel. Introduction to N-of-1 Trials: Indications and Barriers. In: Kravitz RL DN, eds, and the DEcIDE Methods Center N-of-1 Guidance Panel (Duan N, Eslick I, Gabler NB, Kaplan HC, Kravitz RL, Larson EB, Pace WD, Schmid CH, Sim I, Vohra S), ed. Design and Implementation of N-of-1 Trials: A User’s Guide. AHRQ Publication No. 13(14)-EHC122-EF. Rockville, MD: Agency foe Healthcare Research and Quality; 2014:1–11.Google Scholar
- 16.Degner LF, Sloan JA, Venkatesh P. The Control Preferences Scale. Can J Nurs Res. 1997;29(3):21–43.Google Scholar
- 17.Siu AL, Force USPST. Screening for high blood pressure in adults: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2015;163(10):778–86.Google Scholar
- 18.Pickering TG, Miller NH, Ogedegbe G, Krakoff LR, Artinian NT, Goff D, et al. Call to action on use and reimbursement for home blood pressure monitoring: executive summary: a joint scientific statement from the American Heart Association, American Society Of Hypertension, and Preventive Cardiovascular Nurses Association. Hypertension. 2008;52(1):1–9.Google Scholar
- 19.Chatellier G, Day M, Bobrie G, Menard J. Feasibility study of N-of-1 trials with blood pressure self-monitoring in hypertension. Hypertension. 1995;25(2):294–301.Google Scholar
- 20.Estrada CA, Young MJ. Patient preferences for novel therapy: an N-of-1 trial of garlic in the treatment for hypertension. J Gen Intern Med. 1993;8(11):619–21.Google Scholar
- 21.Materson BJ, Reda DJ, Preston RA, Cushman WC, Massie BM, Freis ED, et al. Response to a second single antihypertensive agent used as monotherapy for hypertension after failure of the initial drug. Department of Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study Group on Antihypertensive Agents. Arch Intern Med. 1995;155(16):1757–62.Google Scholar
- 22.Kronish IM, Alcántara C, Duer-Hefele J, St Onge T, Davidson KW, Carter EJ, et al. Patients and primary care providers identify opportunities for personalized (N-of-1) trials in the mobile health era. J Clin Epidemiol. 2017;89:236-237.Google Scholar
- 23.Kravitz RL, Duan N, Niedzinski EJ, Hay MC, Subramanian SK, Weisner TS. What ever happened to N-of-1 trials? Insiders’ perspectives and a look to the future. Milbank Q. 2008;86(4):533–55.Google Scholar
- 24.Kravitz RL, Paterniti DA, Hay MC, Subramanian S, Dean DE, Weisner T, et al. Marketing therapeutic precision: Potential facilitators and barriers to adoption of n-of-1 trials. Contemp Clin Trials. 2009;30(5):436–45.Google Scholar
- 25.Barr C, Marois M, Sim I, Schmid CH, Wilsey B, Ward D, et al. The PREEMPT study - evaluating smartphone-assisted n-of-1 trials in patients with chronic pain: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2015;16:67.Google Scholar