Effect of eprosartan-based antihypertensive therapy on coronary heart disease risk assessed by Framingham methodology in Canadian patients with diabetes: results of the POWER survey

Figures & data

Table 1 Demographic characteristics of the Canadian type 2 diabetes ITT population (N=195) and overall ITT cohort (N=1,114)

Demographic characteristic	ITT diabetic population	Overall ITT population
Sex	n=192	n=1,100
Male	93 (48.4)	574 (52.2)
Female	99 (51.6)	526 (47.8)
Age (years)	n=195	n=1,114
Mean ± SD	63.1±11	59.2±12.5
<50	22 (11.3)	244 (21.9)
50–59	52 (26.7)	333 (29.9)
60–69	64 (32.8)	295 (26.5)
≥70	57 (29.2)	242 (21.7)
Height (cm)	n=172	n=982
Mean ± SD	162.5±12.3	164.6±12.4
Weight (kg)	n=187	n=1,078
Mean ± SD	87.3±17.8	81.6±18.3
Body mass index (kg/m^2)	n=165	n=953
Mean ± SD	32.7±7.3	30.1±6.6
Waist circumference (cm)	n=157	n=950
Mean ± SD	102.0±12.6	98.3±14.9
Arterial blood pressure	n=195	n=1,114
Systolic (mmHg); mean ± SD	153.4±12.4	155.8±12.1
Diastolic (mmHg); mean ± SD	86.8±11.3	90.36±9.9
Pulse pressure (mmHg); mean ± SD	66.6±15	65.46±14.2
Race	n=189	n=1,097
White	100 (52.9)	650 (59.3)
Black of African heritage or African	51 (27)	286 (26.1)
American
Asian	24 (12.7)	104 (9.5)
American Indian or Alaska American	8 (4.2)	43 (3.9)
Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander	2 (1.1)	6 (0.7)
Other	4 (2.1)	8 (0.1)
Smoker status	n=195	n=1,114
Yes	27 (13.8)	185 (16.6)
No	168 (86.2)	929 (83.4)
Total cholesterol:high-density	n=106	n=660
lipoprotein cholesterol ratio
Mean ± SD	1.6±0.53	3.5±0.9

Notes: Sample sizes vary due to lack of recorded data. Data are n (%) unless otherwise stated.

Abbreviations: ITT, intention-to-treat; SD, standard deviation.

Figure 1 Patient disposition, illustrating the derivation of the ITTDP and the Framingham-eligible subsets.

Abbreviations: ITTDP, intention-to-treat diabetic population; HDL, high-density lipoprotein; SBP, systolic blood pressure.

Table 2 Absolute mean change (± standard deviation) of calculated Framingham coronary heart disease risk using formulae, stratified by age

Calculated values of Framingham risk using formulae	<50 years (N=17)	50–59 years (N=45)	60–69 years (N=42)	70 years (N=27)	Overall (N=131)
Baseline	6.9±3.9 (n=8)	8.4±3.9 (n=22)	11.8±8.2 (n=20)	12.4±11.1 (n=16)	10.2±7.6 (n=66)
6 months	5.5±3.7 (n=6)	5.4±2.6 (n=16)	8.7±5.6 (n=17)	12.2±7.9 (n=10)	7.9±5.7 (n=49)
Difference (6 months to baseline)	−1.4±1.5	−3.1±2.6	−2.6±3.8	−4.1±4.9	−2.9±3.5*

Note:

* P=0.0129 by analysis of variance.

Table 3 Cross-analyses of chart-derived Framingham risk distributions during the study

	V3
	<3%	3%–15%	15%–30%	≥30%	Total
V1
<3%	10 (8.8)	0 (0)	0 (0)	0 (0)	10 (8.8)
3%–15%	12 (10.5)	40 (35.1)	3 (2.6)	0 (0)	55 (48.2)
15%–30%	0 (0)	12 (10.5)	31 (27.2)	0 (0)	43 (37.7)
≥30%	0 (0)	0 (0)	5 (4.4)	1 (0.9)	6 (5.3)
Total	22 (19.3)	52 (45.6)	39 (34.2)	1 (0.9)	114 (100)

Notes: Green = shift to lower risk band; red = shift to higher risk band; blue = no change. V1 = baseline; V3 = last visit. The values shown represent numbers of patients, with percentages in parentheses.

Table 4 Cross-analyses of formula-derived Framingham risk distributions during the study

	V3
	<3%	3%–15%	15%–30%	≥30%	Total
V1
<3%	10 (22.7)	3 (6.8)	0 (0)	0 (0)	13 (29.5)
3%–15%	6 (13.6)	17 (38.6)	2 (4.5)	0 (0)	25 (56.8)
15%–30%	0 (0)	3 (6.8)	3 (6.8)	0 (0)	6 (13.6)
≥30%	0 (0)	0 (0)	0 (0)	0 (0)	0 (0)
Total	16 (36.4)	23 (52.3)	5 (11.4)	0 (0)	44 (100)

Notes: Green = shift to lower risk band; red = shift to higher risk band; blue = no change. V1 = baseline; V3 = last visit. The values shown represent numbers of patients, with percentages in parentheses.