Abstract 4366848: Advance-HTN Trial Participant Characteristics Associated with a Failure to be Randomized

Background: Placebo or sham-controlled clinical trials of new hypertension therapies often use run-in periods to assess participant adherence to background antihypertensive (AHT) therapy, assess participant response to a standardized AHT regimen and/or measure out of office blood pressure (BP) prior to randomization to ensure true uncontrolled hypertension. When these factors are assessed a large proportion of participants are excluded prior to randomization which can negatively impact a trial’s ability to enroll in an efficient manner. The Advance-HTN trial demonstrated the BP lowering efficacy of lorundrostat compared with placebo. Participants taking 2 to 5 AHT medications were enrolled and then switched to a standardized AHT regimen for a 3-week run-in period. The standardized regimen included olmesartan, a diuretic (hydrochlorothiazide or indapamide) and in certain cases amlodipine (if participant was taking ≥3 medications at enrollment). Participants were subsequently randomized if BP was uncontrolled when 24-hour ambulatory BP was measured while taking the standardized regimen. Objective: This post hoc analysis aims to understand which Advance-HTN participant characteristics were associated with a failure to be randomized among participants that were enrolled and participated in the standardized AHT regimen run-in period. Methods: Multivariable logistic regression was performed comparing participants who took part in the run-in period and failed to be randomized with those participants that were successfully randomized. Candidate predictors included participant demographics, labs and medication use (Table). Results: Of the 926 participants who started the standardized AHT regimen 285 proceeded to randomization. In the multivariable model, diabetes was associated with lower odds of failure to be randomized (OR: 0.61, 95% CI: 0.45-0.81, p < 0.001). Similarly, higher office systolic BP at screening was associated with lower odds of failure to be randomized (OR: 0.83 per 10 mmHg increase, 95% CI: 0.74-0.93, p < 0.001). In contrast, use of indapamide in the standardized AHT regimen was associated with greater odds of failing to be randomized (OR: 1.39, 95% CI: 1.03-1.87, p = 0.03). Conclusion: Advance-HTN participant characteristics associated with a failure to be randomized were identified. These data may inform future hypertension trial design including participant selection strategies to maximize enrollment of patients with true uncontrolled hypertension

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Circulation
Published
2025-11-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1161/circ.152.suppl_3.4366848
Primary Topic
Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Abstract 4366848: Advance-HTN Trial Participant Characteristics Associated with a Failure to be Randomized

David Rodman, Ashish Sarraju, Vaidehi Mendpara, Kathy Wolski et al.
Circulation
Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
article

Abstract 4366848: Advance-HTN Trial Participant Characteristics Associated with a Failure to be Randomized

David Rodman, Ashish Sarraju, Vaidehi Mendpara, Kathy Wolski, Luke J. Laffin, Julie St. John, Steven E. Nissen
article en

Abstract

Background: Placebo or sham-controlled clinical trials of new hypertension therapies often use run-in periods to assess participant adherence to background antihypertensive (AHT) therapy, assess participant response to a standardized AHT regimen and/or measure out of office blood pressure (BP) prior to randomization to ensure true uncontrolled hypertension. When these factors are assessed a large proportion of participants are excluded prior to randomization which can negatively impact a trial’s ability to enroll in an efficient manner. The Advance-HTN trial demonstrated the BP lowering efficacy of lorundrostat compared with placebo. Participants taking 2 to 5 AHT medications were enrolled and then switched to a standardized AHT regimen for a 3-week run-in period. The standardized regimen included olmesartan, a diuretic (hydrochlorothiazide or indapamide) and in certain cases amlodipine (if participant was taking ≥3 medications at enrollment). Participants were subsequently randomized if BP was uncontrolled when 24-hour ambulatory BP was measured while taking the standardized regimen. Objective: This post hoc analysis aims to understand which Advance-HTN participant characteristics were associated with a failure to be randomized among participants that were enrolled and participated in the standardized AHT regimen run-in period. Methods: Multivariable logistic regression was performed comparing participants who took part in the run-in period and failed to be randomized with those participants that were successfully randomized. Candidate predictors included participant demographics, labs and medication use (Table). Results: Of the 926 participants who started the standardized AHT regimen 285 proceeded to randomization. In the multivariable model, diabetes was associated with lower odds of failure to be randomized (OR: 0.61, 95% CI: 0.45-0.81, p < 0.001). Similarly, higher office systolic BP at screening was associated with lower odds of failure to be randomized (OR: 0.83 per 10 mmHg increase, 95% CI: 0.74-0.93, p < 0.001). In contrast, use of indapamide in the standardized AHT regimen was associated with greater odds of failing to be randomized (OR: 1.39, 95% CI: 1.03-1.87, p = 0.03). Conclusion: Advance-HTN participant characteristics associated with a failure to be randomized were identified. These data may inform future hypertension trial design including participant selection strategies to maximize enrollment of patients with true uncontrolled hypertension

CirculationVol. 152(Suppl_3)
Cleveland Clinic (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 51%
Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.