Comparative effectiveness of antihypertensive drug classes in patients with gastrointestinal malignancy and incident hypertension.
Abstract
e16359 Background: Over one-third of patients with cancer require antihypertensive therapy. Emerging evidence suggests renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors may improve survival in oncology populations, and the 2023 AHA Scientific Statement on Cancer Therapy-Related Hypertension highlights optimal antihypertensive selection as a key evidence gap. We compared outcomes between RAS and non-RAS antihypertensives, and between ACE inhibitors (ACEi) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB), in patients with gastrointestinal malignancy and incident hypertension. Methods: Using the TriNetX Research Network (2017-2025), we conducted a retrospective cohort study with a new-user, active-comparator design and propensity score matching. Adults with incident gastrointestinal malignancy (ICD-10 C15-C25) who developed new-onset hypertension requiring antihypertensive initiation within 90 days of cancer diagnosis were included. ACEi/ARB initiators were compared with beta-blocker or calcium channel blocker (BB/CCB) initiators. Cox regression evaluated outcomes starting 91 days post-index. Sensitivity analyses compared ARB with ACEi, BB, and CCB. Results: After matching, 8,440 patient pairs were analyzed. ACEi/ARB initiation was associated with lower all-cause mortality (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.77-0.90; p < 0.001) and reduced acute kidney injury (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.70-0.92; p = 0.002). ARB use showed consistent mortality reductions versus ACEi (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.76-0.96), BB (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.66-0.84), and CCB (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.67-0.85). Conclusions: In patients with gastrointestinal malignancy and incident hypertension, RAS inhibitor initiation, particularly ACEi/ARB, was associated with significantly lower mortality and reduced acute kidney injury. These data support preferential first-line use of ACEi/ARB for hypertension management in this population. Summary of primary and sensitivity analyses: Significant outcomes. Comparison N Mortality OR (95% CI) Mortality HR (95% CI) AKI OR (95% CI) AKI HR (95% CI) Thrombosis HR (95% CI) Primary: ACEi/ARB vs BB/CCB 8,440 0.87 (0.80, 0.94)* 0.83 (0.77, 0.90)* 0.86 (0.75, 0.99)* 0.81 (0.70, 0.92)* 0.86 (0.75, 0.98)* Sensitivity 1: ARB vs ACEi 3,622 0.90 (0.79, 1.03) 0.85 (0.76, 0.96)* 1.01 (0.82, 1.25) 0.92 (0.75, 1.13) 0.80 (0.65, 0.99)* Sensitivity 2: ARB vs BB 3,276 0.85 (0.74, 0.97)* 0.74 (0.66, 0.84)* 1.02 (0.81, 1.29) 0.83 (0.67, 1.04) 0.83 (0.66, 1.04) Sensitivity 3: ARB vs CCB 3,901 0.80 (0.70, 0.91)* 0.76 (0.67, 0.85)* 0.89 (0.72, 1.10) 0.81 (0.66, 0.99)* 0.90 (0.72, 1.12) *p < 0.05 (bold text with green shading indicates statistical significance). Abbreviations: OR = odds ratio; HR = hazard ratio; CI = confidence interval; AKI = acute kidney injury; Thrombosis = composite any thrombosis (arterial and venous events combined).
Article Details
Journal Info
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
Authors (8)
Kartik Dapke
Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida, United States
Manaswini Krishnakumar
Saint Vincent Hospital, Worcester, MA
Arankesh Mahadevan
University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT
Akshat Saxena
1Saint Vincent Hospital, Worcester, United States
Samir Ahuja
Saint Vincent Hospital, Worcester, MA
Aditya Khanijo
Saint Vincent Hospital, Worcester, Massachusetts, United States
Susan V. George
Saint Vincent Hospital, Worcester, MA
Aswanth Reddy
10Mercy Hospital, Fort Smith, United States