Calcium Channel Blockers And Vitamin D

The role of calcium in the prevention and treatment of hypertension is controversial, despite decades of study. An overall healthy dietary pattern that is rich in calcium from low-fat dairy products, fruits, and vegetables has been shown to lower blood pressure substantially compared with a typical diet higher in fat and sodium and lower in calcium, magnesium, potassium, and fiber.^1–4 However, meta-analyses^5–12 and systematic reviews¹³ of the epidemiological and clinical trial evidence regarding dietary intake of calcium as a single nutrient have generally concluded that the effect on systolic blood pressure (BP) lowering is small, on the order of 2 mm Hg. The effect on diastolic BP, if any, may be even smaller. Nevertheless, at a population level, sustained BP lowering of this degree by calcium supplementation could have important benefits on cardiovascular disease.

Although the relation between vitamin D and BP has been less studied, 2 small, short-term intervention studies suggest that vitamin D, either as ultraviolet light exposure or as an oral supplement, may lower BP.^14,15 In addition, the risk of incident hypertension was lower in a 4-year prospective study among men and women with higher plasma levels of 25(OH) vitamin D.¹⁶ Animal studies have also shown that oral supplementation with vitamin D lowered BP in hypertensive rats; in this model vitamin D inhibited renin expression in the juxtaglomerular apparatus and inhibited smooth muscle proliferation.^17–20

Most individual trials of calcium supplementation (with or without vitamin D) have been relatively small, short in duration, or both. Meta-analyses and reviews have called for high-quality, long-term studies including subgroups that might have greater BP lowering from calcium supplementation, such as individuals with elevated BP or hypertension (especially low renin or "salt-sensitive" hypertension), black subjects, or those with habitual low intake of calcium or vitamin D.^21–24 The Women's Health Initiative (WHI) included a methodologically rigorous randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of dietary supplementation with calcium plus vitamin D supplementation and long-term follow-up. We examined the effect on BP and the incidence of hypertension in this study of 36 282 postmenopausal women. Because of the large size of the trial, we were able to examine subgroups that might have differing degrees of benefit.

Methods

Study Population and Intervention

Between 1993 and 1998, postmenopausal women aged 50 to 79 years were recruited at 40 US clinical centers into the WHI randomized trials assessing the risks and benefits of hormone therapy and dietary modification.²⁵ Participants enrolled in one or both trials were further invited to join the calcium plus vitamin D (CaD) trial at their first (n=33 070) or second (n=3212) annual follow-up visit.²⁶ Women with <3 years of predicted survival, a history of kidney stone or hypercalcemia, current oral corticosteroid use, or current calcitriol use were excluded. The primary outcome for the CaD intervention trial was incident hip fracture, and the secondary outcome was colorectal cancer. Results of these analyses have been published.^27,28 The study protocol was approved by the institutional review board at each participating institution, and written informed consent was granted by each participant before the random assignment into the CaD trial.

Participants were randomly assigned in a double-blind fashion to receive 1000 mg of elemental calcium plus 400 IU of vitamin D3 daily or placebo.²⁶ Each active tablet provided 500 mg of calcium (as calcium carbonate) and 200 IU of vitamin D3 (provided by GlaxoSmithKline). Participants were instructed to take 2 tablets daily, preferably in divided doses with meals. Women in both the active supplement and placebo groups were allowed to continue their own open-label use of calcium and vitamin D supplements as long as nonstudy use of vitamin D did not exceed 600 IU daily. The upper limit of nonstudy vitamin D intake was raised to 1000 IU after the Institute of Medicine released its report on the tolerable upper limits of vitamin D intake.²⁹ Adherence to study medication was assessed by weighing returned bottles.

BP Measurement and Ascertainment of Hypertension

BP was measured by certified staff using standardized procedures and instruments, in the right arm, with a conventional mercury sphygmomanometer and an appropriately sized cuff, after the participant was seated and resting for 5 minutes.³⁰ Two measurements, obtained ≥30 seconds apart, were performed at the WHI enrollment visit and at each subsequent annual visit, including the CaD enrollment visit. The average of the 2 measurements was used for analyses. At enrollment, participants were asked whether they had been diagnosed by a physician with high BP or hypertension and whether they were taking medications for hypertension. Then, at each semiannual contact, participants were asked, "Since the date given on the front of this form, has a doctor prescribed any of the following pills or treatments?" The choices included "pills for hypertension." Medication inventories were conducted at WHI enrollment, and at the first, third, sixth, and ninth annual visits. The product or generic name of the medications on the label was entered into the study database and matched to the corresponding item in a pharmacy database (Master Drug Data Base, Medi-Span). Drugs from the following classes were considered to be antihypertensive agents: angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, β-blockers, calcium channel blockers, diuretics, centrally acting antihypertensive agents, vasodilators, and combinations of these medications. At enrollment in the WHI study, 94% of women with self-reported hypertension treatment had an antihypertensive agent in the baseline drug inventory, and 79% with incident self-reported hypertension treatment during the first year of the trial brought an antihypertensive medication to the year 1 drug inventory.

Covariates

Demographic and health history data were self-reported at WHI baseline. Dietary data were collected using a validated food frequency questionnaire.³¹ Total calcium and vitamin D intakes included both dietary and supplement sources determined from the medication and supplement inventory. Metabolic equivalent task scores were calculated from the frequency and duration of recreational physical activity.³² Baseline 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels were measured using the DiaSorin Liaison chemiluminescent immunoassay system in a subset of CaD trial participants as part of nested case-control studies examining fractures, breast cancer, and colorectal cancer.^27,28 Only participants selected as control subjects were included in these biomarker analyses (n=2029).

Statistical Methods

Of 36 282 postmenopausal women enrolled in the CaD trial, 36 189 had either a systolic or diastolic BP measurement at random assignment. The primary outcome measure was BP change (annual BP measurements collected through 7 years of follow-up minus the BP at the CaD randomization visit). All of the participants with ≥1 BP change measurement were included in the intent-to-treat analysis using linear repeated-measures regression modeling with an unstructured covariance matrix (using SAS PROC MIXED 9.1, SAS Institute). Repeated-measures regression allows for correlations among responses within an individual and allows for missing response data. This procedure does not impute missing data or carry the last observation forward but allows the inclusion of available data from individuals with missing responses by using a maximum likelihood approach that gives valid results under missing-at-random assumptions. Plots of longitudinal data are based on fitted means from these models where both treatment assignment and time are modeled as class variables, and treatment effect is allowed to vary over time (saturated model).

The effect of treatment on incident hypertension was examined using Cox proportional hazards models stratified by age and randomization status for other WHI trials. Incident hypertension was defined as self-report of medication prescribed for hypertension or any BP ≥140/90 mm Hg during 7 years of follow-up among 17 122 women who did not have hypertension at CaD enrollment (no self-report of hypertension treatment, no antihypertensive medications in inventory, and BP at all visits <140/90 mm Hg before random assignment). We also examined the effect of treatment on incident prehypertension (≥1 visit with BP 120 to 139/80 to 89 mm Hg with no self-report of medication prescribed for hypertension) or hypertension during follow-up among 9416 normotensive women at CaD enrollment (no self-report of hypertension treatment, no antihypertensive medications in inventory, and BP <120/80 mm Hg at all prerandomization visits). For all of the analyses of incident hypertension, women were considered at risk from entry into the CaD trial until the date at which hypertension was determined or until the last date during the follow-up period that outcome data were available. Women who were normotensive at CaD enrollment were considered at risk for prehypertension or hypertension from date of entry into the CaD trial until the first annual visit with BP ≥120/80 mm Hg, a self-report of medication prescribed for hypertension, or the last date that outcome data were available.

To examine the effect of nonadherence to the active CaD supplements or placebo, sensitivity analyses were conducted in which participants were censored after their first visit at which nonadherence was detected, defined as use of <80% of the study pills.

To assess whether the effect of CaD supplementation on BP and incident hypertension varied according to baseline risk factors, the same models were extended, and formal tests of interactions were performed. These factors included demographic characteristics; other risk factors for hypertension (baseline BP, presence of hypertension, body mass index, and physical activity); baseline intake of sodium, calcium, and vitamin D; and randomization status in the hormone therapy and dietary modification trials. Because 16 interactions with baseline characteristics were investigated, chance alone would be expected to produce ≈1 statistically significant interaction test at the 0.05 level of significance.

Results

Baseline Characteristics, Retention, and Adherence

Between 1995 and 2000, 36 282 women were randomly assigned into the CaD trial: 18 176 were assigned to the active CaD supplementation and 18 106 to placebo. Mean (SD) follow-up time was 7.0 years (1.4 years). Participant characteristics, described in detail in Table 1, did not differ by CaD treatment assignment. The mean age at enrollment in the WHI Trial of women included in this study was 62±7 years; 83% described themselves as non-Hispanic white, 9% black, 4% Hispanic, <1% American Indian, and 2% Asian/Pacific Islander. Mean BP was 126/75 mm Hg, and 46% of the participants had evidence of hypertension (28% with self-reported antihypertensive treatment and 18% with ≥1 visit BP ≥140/90 mm Hg).

**Table 1. Characteristics of the Participants in the CaD Trial (n=36 282) at the Time of WHI Screening, According to Randomly Assigned Group**
Characteristic	CaD (N=18 176)		Placebo (N=18 106)		P ^*
Characteristic	N	%	N	%	P ^*
Age at screening, y
50 to 59	6726	37.00	6696	36.98	0.99
60 to 69	8276	45.53	8243	45.53
70 to 79	3174	17.46	3167	17.49
Race/ethnicity
White	15 047	82.78	15 106	83.43	0.35
Black	1682	9.25	1635	9.03
Hispanic	789	4.34	718	3.97
Asian or Pacific Islander	369	2.03	353	1.95
Other/unknown	289	1.59	294	1.62
Education
High school diploma or less	4286	23.74	4289	23.84	0.94
Some school after high school	7216	39.96	7156	39.78
College degree or higher	6555	36.30	6543	36.37
Blood pressure, mm Hg^†
<120/80	6283	34.70	6271	34.74	0.41
120 to 139/80 to 89	7987	44.11	7851	43.50
140 to 159/90 to 99	3105	17.15	3209	17.78
≥160/100	730	4.03	718	3.98
Hypertensive status^†
Not hypertensive	9845	54.16	9768	53.95	0.47
Treated with medications for hypertension by self-report	5137	28.26	5068	27.99
Blood pressure ≥140/90, not being treated	3194	17.57	3270	18.06
Body mass index, kg/m² ^†
<25	4974	27.57	5117	28.47	0.16
25 to <30	6409	35.52	6327	35.20
≥30	6658	36.90	6531	36.33
Physical activity, MET h/wk
<3.00	5517	33.34	5478	33.30	0.84
3.00 to <11.75	5463	33.02	5477	33.30
≥11.75	5566	33.64	5493	33.40
Smoking
Never smoked	9325	51.85	9428	52.62	0.31
Past smoker	7255	40.34	7133	39.81
Current smoker	1405	7.81	1356	7.57
Alcohol intake, drinks per week
None or <1	11 447	63.45	11 378	63.27	0.90
1 to 6	4683	25.96	4706	26.17
≥7	1910	10.59	1900	10.56
(Continued)

**Table 1. Continued**
Characteristic	CaD (N=18 176)		Placebo (N=18 106)		P ^*
Characteristic	N	%	N	%	P ^*
BMI indicates body mass index (weight in kilograms divided by the square of height in meters); MET, metabolic equivalent.
*Data are from the χ² test of association.
†Data are from randomization into the CaD trial.
‡Data are from diet and supplements.
§Data are limited to CaD trial participants with available measurements, who were control subjects in nested case-control studies examining fractures, breast cancer, and colorectal cancer.
Total calcium intake, mg/d^‡
<600	3554	19.94	3447	19.42	0.47
600 to 799	2550	14.31	2556	14.40
800 to 1199	4715	26.46	4655	26.22
≥1200	7002	39.29	7095	39.97
Dietary calcium intake, mg/d
<400	2406	13.50	2378	13.39	0.84
400 to 599	3847	21.59	3776	21.27
600 to 1199	8556	48.01	8558	48.21
≥1200	3012	16.90	3041	17.13
Total vitamin D intake, IU/d^‡
<200	6827	38.31	6671	37.58	0.35
200 to 399	3379	18.96	3423	19.28
≥400	7615	42.73	7659	43.14
Dietary vitamin D, IU/d
<200	12 327	69.17	12 243	68.96	0.67
≥200	5494	30.83	5510	31.04
Dietary sodium intake, mg/d
<2040	4456	25.00	4438	25.00	0.60
2040 to 2697	4507	25.29	4386	24.71
2698 to 3250	4433	24.88	4461	25.13
≥3521	4425	24.83	4468	25.17
25 Hydroxyvitamin D level, nmol/L^§
<34.4	254	25.17	253	24.80	0.80
34.4 to 47.6	250	24.78	262	25.69
47.7 to 64.6	246	24.38	260	25.49
≥64.7	259	25.67	245	24.02
Diet modification trial assignment
Not randomized	5582	30.71	5490	30.32	0.30
Intervention	4767	26.23	4878	26.94
Comparison	7827	43.06	7738	42.74
Hormone therapy trial assignment
Not randomized	10 122	55.69	10 071	55.62	0.80
Estrogen+progestin active	2508	13.80	2535	14.00
Estrogen+progestin placebo	2475	13.62	2395	13.23
Estrogen-alone active	1531	8.42	1543	8.52
Estrogen-alone placebo	1540	8.47	1562	8.63

Mean (SD) dietary calcium intake was 825 mg/d (438 mg/d), total calcium intake was 1150 mg/d (656 mg/d), dietary vitamin D intake was 175 IU/d (117 IU/d), and mean total vitamin D intake was 367 IU/d (266 IU/d). The mean intake of dairy products was 1.5 servings per day, and 52% of the participants reported the use of calcium supplements. At CaD enrollment, 40% of women met the current recommendation for 1200 mg/d of calcium intake from supplements and diet combined.

At the termination of the trial, 1551 participants (4.3%) had died, and 2.7% percent had withdrawn or been lost to follow-up. In year 1, the proportion taking ≥80% of study medication was 60% overall and remained stable through year 7, ranging between 56% and 63%, with small differences between treatment groups. The mean dose of open-label supplemental calcium increased by <100 mg/d during the trial from 325 mg/d at enrollment and was similar across both treatment groups.

BP Change

From baseline to the end of follow-up, systolic BP declined by ≈1 mm Hg during follow-up, whereas diastolic BP declined by ≈4 mm Hg. There was no difference in the change in either systolic BP (Figure 1A) or diastolic BP (Figure 1B) between women randomly assigned to the active versus placebo CaD supplements. In sensitivity analyses accounting for nonadherence, the results were similar (data not shown). The overall mean difference in change in systolic BP was 0.22 mm Hg (95% CI: −0.05 to 0.49 mm Hg) and in diastolic BP was 0.11 mm Hg (95% CI: −0.04 to 0.27 mm Hg), with a positive mean difference indicating that BP was lowered less in the active group than the placebo group, although differences were not significant (Table 2).

**Table 2. Effect of CaD on Mean Difference (95% CI) in BP Change Over the Course of the Trial Overall and in Subgroups for 36 189 Participants With Measured BPs at Random Assignment**
Variable	Systolic BP				Diastolic BP
Variable	Mean Difference^*	Lower	Upper	P ^†	Mean Difference^*	Lower	Upper	P ^†
Overall
Overall effect of CaD	0.22	−0.05	0.49	0.11^‡	0.11	−0.04	0.27	0.14^‡
Subgroup
Age at screening, y				0.95				0.58
50 to 59	0.22	−0.22	0.66		0.10	−0.15	0.36
60 to 69	0.18	−0.21	0.58		0.06	−0.17	0.28
70 to 79	0.31	−0.33	0.95		0.29	−0.08	0.66
Ethnicity				0.79				0.67
White	0.17	−0.12	0.46		0.10	−0.06	0.27
Black	0.46	−0.44	1.35		0.07	−0.45	0.58
Hispanic	0.97	−0.37	2.30		0.22	−0.55	0.98
Asian or Pacific Islander	0.20	−1.68	2.09		0.85	−0.23	1.94
Other/unknown	−0.13	−2.25	2.00		−0.30	−1.52	0.93
Education				0.48				0.18
High school diploma or less	0.50	−0.05	1.05		0.33	0.01	0.64
Some school after high school	0.20	−0.23	0.62		0.14	−0.11	0.39
College degree or higher	0.07	−0.37	0.51		−0.05	−0.31	0.20
BP, mm Hg^§				0.21				0.28
<120/80	−0.02	−0.40	0.36		0.13	−0.11	0.37
120 to 139/80 to 89	0.08	−0.26	0.42		−0.03	−0.25	0.18
≥140/90	0.52	0.03	1.01		0.26	−0.05	0.57
Hypertensive at enrollment				0.09				0.18
No	−0.01	−0.37	0.34		0.01	−0.20	0.21
Yes^∥	0.45	0.06	0.83		0.22	−0.01	0.44
BMI, kg/m² ^§				0.73				0.91
<25	0.31	−0.20	0.81		0.06	−0.23	0.35
25 to <30	0.07	−0.38	0.52		0.15	−0.11	0.40
≥30	0.29	−0.15	0.74		0.12	−0.14	0.37
Physical activity, MET h/wk				0.26			0.68
<3.00	0.61	0.12	1.10		0.26	−0.02	0.55
3.00 to <11.75	0.03	−0.46	0.52		0.09	−0.19	0.37
≥11.75	0.30	−0.18	0.79		0.14	−0.14	0.42
Total calcium intake, mg/d^¶				0.62				0.80
<600	−0.11	−0.73	0.50		−0.01	−0.37	0.34
600 to 799	0.24	−0.47	0.95		0.26	−0.15	0.67
800 to 1199	0.23	−0.29	0.76		0.12	−0.18	0.42
≥1200	0.39	−0.03	0.82		0.09	−0.16	0.33
Dietary calcium, mg/d				0.53				0.96
<400	−0.03	−0.77	0.71		0.08	−0.35	0.50
400 to 599	0.53	−0.05	1.12		0.07	−0.27	0.40
600 to 1199	0.11	−0.28	0.49		0.09	−0.13	0.31
≥1200	0.41	−0.24	1.07		0.19	−0.19	0.56
Total vitamin D intake, IU/d^¶				0.15				0.65
<200	0.21	−0.23	0.65		0.05	−0.21	0.30
200 to <400	0.75	0.13	1.37		0.25	−0.11	0.60
≥400	0.02	−0.39	0.43		0.08	−0.15	0.32
(Continued)

**Table 2. Continued**
Variable	Systolic BP				Diastolic BP
Variable	Mean Difference^*	Lower	Upper	P ^†	Mean Difference^*	Lower	Upper	P ^†
BMI indicates body mass index (weight in kilograms divided by the square of height in meters); MET, metabolic equivalent.
*Positive mean differences between treatment groups indicate that BP was lowered less in the CaD group than in the placebo group during follow-up.
†Data show the test of interaction between CaD assignment and variable of interest, based on linear repeated-measures model with unstructured correlation matrix.
‡Data show the test of main effect of CaD assignment, based on linear repeated-measures model with unstructured correlation matrix.
§Data were at random assignment into the CaD trial.
∥Data include women who self-reported treatment for hypertension or who had ≥1 BP ≥140/90 mm Hg up to the time of CaD random assignment.
¶Data are from diet and supplements.
#Data are limited to CaD trial participants with available measurements who were control subjects in nested case-control studies examining fractures, breast cancer, and colorectal cancer.
Dietary vitamin D, IU/d				0.10				0.11
<200	0.08	−0.25	0.40		0.02	−0.17	0.20
≥200	0.57	0.09	1.06		0.29	0.01	0.57
Dietary sodium intake, mg/d				0.46				0.98
<2040	0.02	−0.52	0.56		0.10	−0.21	0.42
2040 to <2698	0.44	−0.10	0.98		0.16	−0.15	0.47
2698 to <3521	0.00	−0.54	0.54		0.08	−0.23	0.39
≥3521	0.46	−0.08	1.00		0.05	−0.26	0.36
25 Hydroxyvitamin D level, nmol/L^#				0.82				0.26
<34.4	−0.29	−2.64	2.05		0.28	−1.02	1.57
34.4 to 47.6	−1.57	−3.89	0.74		−1.43	−2.71	−0.16
47.7 to 64.6	−0.22	−2.56	2.12		−0.04	−1.33	1.25
≥64.7	−1.10	−3.43	1.23		−0.14	−1.42	1.14
Diet modification trial assignment				0.13				0.32
Intervention	0.58	0.07	1.10		0.30	−0.00	0.59
Comparison	−0.08	−0.48	0.33		0.00	−0.23	0.24
Hormone therapy trial assignment				0.16				0.05
Estrogen+progestin active	1.07	0.34	1.80		0.34	−0.07	0.76
Estrogen+progestin placebo	0.14	−0.60	0.88		0.44	0.02	0.86
Estrogen-alone active	−0.66	−1.60	0.28		−0.21	−0.75	0.32
Estrogen-alone placebo	0.33	−0.61	1.26		0.32	−0.21	0.86

There were no subgroups based on demographic characteristics, hypertension risk factors, calcium/vitamin D intake, or measured serum 25-hydroxy vitamin D that appeared to derive BP benefits from the supplements (Table 2). In addition to our a priori subgroups of approximate tertiles of baseline calcium intake (data not shown), we further subdivided the lowest tertile of the level of intake to attempt to identify a group with extremely low intake (<400 mg/d of dietary calcium [14th percentile] and <600 mg/d of total calcium [20th percentile]) that might benefit from the supplements. In each subgroup, the mean BP differences were very close to 0, and none of the tertile or posthoc subgroups showed statistically significant treatment group differences either individually or overall. There were also no differences in BPs between treatment groups in the subgroup of women with joint intake of dietary calcium <400 IU/d and total vitamin D intake <200 IU/d (data not shown).

Incident Hypertension and Prehypertension

Over a mean follow-up time of 7 years, of 17 122 initially nonhypertensive women, 4429 (2131 assigned to active CaD and 2098 assigned to placebo) reported being prescribed medication for hypertension. Including participants who developed BP ≥140/90 mm Hg in the definition, 6692 women (3377 assigned to active CaD and 3315 assigned to placebo) developed incident hypertension. The risk of hypertension did not differ by CaD treatment assignment (Figure 2). The hazard ratio for incident hypertension, defined as newly prescribed antihypertensive medication or elevated measured BP, was 1.01 (95% CI: 0.96 to 1.06.) In the subsample of participants with measured 25-hydroxy vitamin D, those with lower levels had a higher risk of incident hypertension. No other subgroup interactions were observed.

**Figure 2.** Effect of CaD assignment on risk of developing hypertension in 17 122 participants without hypertension during an average of 7-year follow-up, overall and by baseline subgroups. Hypertension was defined as first self-report of medication prescribed for hypertension or BP of ≥140/90.

Among 9416 normotensive women, prehypertension or hypertension developed during follow-up in 6636. Treatment with CaD did not lower the risk of incident prehypertension or hypertension either overall or in any subgroup (hazard ratio: 1.01; 95% CI: 0.97 to 1.06; data not shown).

Discussion

Calcium plus vitamin D3 supplementation (1000 mg plus 400 IU daily, respectively) did not reduce BP over 7 years of follow-up or the risk of developing prehypertension or hypertension in the WHI CaD randomized, placebo-controlled trial. This null result was robust in intention-to-treat analyses, analyses among adherent participants, and subgroup analyses. With the hazard ratio for incident hypertension of 1.01, comparing supplementation with placebo, and a narrow 95% CI (0.96 to 1.06), a clinically significant benefit for this calcium supplementation with regard to lowering BP or preventing hypertension is unlikely among generally healthy postmenopausal women.

A recent meta-analysis by van Mierlo et al¹⁰ of randomized, controlled trials of calcium supplementation or dietary intervention with a duration of ≥2 weeks included 40 trials and 2492 nonpregnant adults. The duration ranged from 3 to 208 weeks (median: 9.5 weeks) and daily calcium dose from 335 to 2000 mg (median: 1055 mg). The weighted estimate of the effect of calcium supplementation on BP was −2 mm Hg for systolic BP and −1 mm Hg for diastolic BP. The effect on systolic BP (−3 mm Hg) was slightly larger in populations with calcium intake ≤800 mg/d. The BP-lowering effect was substantially larger (−10/5 mm Hg) in 4 trials in Asian populations, composed of 154 subjects, mostly with habitual calcium intakes <600 mg/d. A second recent meta-analysis included only randomized, controlled trials of duration ≥8 weeks in nonpregnant adults with BP ≥140/85 mm Hg. In this study of 13 trials that enrolled 484 subjects, the BP-lowering effect of calcium supplements was similar to that observed in the meta-analysis by van Mierlo et al¹⁰: −2.5 mm Hg for systolic BP and −0.8 mm Hg for diastolic BP.

Several authors have argued that previous clinical trials and meta-analyses masked considerable heterogeneity of the effect of BP response to calcium supplementation.^22,33 The present study did not detect any heterogeneity of effect by age, ethnicity, baseline BP, sodium intake, or calcium/vitamin D intake. The WHI CaD trial enrolled >10-fold the number of participants included in previous meta-analyses of randomized trials of calcium supplementation and included large numbers of women in these potentially more responsive subgroups. The lower bound of the 95% CI overall and in each of these subgroups excludes a BP-lowering effect of calcium supplementation of clinical or public health importance.

The WHI CaD trial intervention included supplementation with 400 IU of vitamin D3. Although data from large prospective studies have not shown that higher vitamin D intake lowered the incidence of hypertension, participants in these studies with plasma levels of 25-hydroxy vitamin D in the deficient range had an increase in the risk of incident hypertension (6-fold in men and 3-fold in women).¹⁶ In the present study, we did not find evidence of lower BP in women who received the active vitamin D3–containing supplement in the lowest quartile of measured 25-hydroxy vitamin D, which fell into the range generally considered deficient. In fact, there was a trend toward an increased risk of hypertension with supplementation in women with lower vitamin D levels. This was not statistically significant for hypertension defined only by antihypertensive treatment prescription. Because of the number of subgroup interactions that we examined, this finding may be attributable to chance.

There are a number of potential limitations to this study. First, only postmenopausal women were included, so our results may not apply to men or younger women, although there is little basis to believe that these populations would respond differently to calcium supplementation.¹⁰ Second, nonadherence may have biased results toward the null; however, sensitivity analyses accounting for this suggested that the study result was robust. Third, the baseline level of dietary calcium intake was higher in the WHI CaD trial than average for older women in the United States (825 versus 660 mg/d), and many women took supplemental calcium and vitamin D at baseline and as open-label supplements during the trial. However, because of the large size of the study, subgroup analyses included substantial numbers of participants with low intake of these nutrients, and a clinically important BP effect was also excluded in these subgroups. Fourth, different results might have been observed with a different formulation or dose of calcium or a higher dose of vitamin D3. The dose of 400 IU of vitamin D in particular has been questioned as being inadequate to reduce the incidence of hip fracture and colorectal cancer, the main end points of the trial.^27,28 The lack of any degree of BP lowering even in subgroups with low intakes of calcium or vitamin D or in women with low vitamin D levels argues against this possibility, however. In addition, meta-analyses have not shown differences in BP lowering with higher (>1000 to 1200 mg/d) versus lower doses of calcium supplements.^34,35 Finally, it is possible that combining calcium with other nutrients or other minerals or simultaneous dietary intervention focused on calcium and vitamin D rich foods might have led to different results. However, a meta-analysis of 3 trials of combinations of calcium, magnesium, and potassium supplementation in 277 participants did not find a significant effect on BP.³⁶ Although 1 meta-analysis suggested the possibility of a trend toward a greater BP-lowering effect of dietary versus nondietary provision of calcium,⁹ unequivocally effective dietary interventions to lower BP have generally included sodium restriction and manipulation of multiple foods groups, macronutrients, and minerals.¹¹

This study also has important strengths. The large size of the study allowed us to examine subgroups that had been hypothesized to have potential for greater benefit: blacks, Asians, hypertensive subjects, women with low habitual intake of calcium, and women with low serum levels of vitamin D. The study methodology was double blind and included adequate concealment of treatment assignment. The study was longer than any trial reported previously, and there was little loss to follow-up.

In conclusion, in postmenopausal women over 7 years of follow-up, calcium plus vitamin D3 supplementation did not reduce either BP or the risk of developing hypertension. There was no subgroup that appeared to benefit from CaD supplementation, and the precision of this study excludes a BP-lowering effect of calcium supplementation of clinical or public health importance.

Perspectives

Calcium supplementation, and, to a lesser extent, vitamin D supplementation have long been hypothesized to lower BP and delay the onset of hypertension. The results of previous calcium supplementation trials have been mixed but in general have shown a small BP–lowering benefit. The WHI CaD supplementation trial provides the most definitive answer to the question: no benefit was seen overall or in any subgroup of postmenopausal women. Although the dose of both supplements was modest, particularly the vitamin D, the lack of benefit in women with low intake of these nutrients or low levels of vitamin D argues against a different result had dosages been higher. Because the WHI trial did not include younger women or men, no firm conclusions can be drawn about the effect of calcium or vitamin D on BP in these groups. This study also did not address the question of BP lowering by dietary calcium intake or dairy foods, but it suggests that short cuts with dietary supplements cannot be substituted for encouraging people to adopt dietary patterns that have been shown to lower BP and decrease the risk of hypertension.

Please see http://hyper.ahajournals.org for a short list of the Women's Health Initiative investigators.

Sources of Funding

The Women's Health Initiative program is funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health, US Department of Health and Human Services, through contracts N01WH22110, 24152, 32100-32102, 32105-32106, 32108-32109, 32111-32113, 32115, 32118-32119, 32122, 42107-42126, 42129-42132, and 44221.

Disclosures

None.

Footnotes

Correspondence to Karen L. Margolis, HealthPartners Research Foundation, Box 1524, Mailstop 21111R, Minneapolis, MN 55440-1524. E-mail [email protected]

References

1 Appel LJ, Moore TJ, Obarzanek E, Vollmer WM, Svetkey LP, Sacks FM, Bray GA, Vogt TM, Cutlet JA, Windhauser MM, Lin PH, Karania N. A clinical trial of the effects of dietary patterns on blood pressure. DASH Collaborative Research Group [see comment]. N Engl J Med . 1997; 336: 1117–1124.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
2 Sacks FM, Svetkey LP, Vollmer WM, Appel LJ, Bray GA, Harsha D, Obarzanek E, Conlin PR, Miller ER, Simons-Morton DG, Karania N, Lin PH. Effects on blood pressure of reduced dietary sodium and the Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension (DASH) diet. DASH-Sodium Collaborative Research Group. N Engl J Med . 2001; 344: 3–10.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
3 Dauchet L, Kesse-Guyot E, Czernichow S, Bertrais S, Estaquio C, Peneau S, Vergnaud AC, Chat-Yung S, Castetbon K, Deschamps V, Brindel P, Hercberg S. Dietary patterns and blood pressure change over 5-y follow-up in the SU.VI.MAX cohort. Am J Clin Nutr . 2007; 85: 1650–1656.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
4 Wang L, Manson JE, Buring JE, Lee IM, Sesso HD. Dietary intake of dairy products, calcium, and vitamin D and the risk of hypertension in middle-aged and older women. Hypertension . 2008; 51: 1073–1079.LinkGoogle Scholar
5 Cappuccio FP, Elliott P, Allender PS, Pryer J, Follman DA, Cutler JA. Epidemiologic association between dietary calcium intake and blood pressure: a meta-analysis of published data. Am J Epidemiol . 1995; 142: 935–945.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
6 Allender PS, Cutler JA, Follmann D, Cappuccio FP, Pryer J, Elliott P. Dietary calcium and blood pressure: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Ann Intern Med . 1996; 124: 825–831.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
7 Birkett NJ. Comments on a meta-analysis of the relation between dietary calcium intake and blood pressure. Am J Epidemiol . 1998; 148: 223–228,discussion 32–33.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
8 Bucher HC, Cook RJ, Guyatt GH, Lang JD, Cook DJ, Hatala R, Hunt DL. Effects of dietary calcium supplementation on blood pressure. A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. JAMA . 1996; 275: 1016–1022.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
9 Griffith LE, Guyatt GH, Cook RJ, Bucher HC, Cook DJ. The influence of dietary and nondietary calcium supplementation on blood pressure: an updated metaanalysis of randomized controlled trials. Am J Hypertens . 1999; 12: 84–92.MedlineGoogle Scholar
10 van Mierlo LA, Arends LR, Streppel MT, Zeegers MP, Kok FJ, Grobbee DE, Geleijnse JM. Blood pressure response to calcium supplementation: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Hum Hypertens . 2006; 20: 571–580.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
11 Dickinson HO, Mason JM, Nicolson DJ, Campbell F, Beyer FR, Cook JV, Williams B, Ford GA. Lifestyle interventions to reduce raised blood pressure: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. J Hypertens . 2006; 24: 215–233.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
12 Dickinson HO, Nicolson DJ, Cook JV, Campbell F, Beyer FR, Ford GA, Mason J. Calcium supplementation for the management of primary hypertension in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev . 2006: CD004639.MedlineGoogle Scholar
13 Trumbo PR, Ellwood KC. Supplemental calcium and risk reduction of hypertension, pregnancy-induced hypertension, and preeclampsia: an evidence-based review by the US Food and Drug Administration. Nutr Rev . 2007; 65: 78–87.MedlineGoogle Scholar
14 Krause R, Buhring M, Hopfenmuller W, Holick MF, Sharma AM. Ultraviolet B and blood pressure. Lancet . 1998; 352: 709–710.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
15 Pfeifer M, Begerow B, Minne HW, Nachtigall D, Hansen C. Effects of a short-term vitamin D(3) and calcium supplementation on blood pressure and parathyroid hormone levels in elderly women. J Clin Endocrinol Metab . 2001; 86: 1633–1637.MedlineGoogle Scholar
16 Forman JP, Giovannucci E, Holmes MD, Bischoff-Ferrari HA, Tworoger SS, Willett WC, Curhan GC. Plasma 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels and risk of incident hypertension. Hypertension . 2007; 49: 1063–1069.LinkGoogle Scholar
17 Li YC, Kong J, Wei M, Chen ZF, Liu SQ, Cao LP. 1,25-Dihydroxyvitamin D(3) is a negative endocrine regulator of the renin-angiotensin system. J Clin Invest . 2002; 110: 229–238.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
18 Carthy EP, Yamashita W, Hsu A, Ooi BS. 1,25-Dihydroxyvitamin D3 and rat vascular smooth muscle cell growth. Hypertension . 1989; 13: 954–959.LinkGoogle Scholar
19 Borges AC, Feres T, Vianna LM, Paiva TB. Cholecalciferol treatment restores the relaxant responses of spontaneously hypertensive rat arteries to bradykinin. Pathophysiology . 2002; 8: 263–268.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
20 Feres T, Vianna LM, Paiva AC, Paiva TB. Effect of treatment with vitamin D3 on the responses of the duodenum of spontaneously hypertensive rats to bradykinin and to potassium. Br J Pharmacol . 1992; 105: 881–884.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
21 McCarron DA. Role of adequate dietary calcium intake in the prevention and management of salt-sensitive hypertension. Am J Clin Nutr . 1997; 65: 712S–716S.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
22 Resnick LM. The role of dietary calcium in hypertension: a hierarchical overview. Am J Hypertens . 1999; 12: 99–112.MedlineGoogle Scholar
23 Geleijnse JM, Grobbee DE. Calcium intake and blood pressure: an update. J Cardiovasc Risk . 2000; 7: 23–29.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
24 Suter PM, Sierro C, Vetter W. Nutritional factors in the control of blood pressure and hypertension. Nutr Clin Care . 2002; 5: 9–19.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
25 Hays J, Hunt J, Hubbell F, Anderson GL, Limacher M, Allen C, Rossouw JE. The Women's Health Initiative recruitment methods and results. Ann Epidemiol . 2003; 13: S18–S77.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
26 Jackson RD, Lacroix AZ, Cauley JA, Mcgowan J. The Women's Health Initiative Calcium-Vitamin D trial: overview and baseline characteristics of participants. Ann Epidemiol . 2003; 13: S98–S106.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
27 Jackson RD, LaCroix AZ, Gass M, Wallace B, Robbins J, Lewis CE, Bassford T, Beresford SA, Black HR, Blanchette P, Bonds DE, Brunner RL, Brzyski RG, Caan B, Cauley JA, Chlebowski RT, Cummings SR, Granek I, Hays J, Heiss G, Hendrix SL, Howard BV, Hsia J, Hubbell FA, Johnson KC, Judd H, Kotchen JM, Kuller LH, Langer RD, Lasser NL, Limacher MC, Ludlam S, Manson JE, Margolis KL, McGowan J, Ockene JK, O'Sullivan MJ, Phillips L, Prentice RL, Sarto GE, Stefanick ML, Van Horn L, Wactawski-Wende J, Whitlock E, Anderson GL, Assaf AR, Barad D. Calcium plus vitamin D supplementation and the risk of fractures. N Engl J Med . 2006; 354: 669–683.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
28 Wactawski-Wende J, Kotchen JM, Anderson GL, Assaf AR, Brunner RL, O'Sullivan MJ, Margolis KL, Ockene JK, Phillips L, Pottern L, Prentice RL, Robbins J, Rohan TE, Sarto GE, Sharma S, Stefanick ML, Van Horn L, Wallace RB, Whitlock E, Bassford T, Beresford SA, Black HR, Bonds DE, Brzyski RG, Caan B, Chlebowski RT, Cochrane B, Garland C, Gass M, Hays J, Heiss G, Hendrix SL, Howard BV, Hsia J, Hubbell FA, Jackson RD, Johnson KC, Judd H, Kooperberg CL, Kuller LH, LaCroix AZ, Lane DS, Langer RD, Lasser NL, Lewis CE, Limacher MC, Manson JE. Calcium plus vitamin D supplementation and the risk of colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med . 2006; 354: 684–696.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
29 Institute of Medicine Standing Committee on the Scientific Evaluation of Dietary Reference Intakes. Dietary Reference Intakes for Calcium, Phosphorous, Magnesium, Vitamin D, and Fluoride. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 1997.Google Scholar
30 Anderson GL, Manson J, Wallace R, Lund B, Hall D, Davis S, Shumaker S, Wang CY, Stein E, Prentice RL. Implementation of the Women's Health Initiative study design. Ann Epidemiol . 2003; 13: S5–S17.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
31 Patterson R, Kristal A, Tinker L, Carter R, Bolton M, Agurs-Collins T. Measurement characteristics of the Women's Health Initiative food frequency questionnaire. Ann Epidemiol . 1999; 9: 178–187.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
32 Ainsworth B, Haskell W, Leon A, Ainsworth BE, Haskell WL, Leon AS, Jacobs DR Jr, Montoye HJ, Sallis JF Jr, Paffenbarger RS Jr. Compendium of physical activities: Classification of energy costs of human physical activities. Med Sci Sports Exerc . 1993; 25: 71–80.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
33 Zemel MB. Calcium modulation of hypertension and obesity: mechanisms and implications. J Am Coll Nutr . 2001; 20: 428S–435S,discussion 40S–42S.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
34 Dickinson HO, Nicolson DJ, Cook JV, Campbell F, Beyer FR, Ford GA, Mason J. Calcium supplementation for the management of primary hypertension in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev . 2006; (2): CD004639.MedlineGoogle Scholar
35 van Mierol LA, Arends LR, Streppel MT, Zeegers MP, Kok FJ, Grobbee DE, Geleijnse JM. Blood pressure response to calcium supplementation: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Hum Hypertens . 2006; 20: 571–580.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
36 Beyer FR, Dickinson HO, Nicolson DJ, Ford GA, Mason J. Combined calcium, magnesium and potassium supplementation for the management of primary hypertension in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev . 2006; (3): CD004805.MedlineGoogle Scholar

Calcium Channel Blockers And Vitamin D

Source: https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.108.114991

Rabu, 01 Desember 2021

Calcium Channel Blockers And Vitamin D