Increased Mortality Despite Successful Multifactorial Cardiovascular Risk Reduction in Healthy Men: 40-Year Follow-Up of the Helsinki Businessmen Study Intervention Trial
In a 5-year multifactorial risk reduction intervention for healthy men with at least one cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factor, mortality was unexpectedly higher in the intervention than the control group during the first 15-year follow-up. In order to find explanations for the adverse outcome, we have extended mortality follow-up and examined in greater detail baseline characteristics that contributed to total mortality.
Long-term follow-up of a controlled intervention trial.
The Helsinki Businessmen Study Intervention Trial.
Participants and Intervention
The prevention trial between 1974–1980 included 1,222 initially healthy men (born 1919–1934) at high CVD risk, who were randomly allocated into intervention (n=612) and control groups (n=610). The 5-year multifactorial intervention consisted of personal health education and contemporary drug treatments for dyslipidemia and hypertension. In the present analysis we used previously unpublished data on baseline risk factors and lifestyle characteristics.
Main outcome measures
40-year total and cause-specific mortality through linkage to nation-wide death registers.
The study groups were practically identical at baseline in 1974, and the 5-year intervention significantly improved risk factors (body mass index, blood pressure, serum lipids and glucose), and total CVD risk by 46% in the intervention group. Despite this, total mortality has been consistently higher up to 25 years post-trial in the intervention group than the control group, and converging thereafter. Increased mortality risk was driven by CVD and accidental deaths. Of the newly-analysed baseline factors, there was a significant interaction for mortality between intervention group and yearly vacation time (P=0.027): shorter vacation was associated with excess 30-year mortality in the intervention (hazard ratio 1.37, 95% CI 1.03–1.83, P=0.03), but not in the control group (P=0.5). This finding was robust to multivariable adjustments.
After a multifactorial intervention for healthy men with at least one CVD risk factor, there has been an unexpectedly increased mortality in the intervention group. This increase was especially observed in a subgroup characterised by shorter vacation time at baseline. Although this adverse response to personal preventive measures in vulnerable individuals may be characteristic to men of high social status with subclinical CVD, it clearly deserves further investigation.
Key wordsMultifactorial prevention mortality vacation
- 3.Strandberg TE, Salomaa VV, Vanhanen HT, Naukkarinen V, Sarna S, Miettinen TA. Mortality in participants and non-participants of a multifactorial prevention study of cardiovascular diseases: a 28 year follow up of the Helsinki Businessmen Study. Br Heart J 1995;74:449–454.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 7.Anonymous. Should clinical trials carry a health warning? (Editorial) Lancet 1991;338:1495–6.Google Scholar
- 8.Stamler J. Lessons from the Helsinki Multifactorial Primary Prevention Trial. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis 1995;5:1–5.Google Scholar
- 12.Keys A, Aravanis C, Blackburn H, et al. Probability of middle-aged men developing coronary heart disease in five years. Circulation 197245:815–828.Google Scholar
- 14.Carnethon M, Whitsel LP, Franklin BA, et al. American Heart Association Advocacy Coordinating Committee; Council on Epidemiology and Prevention; Council on the Kidney in Cardiovascular Disease; Council on Nutrition, Physical Activity and Metabolism. Worksite wellness programs for cardiovascular disease prevention: a policy statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation 2009;120:1725–41. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.109.192653.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 15.Piepoli MF, Hoes AW, Agewall S, et al; Authors/Task Force Members. European Guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice: The Sixth Joint Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology and Other Societies on Cardiovascular Disease Prevention in Clinical Practice (constituted by representatives of 10 societies and by invited experts) Developed with the special contribution of the European Association for Cardiovascular Prevention & Rehabilitation (EACPR). Eur Heart J 2016;37:2315–81.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 35.Uthman OA, Hartley L, Rees K, Taylor F, Ebrahim S, Clarke A. Multiple risk factor interventions for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in low- and middleincome countries. Cochrane Review 2015; DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011163. pub2Google Scholar
- 36.Ebrahim S, Taylor F, Ward K, Beswick A, Burke M, Davey Smith G. Multiple risk factor interventions for primary prevention of coronary heart disease. Cochrane Review 2011;DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001561.pub3Google Scholar
- 37.Hjermann I, Velve Byre K, Holme I, Leren P. Effect of diet and smoking intervention on the incidence of coronary heart disease. Report from the Oslo study group of a randomised trial in healthy men. Lancet 1981;ii:1303–1310.Google Scholar
- 39.Haskell WL, Alderman EL, Fair JM, et al. Effects of intensive multiple risk factor reduction on coronary atherosclerosis and clinical cardiac events in men and women with coronary artery disease. The Stanford Coronary Risk Intervention Project (SCRIP). Circulation 1994;89:975–990.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 40.The Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial Research Group. Mortality after 16 years for participants randomized to the Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial. Circulation 1996;94:946–951.Google Scholar
- 42.Diabetes Prevention Program Research Group. Reduction in the incidence of type 2 diabetes with lifestyle intervention or metformin. N Engl J Med 2002346:393–403.Google Scholar
- 43.The Look AHEAD Research Group. Cardiovascular effects of intesive lifestyle intervention in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2013;369:145–54.Google Scholar