HypertensionPhase 3DCPNCT02185417
Diuretic Comparison Project
A Phase 3 study testing Hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) and Chlorthalidone (CTD) in people with Hypertension, run by VA Office of Research and Development at 70 sites in 2 countries.
Trial summary
The Diuretic Comparison Project aimed to evaluate whether chlorthalidone, as compared with hydrochlorothiazide, would reduce the risk of major nonfatal cardiovascular disease outcomes and non-cancer-related deaths in older patients with hypertension who were receiving hydrochlorothiazide at baseline. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 65 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Hypertension
- What is being tested?
- Hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) and Chlorthalidone (CTD)
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 20,723 participants
- Where
- 70 sitesin 2 countries
- Study dates
- 15 Jun 2016to 29 Dec 2022
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 65 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Older adult
Who may be able to join
- over age 65 years
- receiving hydrochlorothiazide from the VA pharmacy at a daily dose of 25 or 50 mg
- most recent SBP ≥120 mm Hg and no records of SBP <120 mm Hg in the past 90 days
Who cannot join
- impaired decision-making capacity rendering the patient unable to provide informed consent (i.e., if there is any question during the nurse's EHR chart review that the individual does not have the ability to make an autonomous decision or the PCP declines permission to randomize)
- death expected within 6 months (inferred by PCP permission to randomize)
- blood potassium level <3.1 or 3.5 (if taking digoxin) meq/L in the past 90 days
- blood sodium level <130 meq/L in the past 90 days
- enrolled in Medicare Part C (This exclusion only applied if there might be insufficient EHR data available to the study team)
Trial locations and contacts
70 sites in 2 countries.
70 sites in 2 countries
United States69 sites
Albany VA Medical Center Samuel S. Stratton, Albany, NY
Albany, New York, 12208
New Mexico VA Health Care System, Albuquerque, NM
Albuquerque, New Mexico, 87108-5153
Alaska VA Healthcare System, Anchorage, AK
Anchorage, Alaska, 99504
Rocky Mountain Regional VA Medical Center, Aurora, CO
Aurora, Colorado, 80045
Rehabilitation R&D Service, Baltimore, MD
Baltimore, Maryland, 21202
Bay Pines VA Healthcare System, Pay Pines, FL
Bay Pines, Florida, 33744
Edith Nourse Rogers Memorial Veterans Hospital, Bedford, MA
Bedford, Massachusetts, 01730
VA Gulf Coast Veterans Health Care System, Biloxi, MS
Biloxi, Mississippi, 39531
Birmingham VA Medical Center, Birmingham, AL
Birmingham, Alabama, 35233
Boise VA Medical Center, Boise, ID
Boise, Idaho, 83702
VA Boston Healthcare System Jamaica Plain Campus, Jamaica Plain, MA
Boston, Massachusetts, 02130
Ralph H. Johnson VA Medical Center, Charleston, SC
Charleston, South Carolina, 29401-5799
Cincinnati VA Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH
Cincinnati, Ohio, 45220
Louis Stokes VA Medical Center, Cleveland, OH
Cleveland, Ohio, 44106
Coatesville VA Medical Center, Coatesville, PA
Coatesville, Pennsylvania, 19320
Wm. Jennings Bryan Dorn VA Medical Center, Columbia, SC
Columbia, South Carolina, 29209
VA North Texas Health Care System Dallas VA Medical Center, Dallas, TX
Dallas, Texas, 75216
VA Illiana Health Care System, Danville, IL
Danville, Illinois, 61832
Dayton VA Medical Center, Dayton, OH
Dayton, Ohio, 45428
VA Central Iowa Health Care System, Des Moines, IA
Des Moines, Iowa, 50310-5774
Durham VA Medical Center, Durham, NC
Durham, North Carolina, 27705
Fargo VA Healthcare System, Fargo, ND
Fargo, North Dakota, 58102
Veterans Health Care System of the Ozarks, Fayetteville, AR
Fayetteville, Arkansas, 72703
VA Central California Health Care System, Fresno, CA
Fresno, California, 93703
North Florida/South Georgia Veterans Health System, Gainesville, FL
Gainesville, Florida, 32608
Grand Junction VA Medical Center, Grand Junction, CO
Grand Junction, Colorado, 81501
Hampton VA Medical Center, Hampton, VA
Hampton, Virginia, 23667
Edward Hines Jr. VA Hospital, Hines, IL
Hines, Illinois, 60141-5000
VA Pacific Islands Health Care System, Honolulu, HI
Honolulu, Hawaii, 96819-1522
Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center, Houston, TX
Houston, Texas, 77030
Huntington VA Medical Center, Huntington, WV
Huntington, West Virginia, 25704
Richard L. Roudebush VA Medical Center, Indianapolis, IN
Indianapolis, Indiana, 46202-2884
Iowa City VA Health Care System, Iowa City, IA
Iowa City, Iowa, 52246-2208
Kansas City VA Medical Center, Kansas City, MO
Kansas City, Missouri, 64128
Central Arkansas VHS John L. McClellan Memorial Veterans Hospital, Little Rock, AR
Little Rock, Arkansas, 72205-5484
VA Long Beach Healthcare System, Long Beach, CA
Long Beach, California, 90822
William S. Middleton Memorial Veterans Hospital, Madison, WI
Madison, Wisconsin, 53705
Manchester VA Medical Center, Manchester, NH
Manchester, New Hampshire, 03104
Memphis VA Medical Center, Memphis, TN
Memphis, Tennessee, 38104-2127
Memphis VA Medical Center, Memphis, TN
Memphis, Tennessee, 38104
Clement J. Zablocki VA Medical Center, Milwaukee, WI
Milwaukee, Wisconsin, 53295-1000
Minneapolis VA Health Care System, Minneapolis, MN
Minneapolis, Minnesota, 55417-2309
Minneapolis VA Health Care System, Minneapolis, MN
Minneapolis, Minnesota, 55417
Jackson C. Montgomery VA Medical Center, Muskogee, OK
Muskogee, Oklahoma, 74401
Tennessee Valley Healthcare System Nashville Campus, Nashville, TN
Nashville, Tennessee, 37212-2637
Manhattan Campus of the VA NY Harbor Healthcare System, New York, NY
New York, New York, 10010
Captain James A. Lovell Federal Health Care Center, North Chicago, IL
North Chicago, Illinois, 60064
Omaha VA Nebraska-Western Iowa Health Care System, Omaha, NE
Omaha, Nebraska, 68105-1873
VA Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, CA
Palo Alto, California, 94304-1290
Corporal Michael J. Crescenz VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19104
VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System University Drive Division, Pittsburgh, PA
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 15240
VA Portland Health Care System, Portland, OR
Portland, Oregon, 97239
VA Roseburg Healthcare System, Roseburg, OR
Roseburg, Oregon, 97471
Aleda E. Lutz VA Medical Center, Saginaw, MI
Saginaw, Michigan, 48602
St. Cloud VA Health Care System, St. Cloud, MN
Saint Cloud, Minnesota, 56303
South Texas Health Care System, San Antonio, TX
San Antonio, Texas, 78229
Sheridan VA Medical Center, Sheridan, WY
Sheridan, Wyoming, 82801
St. Louis VA Medical Center John Cochran Division, St. Louis, MO
St Louis, Missouri, 63106
VA Black Hills Health Care System Fort Meade Campus, Fort Meade, SD
Sturgis, South Dakota, 57741
Syracuse VA Medical Center, Syracuse, NY
Syracuse, New York, 13210
Maine VA Medical Center, Augusta, ME
Togus, Maine, 04330
Tomah VA Medical Center, Tomah, WI
Tomah, Wisconsin, 54660
Washington DC VA Medical Center, Washington, DC
Washington D.C., District of Columbia, 20422
VA Connecticut Healthcare System West Haven Campus, West Haven, CT
West Haven, Connecticut, 06516
VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, West Los Angeles, CA
West Los Angeles, California, 90073
VA Southern Oregon Rehabilitation Center and Clinics, White City, OR
White City, Oregon, 97503
White River Junction VA Medical Center, White River Junction, VT
White River Junction, Vermont, 05009-0001
Wilkes-Barre VA Medical Center, Wilkes-Barre, PA
Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, 18711
Wilmington VA Medical Center, Wilmington, DE
Wilmington, Delaware, 19805
Puerto Rico1 site
VA Caribbean Healthcare System, San Juan, PR
San Juan, 00921
About this study
Official title: CSP #597 - Diuretic Comparison Project
The Diuretic Comparison Project aimed to evaluate whether chlorthalidone, as compared with hydrochlorothiazide, would reduce the risk of major nonfatal cardiovascular disease outcomes and non-cancer-related deaths in older patients with hypertension who were receiving hydrochlorothiazide at baseline. The investigators incorporated the pragmatic methods used by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Healthcare System to provide a real-world assessment of the effectiveness of chlorthalidone as compared with hydrochlorothiazide in routine clinical care.
Read the detailed description
Thiazide-type diuretics have been in use for more than 50 years and are considered as the first-line treatment for hypertension. Of the more than 1 million Veterans prescribed a thiazide-type diuretic each year, more than 95% receive hydrochlorothiazide, and fewer than 2.5% receive chlorthalidone. However, indirect evidence has been accumulating for many years that chlorthalidone may be more effective than hydrochlorothiazide at preventing cardiovascular events.
The Diuretic Comparison Project was conducted with a clinically integrated design (termed a "point of care" or "pragmatic embedded" trial). The key feature of our design was that, instead of employing local investigators, the investigators developed centralized trial procedures and implemented into the VA electronic health record (EHR) and healthcare delivery systems. This approach enabled us to conduct trial-related interactions and randomization with the use of data in the EHRs, centralize recruitment efforts without the use of site staff, eliminate the need for trial-related visits and procedures, and centralize data capture from administrative databases.
This study was performed to answer a question of whether chlorthalidone is more effective than hydrochlorothiazide at preventing cardiovascular outcomes. Consent was obtained from eligible participants who were willing to participate and their primary care providers. With provider assented to the patient undergoing randomization, 3,523 older patients with hypertension were randomized across 72 VA health care systems. Patients across the US (including Puerto Rico and District of Columbia) were enrolled. Participants were randomly assigned to continue with existing hydrochlorothiazide treatment regimen (25/50mg daily) or switch to a dose equivalent chlorthalidone (12.5/25 mg daily).
The primary outcome was the first occurrence of a composite outcome consisting of a nonfatal cardiovascular event or non-cancer related death. Nonfatal cardiovascular events included nonfatal myocardial infarction, stroke, hospitalization for heart failure, or urgent coronary revascularization for unstable angina.
- Conditions
- Hypertension
- Being tested
- Hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ), Chlorthalidone (CTD)
- Keywords
- Hypertension, Cardiovascular outcomes, Pragmatic clinical trial, Point of care research
- Medical subject headings
- Hypertension
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ)Drug
Also called HCTZ
Trial activities following study randomization were considered as usual care. Prescriptions of the allocated drug were managed by the primary care providers and patients would receive the prescribed mediations through the VA outpatient pharmacy services.
Chlorthalidone (CTD)Drug
Also called CTD
Trial activities following study randomization were considered as usual care. Prescriptions of the allocated drug were managed by the primary care providers and patients would receive the prescribed mediations through the VA outpatient pharmacy services.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Hydrochlorothiazide | Active comparator | Participants remained on the existing hydrochlorothiazide treatment regimen (a daily dose of 25 or 50 mg). Receives: Drug: Hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) |
| Chlorthalidone | Active comparator | Participants switched to an equivalent dose of chlorthalidone (a daily dose of 12.5 or 25 mg). Receives: Drug: Chlorthalidone (CTD) |
| Providers | No intervention | Providers were enrolled in order to contact their potentially eligible patients and were not included in the results |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Time From Randomization to Composite Primary Outcome
Time to study primary outcome was defined as years from randomization to the first occurrence of a composite endpoint, consisting of a nonfatal cardiovascular event or non-cancer related death. Nonfatal cardiovascular events included nonfatal myocardial infarction, stroke, hospitalization for heart failure, or urgent coronary revascularization for unstable angina. For participants who had a primary outcome, time to event was determined as the earliest admission or death date. Ascertainment of study outcomes was made with the use of administrative and clinical data obtained from VA EHRs through June 1, 2022, from records of Medicare claims obtained from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services through 2021, and from National Death Index records through 2019. Trial outcomes were ascertained with the use of validated EHR phenotypes and, when needed, manual adjudication. Manually adjudicated outcomes were evaluated by investigators and staff who were unaware of group assignment.
Measured: Outcome data collection was performed from study randomization until the participants deceased, withdrawn, or reached end of study (Up to 5.4 years for the first patient enrolled and an average of 2.4 years for all participants).
Proportion of Participants Had a Composite Primary Outcome
The primary outcome was the first occurrence of a composite endpoint consisting of a nonfatal cardiovascular event or non-cancer related death. Nonfatal cardiovascular events included nonfatal myocardial infarction, stroke, hospitalization for heart failure, or urgent coronary revascularization for unstable angina. Time to the first event was computed based on the earliest hospital admission or death dates. Ascertainment of study outcomes was made with the use of administrative and clinical data obtained from VA EHRs through June 1, 2022, from records of Medicare claims obtained from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services through 2021, and from National Death Index records through 2019. Trial outcomes were ascertained with the use of validated EHR phenotypes and, when needed, manual adjudication. Manually adjudicated outcomes were evaluated by investigators and staff who were unaware of group assignment.
Measured: Outcome data collection was performed from study randomization until the participants deceased, withdrawn, or reached end of study (Up to 5.4 years for the first patient enrolled and an average of 2.4 years for all participants).
Secondary outcomes (5)
Proportion of Participants Had Nonfatal Myocardial Infarction
Secondary outcomes were the individual components of the primary outcome. Ascertainment of study outcomes was made with the use of administrative and clinical data obtained from VA EHRs through June 1, 2022, from records of Medicare claims obtained from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services through 2021, and from National Death Index records through 2019. Trial outcomes were ascertained with the use of validated EHR phenotypes and, when needed, manual adjudication. Manually adjudicated outcomes were evaluated by investigators and staff who were unaware of group assignment.
Measured: Outcome data collection was performed from study randomization until the participants deceased, withdrawn, or reached end of study (Up to 5.4 years for the first patient enrolled and an average of 2.4 years for all participants).
Proportion of Participants Had Nonfatal Stroke
Secondary outcomes were the individual components of the primary outcome. Ascertainment of study outcomes was made with the use of administrative and clinical data obtained from VA EHRs through June 1, 2022, from records of Medicare claims obtained from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services through 2021, and from National Death Index records through 2019. Trial outcomes were ascertained with the use of validated EHR phenotypes and, when needed, manual adjudication. Manually adjudicated outcomes were evaluated by investigators and staff who were unaware of group assignment.
Measured: Outcome data collection was performed from study randomization until the participants deceased, withdrawn, or reached end of study (Up to 5.4 years for the first patient enrolled and an average of 2.4 years for all participants).
Proportion of Participants Had Hospitalization for Heart Failure
Secondary outcomes were the individual components of the primary outcome. Ascertainment of study outcomes was made with the use of administrative and clinical data obtained from VA EHRs through June 1, 2022, from records of Medicare claims obtained from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services through 2021, and from National Death Index records through 2019. Trial outcomes were ascertained with the use of validated EHR phenotypes and, when needed, manual adjudication. Manually adjudicated outcomes were evaluated by investigators and staff who were unaware of group assignment.
Measured: Outcome data collection was performed from study randomization until the participants deceased, withdrawn, or reached end of study (Up to 5.4 years for the first patient enrolled and an average of 2.4 years for all participants).
Proportion of Participants Had Unstable Angina Leading to Urgent Coronary Revascularization
Secondary outcomes were the individual components of the primary outcome. Ascertainment of study outcomes was made with the use of administrative and clinical data obtained from VA EHRs through June 1, 2022, from records of Medicare claims obtained from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services through 2021, and from National Death Index records through 2019. Trial outcomes were ascertained with the use of validated EHR phenotypes and, when needed, manual adjudication. Manually adjudicated outcomes were evaluated by investigators and staff who were unaware of group assignment.
Measured: Collection of outcome data were performed from randomization until participants deceased, withdrawn, or reached end of study (Up to 5.4 years for the first patient enrolled and an average of 2.4 years for all participants).
Proportion of Participants Deceased and Not Related to Cancer
Secondary outcomes were the individual components of the primary outcome. Ascertainment of study outcomes was made with the use of administrative and clinical data obtained from VA EHRs through June 1, 2022, from records of Medicare claims obtained from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services through 2021, and from National Death Index records through 2019. Trial outcomes were ascertained with the use of validated EHR phenotypes and, when needed, manual adjudication. Manually adjudicated outcomes were evaluated by investigators and staff who were unaware of group assignment.
Measured: Outcome data collection was performed from study randomization until the participants deceased, withdrawn, or reached end of study (Up to 5.4 years for the first patient enrolled and an average of 2.4 years for all participants).
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted9 Jul 2014 (estimated)
- Study start15 Jun 2016
- Primary completion15 Oct 2022
- Study completion29 Dec 2022
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Publications (11)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for HypertensionStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by VA Office of Research and DevelopmentThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 20,723 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- VA Office of Research and Development
- Sponsor type
- US federal agency
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Areef Ishani, MD MS, Study chair, Minneapolis VA Health Care System, Minneapolis, MNWilliam C Cushman, MD, Study chair, Memphis VA Medical Center, Memphis, TN
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02185417
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 597
- Acronym
- DCP
- Status last verified
- May 2024
- First submitted
- 30 Jun 2014
- Last updated
- 22 May 2024
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- Yes
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No: There is no IPD sharing plan description
Publications
Ishani A, Leatherman SM, Woods P, Hau C, Klint A, Lew RA, Taylor AA, Glassman PA, Brophy MT, Fiore LD, Ferguson RE, Cushman WC. Design of a pragmatic clinical trial embedded in the Electronic Health Record: The VA's Diuretic Comparison Project. Contemp Clin Trials. 2022 May;116:106754. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2022.106754. Epub 2022 Apr 4.
PubMed 35390512Ferguson RE, Leatherman SM, Woods P, Hau C, Lew R, Cushman WC, Brophy MT, Fiore L, Ishani A. Practical issues in pragmatic trials: the implementation of the Diuretic Comparison Project. Clin Trials. 2023 Jun;20(3):276-283. doi: 10.1177/17407745231160553. Epub 2023 Mar 29.
PubMed 36992530Ishani A, Cushman WC, Leatherman SM, Lew RA, Woods P, Glassman PA, Taylor AA, Hau C, Klint A, Huang GD, Brophy MT, Fiore LD, Ferguson RE; Diuretic Comparison Project Writing Group. Chlorthalidone vs. Hydrochlorothiazide for Hypertension-Cardiovascular Events. N Engl J Med. 2022 Dec 29;387(26):2401-2410. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2212270. Epub 2022 Dec 14.
PubMed 36516076Hau C, Efird JT, Leatherman SM, Soloviev OV, Glassman PA, Woods PA, Ishani A, Cushman WC, Ferguson RE. A Centralized EHR-Based Model for the Recruitment of Rural and Lower Socioeconomic Participants in Pragmatic Trials: A Secondary Analysis of the Diuretic Comparison Project. JAMA Netw Open. 2023 Sep 5;6(9):e2332049. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.32049.
PubMed 37656456Anand ST, Hau C, Davenport MJ, Ishani A, Cushman WC, Glassman PA, Taylor AA, Lew RA, Ferguson RE, Leatherman SM. Per-Protocol Analysis of Chlorthalidone Versus Hydrochlorothiazide for Cardiovascular Event Prevention-Diuretic Comparison Project. J Am Heart Assoc. 2026 Feb 3;15(3):e046142. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.125.046142. Epub 2026 Jan 30.
PubMed 41614323Leatherman SM, Beaudette-Zlatanova B, Robben G, Glassman PA, Woods P, Ferguson RE, Cushman WC, Ishani A. Provider experiences with and attitudes about an embedded pragmatic clinical trial. BMC Prim Care. 2025 Apr 23;26(1):121. doi: 10.1186/s12875-025-02799-w.
PubMed 40269774Ishani A, Hau C, Raju S, Wise JK, Glassman PA, Taylor AA, Ferguson RE, Cushman WC, Leatherman SM. Chlorthalidone vs Hydrochlorothiazide and Kidney Outcomes in Patients With Hypertension: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Netw Open. 2024 Dec 2;7(12):e2449576. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.49576.
PubMed 39656458Ishani A, Hau C, Cushman WC, Leatherman SM, Lew RA, Glassman PA, Taylor AA, Ferguson RE. Chlorthalidone vs Hydrochlorothiazide for Hypertension Treatment After Myocardial Infarction or Stroke: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Netw Open. 2024 May 1;7(5):e2411081. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.11081.
PubMed 38743423Klint AL, Leatherman SM, Taylor O, Glassman PA, Ferguson RE, Cushman WC, Ishani A. Telephone informed consent in a pragmatic point-of-care clinical trial embedded in primary care. Contemp Clin Trials. 2023 Aug;131:107239. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2023.107239. Epub 2023 May 25.
PubMed 37244366Raju S, Hau C, Woods P, Flynn M, Sadatis C, McPherson J, Tella A, Ishani A, Ferguson RE, Leatherman SM. Ascertainment of stroke from administrative data to support a pragmatic embedded clinical trial. Contemp Clin Trials. 2023 Jul;130:107214. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2023.107214. Epub 2023 May 1.
PubMed 37137378Leatherman SM, Hau C, Klint A, Glassman PA, Taylor AA, Ferguson RE, Cushman WC, Ishani A. The impact of COVID-19 on a large pragmatic clinical trial embedded in primary care. Contemp Clin Trials. 2023 Jun;129:107179. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2023.107179. Epub 2023 Apr 7.
PubMed 37031794
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 22 May 2024. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- CSP #597 - Diuretic Comparison Project
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02185417
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- DCP / 597
- Conditions
- Hypertension
- Keywords
- Hypertension, Cardiovascular outcomes, Pragmatic clinical trial, Point of care research
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 20,723 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- VA Office of Research and DevelopmentUS federal agency
- Study start
- 15 Jun 2016 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 15 Oct 2022 (actual)
- Study completion
- 29 Dec 2022 (actual)
- First posted
- 9 Jul 2014 (estimated)
- Results
- Posted 22 May 2024
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The Diuretic Comparison Project aimed to evaluate whether chlorthalidone, as compared with hydrochlorothiazide, would reduce the risk of major nonfatal cardiovascular disease outcomes and non-cancer-related deaths in older patients with hypertension who were receiving hydrochlorothiazide at baseline. The investigators incorporated the pragmatic methods used by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Healthcare System to provide a real-world assessment of the effectiveness of chlorthalidone as compared with hydrochlorothiazide in routine clinical care.
Detailed description
Thiazide-type diuretics have been in use for more than 50 years and are considered as the first-line treatment for hypertension. Of the more than 1 million Veterans prescribed a thiazide-type diuretic each year, more than 95% receive hydrochlorothiazide, and fewer than 2.5% receive chlorthalidone. However, indirect evidence has been accumulating for many years that chlorthalidone may be more effective than hydrochlorothiazide at preventing cardiovascular events.
The Diuretic Comparison Project was conducted with a clinically integrated design (termed a "point of care" or "pragmatic embedded" trial). The key feature of our design was that, instead of employing local investigators, the investigators developed centralized trial procedures and implemented into the VA electronic health record (EHR) and healthcare delivery systems. This approach enabled us to conduct trial-related interactions and randomization with the use of data in the EHRs, centralize recruitment efforts without the use of site staff, eliminate the need for trial-related visits and procedures, and centralize data capture from administrative databases.
This study was performed to answer a question of whether chlorthalidone is more effective than hydrochlorothiazide at preventing cardiovascular outcomes. Consent was obtained from eligible participants who were willing to participate and their primary care providers. With provider assented to the patient undergoing randomization, 3,523 older patients with hypertension were randomized across 72 VA health care systems. Patients across the US (including Puerto Rico and District of Columbia) were enrolled. Participants were randomly assigned to continue with existing hydrochlorothiazide treatment regimen (25/50mg daily) or switch to a dose equivalent chlorthalidone (12.5/25 mg daily).
The primary outcome was the first occurrence of a composite outcome consisting of a nonfatal cardiovascular event or non-cancer related death. Nonfatal cardiovascular events included nonfatal myocardial infarction, stroke, hospitalization for heart failure, or urgent coronary revascularization for unstable angina.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 3
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Hydrochlorothiazide | Active comparator | Drug: Hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ)Participants remained on the existing hydrochlorothiazide treatment regimen (a daily dose of 25 or 50 mg). |
| Chlorthalidone | Active comparator | Drug: Chlorthalidone (CTD)Participants switched to an equivalent dose of chlorthalidone (a daily dose of 12.5 or 25 mg). |
| Providers | No intervention | –Providers were enrolled in order to contact their potentially eligible patients and were not included in the results |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 65 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- over age 65 years
- receiving hydrochlorothiazide from the VA pharmacy at a daily dose of 25 or 50 mg
- most recent SBP ≥120 mm Hg and no records of SBP <120 mm Hg in the past 90 days
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- impaired decision-making capacity rendering the patient unable to provide informed consent (i.e., if there is any question during the nurse's EHR chart review that the individual does not have the ability to make an autonomous decision or the PCP declines permission to randomize)
- death expected within 6 months (inferred by PCP permission to randomize)
- blood potassium level <3.1 or 3.5 (if taking digoxin) meq/L in the past 90 days
- blood sodium level <130 meq/L in the past 90 days
- enrolled in Medicare Part C (This exclusion only applied if there might be insufficient EHR data available to the study team)
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ)Also: HCTZTrial activities following study randomization were considered as usual care. Prescriptions of the allocated drug were managed by the primary care providers and patients would receive the prescribed mediations through the VA outpatient pharmacy services. | Drug | Hydrochlorothiazide |
| Chlorthalidone (CTD)Also: CTDTrial activities following study randomization were considered as usual care. Prescriptions of the allocated drug were managed by the primary care providers and patients would receive the prescribed mediations through the VA outpatient pharmacy services. | Drug | Chlorthalidone |
Primary outcome
Time From Randomization to Composite Primary Outcome
Time frame: Outcome data collection was performed from study randomization until the participants deceased, withdrawn, or reached end of study (Up to 5.4 years for the first patient enrolled and an average of 2.4 years for all participants).
Time to study primary outcome was defined as years from randomization to the first occurrence of a composite endpoint, consisting of a nonfatal cardiovascular event or non-cancer related death. Nonfatal cardiovascular events included nonfatal myocardial infarction, stroke, hospitalization for heart failure, or urgent coronary revascularization for unstable angina. For participants who had a primary outcome, time to event was determined as the earliest admission or death date. Ascertainment of study outcomes was made with the use of administrative and clinical data obtained from VA EHRs through June 1, 2022, from records of Medicare claims obtained from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services through 2021, and from National Death Index records through 2019. Trial outcomes were ascertained with the use of validated EHR phenotypes and, when needed, manual adjudication. Manually adjudicated outcomes were evaluated by investigators and staff who were unaware of group assignment.
Proportion of Participants Had a Composite Primary Outcome
Time frame: Outcome data collection was performed from study randomization until the participants deceased, withdrawn, or reached end of study (Up to 5.4 years for the first patient enrolled and an average of 2.4 years for all participants).
The primary outcome was the first occurrence of a composite endpoint consisting of a nonfatal cardiovascular event or non-cancer related death. Nonfatal cardiovascular events included nonfatal myocardial infarction, stroke, hospitalization for heart failure, or urgent coronary revascularization for unstable angina. Time to the first event was computed based on the earliest hospital admission or death dates. Ascertainment of study outcomes was made with the use of administrative and clinical data obtained from VA EHRs through June 1, 2022, from records of Medicare claims obtained from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services through 2021, and from National Death Index records through 2019. Trial outcomes were ascertained with the use of validated EHR phenotypes and, when needed, manual adjudication. Manually adjudicated outcomes were evaluated by investigators and staff who were unaware of group assignment.
5 secondary outcomes
Proportion of Participants Had Nonfatal Myocardial Infarction
Time frame: Outcome data collection was performed from study randomization until the participants deceased, withdrawn, or reached end of study (Up to 5.4 years for the first patient enrolled and an average of 2.4 years for all participants).
Proportion of Participants Had Nonfatal Stroke
Time frame: Outcome data collection was performed from study randomization until the participants deceased, withdrawn, or reached end of study (Up to 5.4 years for the first patient enrolled and an average of 2.4 years for all participants).
Proportion of Participants Had Hospitalization for Heart Failure
Time frame: Outcome data collection was performed from study randomization until the participants deceased, withdrawn, or reached end of study (Up to 5.4 years for the first patient enrolled and an average of 2.4 years for all participants).
Proportion of Participants Had Unstable Angina Leading to Urgent Coronary Revascularization
Time frame: Collection of outcome data were performed from randomization until participants deceased, withdrawn, or reached end of study (Up to 5.4 years for the first patient enrolled and an average of 2.4 years for all participants).
Proportion of Participants Deceased and Not Related to Cancer
Time frame: Outcome data collection was performed from study randomization until the participants deceased, withdrawn, or reached end of study (Up to 5.4 years for the first patient enrolled and an average of 2.4 years for all participants).
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 22 May 2024.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Background: PubMed 35390512Ishani A, Leatherman SM, Woods P, Hau C, Klint A, Lew RA, Taylor AA, Glassman PA, Brophy MT, Fiore LD, Ferguson RE, Cushman WC. Design of a pragmatic clinical trial embedded in the Electronic Health Record: The VA's Diuretic Comparison Project. Contemp Clin Trials. 2022 May;116:106754. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2022.106754. Epub 2022 Apr 4.
- Background: PubMed 36992530Ferguson RE, Leatherman SM, Woods P, Hau C, Lew R, Cushman WC, Brophy MT, Fiore L, Ishani A. Practical issues in pragmatic trials: the implementation of the Diuretic Comparison Project. Clin Trials. 2023 Jun;20(3):276-283. doi: 10.1177/17407745231160553. Epub 2023 Mar 29.
- Results publication: PubMed 36516076Ishani A, Cushman WC, Leatherman SM, Lew RA, Woods P, Glassman PA, Taylor AA, Hau C, Klint A, Huang GD, Brophy MT, Fiore LD, Ferguson RE; Diuretic Comparison Project Writing Group. Chlorthalidone vs. Hydrochlorothiazide for Hypertension-Cardiovascular Events. N Engl J Med. 2022 Dec 29;387(26):2401-2410. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2212270. Epub 2022 Dec 14.
- Results publication: PubMed 37656456Hau C, Efird JT, Leatherman SM, Soloviev OV, Glassman PA, Woods PA, Ishani A, Cushman WC, Ferguson RE. A Centralized EHR-Based Model for the Recruitment of Rural and Lower Socioeconomic Participants in Pragmatic Trials: A Secondary Analysis of the Diuretic Comparison Project. JAMA Netw Open. 2023 Sep 5;6(9):e2332049. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.32049.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 41614323Anand ST, Hau C, Davenport MJ, Ishani A, Cushman WC, Glassman PA, Taylor AA, Lew RA, Ferguson RE, Leatherman SM. Per-Protocol Analysis of Chlorthalidone Versus Hydrochlorothiazide for Cardiovascular Event Prevention-Diuretic Comparison Project. J Am Heart Assoc. 2026 Feb 3;15(3):e046142. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.125.046142. Epub 2026 Jan 30.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 40269774Leatherman SM, Beaudette-Zlatanova B, Robben G, Glassman PA, Woods P, Ferguson RE, Cushman WC, Ishani A. Provider experiences with and attitudes about an embedded pragmatic clinical trial. BMC Prim Care. 2025 Apr 23;26(1):121. doi: 10.1186/s12875-025-02799-w.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 39656458Ishani A, Hau C, Raju S, Wise JK, Glassman PA, Taylor AA, Ferguson RE, Cushman WC, Leatherman SM. Chlorthalidone vs Hydrochlorothiazide and Kidney Outcomes in Patients With Hypertension: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Netw Open. 2024 Dec 2;7(12):e2449576. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.49576.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 38743423Ishani A, Hau C, Cushman WC, Leatherman SM, Lew RA, Glassman PA, Taylor AA, Ferguson RE. Chlorthalidone vs Hydrochlorothiazide for Hypertension Treatment After Myocardial Infarction or Stroke: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Netw Open. 2024 May 1;7(5):e2411081. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.11081.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 37244366Klint AL, Leatherman SM, Taylor O, Glassman PA, Ferguson RE, Cushman WC, Ishani A. Telephone informed consent in a pragmatic point-of-care clinical trial embedded in primary care. Contemp Clin Trials. 2023 Aug;131:107239. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2023.107239. Epub 2023 May 25.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 37137378Raju S, Hau C, Woods P, Flynn M, Sadatis C, McPherson J, Tella A, Ishani A, Ferguson RE, Leatherman SM. Ascertainment of stroke from administrative data to support a pragmatic embedded clinical trial. Contemp Clin Trials. 2023 Jul;130:107214. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2023.107214. Epub 2023 May 1.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 37031794Leatherman SM, Hau C, Klint A, Glassman PA, Taylor AA, Ferguson RE, Cushman WC, Ishani A. The impact of COVID-19 on a large pragmatic clinical trial embedded in primary care. Contemp Clin Trials. 2023 Jun;129:107179. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2023.107179. Epub 2023 Apr 7.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No. There is no IPD sharing plan description
Related trials for Hypertension
Not yet recruiting
PAUL® Glaucoma Implant Safety and Effectiveness Study
Refractory Glaucoma
RecruitingObservational study
Asthma and Primary Arterial Hypertension: an Inflammatory Link?
Asthma Bronchial
RecruitingObservational study
Clevidipine for the Antihypertensive Treatment of Acute Intracerebral Hemorrhage
Intracerebral Hemorrhage, Stroke
RecruitingPhase 1/2
HS235 Study in Overweight and Obese Participants With Combined Pre and Post-Capillary Pulmonary Hypertension Due to Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction
Pulmonary Hypertension, Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction
Recruiting
Dry Weight Reduction Intervention Via Extra Ultrafiltration
Fluid Accumulation, Blood Pressure Management
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Areef Ishani, MD MS study chair
Minneapolis VA Health Care System, Minneapolis, MN
William C Cushman, MD study chair
Memphis VA Medical Center, Memphis, TN
70 sites in 2 countries: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 3 study testing Hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) and Chlorthalidone (CTD) in people with Hypertension, run by VA Office of Research and Development at 70 sites in 2 countries.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 5 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 22 May 2024. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 70 sites in United States, Puerto Rico. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
What does this phase mean?
Phase 3 studies compare the treatment with the current standard treatment or a placebo in a large group, to confirm how well it works and watch for side effects.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 22 May 2024). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Time From Randomization to Composite Primary Outcome (time frame: Outcome data collection was performed from study randomization until the participants deceased, withdrawn, or reached end of study (Up to 5.4 years for the first patient enrolled and an average of 2.4 years for all participants).). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT02185417, which also lists 11 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 22 May 2024.