Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40413804›Full record

ArticleAge and ageing2025

Antihypertensive drug classes and risk of incident dementia: a multinational population-based cohort study.

Edmund C L Cheung, Matthew Adesuyan, Máté Szilcz, Lisa M Kalisch Ellett, Sonia Shah, Yogini H Jani, Sara Hägg, Nicole Pratt, Kui Kai Lau, Hao Luo and 8 more

Abstract readMulticenter StudyComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Age and ageing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Angiotensin receptor blockers and dementia risk in older adults: A target trial emulation.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Decoding Vascular Senescence: Cellular Insights and Therapeutic Strategies.International journal of biological sciences · 2026
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

18 authors.

Edmund C L CheungCentre for Safe Medication Practice and Research, Department of Pharmacology and Pharmacy, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China.ORCID 0000-0002-4117-4504
Matthew AdesuyanResearch Department of Practice and Policy, UCL School of Pharmacy, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2058-4096
Máté SzilczDepartment of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-9291-0559
Lisa M Kalisch EllettQuality Use of Medicines and Pharmacy Research Centre, Clinical and Health Sciences, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5063-6128
Sonia ShahInstitute for Molecular Bioscience, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Yogini H JaniResearch Department of Practice and Policy, UCL School of Pharmacy, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5927-5429
Sara HäggDepartment of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Nicole PrattQuality Use of Medicines and Pharmacy Research Centre, Clinical and Health Sciences, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Kui Kai LauDepartment of Medicine, School of Clinical Medicine, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Hao LuoSchool of Public Health Sciences, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.
Eric Yuk Fai WanCentre for Safe Medication Practice and Research, Department of Pharmacology and Pharmacy, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China.ORCID 0000-0002-6275-1147
Esther Wai Yin ChanCentre for Safe Medication Practice and Research, Department of Pharmacology and Pharmacy, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Ian C K WongCentre for Safe Medication Practice and Research, Department of Pharmacology and Pharmacy, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China.ORCID 0000-0001-8242-0014
Jacqueline K YuenDepartment of Medicine, School of Clinical Medicine, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Kai-Hang YiuDepartment of Medicine, School of Clinical Medicine, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China.ORCID 0000-0003-2145-3108
Robert HowardDivision of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK.
Ruth BrauerResearch Department of Practice and Policy, UCL School of Pharmacy, London, UK.
Celine S L ChuiAdvance Data Analytics for Medical Science (ADAMS) Limited, Hong Kong SAR, China.ORCID 0000-0003-1513-8726

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAngiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin-II receptor blockers (ARBs) are first-line antihypertensive drugs for many patients, and influencing angiotensin systems may play a role in dementia risk. This study aimed to investigate whether exposure to different antihypertensive drug classes compared with ACEI affects the risk of dementia and pathological dementia subtypes in a large multinational database study.

methodsThis was a multinational population-based cohort study using electronic health databases in Hong Kong, the UK, Sweden and Australia. A common protocol was used to harmonise the study design. An active comparator, a new user design, was applied to compare the risk of all-cause dementia between different antihypertensive drug classes, with secondary outcomes of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and vascular dementia (VaD). Adjusted Cox proportional hazards models with inverse probability of treatment weighting were used to generate results in each study site and were pooled in meta-analysis.

resultsOne million nine hundred twenty-five thousand, five hundred sixty-three individuals were included across the four databases with a median follow-up ranging from 5.6 to 8.4 years. Compared to ACEI, initiation with ARB was associated with a reduced risk of incident all-cause dementia [hazard ratio (HR): 0.92, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.89-0.94] and VaD (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.78-0.96) but not AD.

conclusionsThis is the largest multinational cohort study conducted to date investigating different classes of antihypertensive drugs and the risk of incident dementia. When initiating antihypertensives, physicians and patients should consider the reduced risk of all-cause dementia and VaD with ARB compared with ACEI in their risk-benefit assessment.

Indexed as

Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme InhibitorsAngiotensin Receptor AntagonistsAntihypertensive AgentsDementiaHypertensionAgedAged, 80 and overAustraliaDatabases, FactualFemaleHong KongHumansIncidenceMaleMiddle AgedRisk AssessmentAngiotensin-Converting Enzyme InhibitorsAngiotensin Receptor AntagonistsAntihypertensive Agentsantihypertensive drugsdementiamultinational cohort studyolder people

Identifiers

PMID40413804
PMCPMC12103899

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.