Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42124528›Full record

ReviewCurrent opinion in cardiology2026

Resistant hypertension, hyperaldosteronism, and the emerging understanding of hypercortisolism.

Daniel Einhorn, Christian Mende, Richard J Auchus

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current opinion in cardiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. 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

3 authors.

Daniel EinhornCorcept Therapeutics, Incorporated, Redwood City.
Christian MendeUniversity of California San Diego; San Diego, California.
Richard J AuchusUniversity of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewThis article reviews the evolving landscape and high prevalence of hyperaldosteronism and hypercortisolism, two previously under-recognized disorders for which cardiologists should have a high index of suspicion when managing patients with resistant hypertension. RECENT

findingsResistant hypertension is estimated to occur in approximately 10-20% of people with hypertension, or 10 million people in the United States, and is associated with substantially increased cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Hyperaldosteronism, previously considered a rare disease, has been shown to be a relatively common cause of hypertension and is a multisystem disease associated with a significantly higher risk of multiple comorbid conditions, including resistant hypertension. Likewise, endogenous hypercortisolism, once considered a rare disease, is now known to have a higher prevalence than previously estimated and is associated with a wide spectrum of clinical and biochemical presentations, including resistant hypertension, that result from prolonged exposure to excess cortisol activity. However, despite the prevalence and negative clinical consequences of hyperaldosteronism and hypercortisolism, screening rates remain low. SUMMARY: Cardiologists are well positioned to provide timely screening for both hyperaldosteronism and hypercortisolism. To optimize clinical outcomes, patients with these endocrine causes of resistant hypertension require aldosterone-directed and/or cortisol-directed therapy in addition to therapy for hypertension.

Indexed as

Cushing SyndromeHyperaldosteronismHypertensionAntihypertensive AgentsHumansPrevalenceAntihypertensive Agentscardiovascular comorbiditieshypercortisolismhypertensionprimary aldosteronismscreening

Identifiers

PMID42124528
PMCPMC13258219

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.