Comparison of Cardiovascular and Safety Outcomes of Chlorthalidone vs Hydrochlorothiazide to Treat Hypertension.

George Hripcsak, Marc A Suchard, Steven Shea, RuiJun Chen, Seng Chan You, Nicole Pratt, David Madigan, Harlan M Krumholz, Patrick B Ryan, Martijn J Schuemie

Journal: JAMA internal medicine 2020;180(4):542-551

PMID: 32065600

Abstract

IMPORTANCE

Chlorthalidone is currently recommended as the preferred thiazide diuretic to treat hypertension, but no trials have directly compared risks and benefits.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness and safety of chlorthalidone and hydrochlorothiazide as first-line therapies for hypertension in real-world practice.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This is a Large-Scale Evidence Generation and Evaluation in a Network of Databases (LEGEND) observational comparative cohort study with large-scale propensity score stratification and negative-control and synthetic positive-control calibration on databases spanning January 2001 through December 2018. Outpatient and inpatient care episodes of first-time users of antihypertensive monotherapy in the United States based on 2 administrative claims databases and 1 collection of electronic health records were analyzed. Analysis began June 2018.

EXPOSURES

Chlorthalidone and hydrochlorothiazide.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcomes were acute myocardial infarction, hospitalization for heart failure, ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke, and a composite cardiovascular disease outcome including the first 3 outcomes and sudden cardiac death. Fifty-one safety outcomes were measured.

RESULTS

Of 730 225 individuals (mean [SD] age, 51.5 [13.3] years; 450 100 women [61.6%]), 36 918 were dispensed or prescribed chlorthalidone and had 149 composite outcome events, and 693 337 were dispensed or prescribed hydrochlorothiazide and had 3089 composite outcome events. No significant difference was found in the associated risk of myocardial infarction, hospitalized heart failure, or stroke, with a calibrated hazard ratio for the composite cardiovascular outcome of 1.00 for chlorthalidone compared with hydrochlorothiazide (95% CI, 0.85-1.17). Chlorthalidone was associated with a significantly higher risk of hypokalemia (hazard ratio [HR], 2.72; 95% CI, 2.38-3.12), hyponatremia (HR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.16-1.47), acute renal failure (HR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.15-1.63), chronic kidney disease (HR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.09-1.42), and type 2 diabetes mellitus (HR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.12-1.30). Chlorthalidone was associated with a significantly lower risk of diagnosed abnormal weight gain (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.61-0.86).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This study found that chlorthalidone use was not associated with significant cardiovascular benefits when compared with hydrochlorothiazide, while its use was associated with greater risk of renal and electrolyte abnormalities. These findings do not support current recommendations to prefer chlorthalidone vs hydrochlorothiazide for hypertension treatment in first-time users was found. We used advanced methods, sensitivity analyses, and diagnostics, but given the possibility of residual confounding and the limited length of observation periods, further study is warranted.

Address: Department of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York.; Medical Informatics Services, NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital, New York.; Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics, New York, New York.; Fielding School of Public Health, Department of Biostatistics, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles.; David Geffen School of Medicine, Department of Biomathematics, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles.; Department of Medicine, Columbia University, New York, New York.; Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York.; Department of Biomedical Informatics, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, Korea.; Quality Use of Medicines and Pharmacy Research Centre, School of Pharmacy and Medical Sciences, University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.; Department of Statistics, Columbia University, New York, New York.; Section of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.; Department of Health Policy and Management, Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, Connecticut.; Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Yale-New Haven Hospital, New Haven, Connecticut.; Epidemiology Analytics, Janssen Research and Development, Titusville, New Jersey.
Bant logo

© Copyright 2026, Nutrition Evidence

NED wishes to thank the following organisations for their support:

We use cookies to improve your experience and analyze site traffic with Google Analytics. By continuing to use our site, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more.