Table 2.

Association between carvedilol versus metoprolol initiation and 1-year mortality among clinically relevant subgroups: intent-to-treat analysis^a

		1-year all-cause mortalityb			1-year cardiovascular mortalityc
Beta-blocker	N	Rate per 1,000 p-y	Adjusted HR (95% CI)		Rate per 1,000 p-y	Adjusted HR (95% CI)
Patients with hypertension (n = 19,673)
Metoprolol	12,652	234.7	1.00 (ref.)		100.7	1.00 (ref.)
Carvedilol	7,021	266.0	1.09 (1.02, 1.17)		126.1	1.18 (1.07, 1.31)
Patients with atrial fibrillation (n = 3,761)
Metoprolol	2,525	406.1	1.00 (ref.)		174.1	1.00 (ref.)
Carvedilol	1,236	458.4	1.08 (0.94, 1.23)		215.9	1.12 (0.94, 1.35)
Patients with heart failure (n = 9,358)
Metoprolol	5,251	336.7	1.00 (ref.)		144.9	1.00 (ref.)
Carvedilol	4,107	335.8	1.02 (0.94, 1.11)		157.6	1.09 (0.96, 1.23)
Patients with a recent MI (n = 1,793)
Metoprolol	1,151	395.6	1.00 (ref.)		187.1	1.00 (ref.)
Carvedilol	642	443.6	1.02 (0.84, 1.23)		244.7	1.19 (0.92, 1.53)

An intent-to-treat design was employed in all analyses. Adjusted analyses controlled for baseline covariates listed in Table 1 using inverse probability of treatment weighting. Subgroups of interest were excluded the corresponding propensity score models. For example, in subgroup analyses of patients with hypertension, the hypertension covariate was excluded from the propensity score model.

^aPresented patient counts and outcome event rates are based on the unweighted cohort.

^bCox proportional hazards models were used to estimate the associations between carvedilol (versus metoprolol) initiation and 1-year all-cause mortality.

^cFine and Gray proportional subdistribution hazards models were used to estimate the associations between carvedilol (versus metoprolol) initiation and 1-year cardiovascular mortality. Non-cardiovascular death was treated as a competing risk.

Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio; no., number; p-y, person-year; MI, myocardial infarction