There was a putatively significantly lower incidence of stroke in the intensive therapy group (ie, uncorrected for multiple comparisons), but the number of strokes was small (at 98). The main conclusion drawn by the investigators from this study is that an SBP <120 mmHg in patients with type 2 dia- betes mellitus is not justified.20,152 In the context of the J-curve conundrum discussed above, it is worthwhile noting that the mean achieved DBP in the intensive therapy group at 4 to 8 years after randomization was in the range of 60 to 65 mmHg and that there was not only no significant increase in coronary events at these DBPs but in fact a numerical decrease in such events. This finding, together with the significant protection from stroke, seen in ACCORD and most other trials could suggest a different interpretation of the ACCORD results, namely that lower DBPs are safe, at least in the range of 60 to 65 mmHg, and may protect against stroke. The Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT), now underway, has a trial design very similar to that of ACCORD but has enrolled only nondiabetic subjects, with a heavy representa- tion of the elderly and patients with CKD. 3.2.4. Lower BP Goals and Diabetes Mellitus Besides the ACCORD study, discussed above, there have been other studies relevant to secondary prevention of cardiovascu- lar events in patients with hypertension and CAD. In a diabetic cohort of subjects with hypertension and CAD in INVEST,116 tight control of SBP (<130 mmHg) was not associated with Rosendorff et al Treatment of Hypertension in Patients With CAD 1385 improved cardiovascular outcomes compared with usual con- trol (130 139 mmHg), although in an extended follow-up of 9 years, the risk of all-cause mortality was 22.8% versus 21.8%, respectively, which was just statistically significant. 