I'm not a low-node guru, but it's still sort of the way I shoot the most, like 99%.
If you want to skip all the blather below, I'll say now that I've used a bunch of different primers in my own low-node shooting and cannot see them having any good or bad effect, regardless of which ones I use.
I produce limited data, in that I shoot the 357 Mag in revolver and carbine (mostly carbine/suppressed), the 30/30 at about 1200 fps and occasionally the 222 at 1800+, which I guess wouldn't count as "low-node."
Focusing on the 357, I've made it a point to ensure that any load I put together will be safe in both revolver and carbine and that the revolver will set off any primer I use, to include small rifle - even the sturdier Wolff "Magnum" SRPs, which aren't really magnums, but just have a thicker or heavier cup. I've been using S&B SPP,/SRP, CCI SPP, Wolff SRPM in a wide range of moderate loads, all of which are sub-sonic in a 3" revolver and MOST of which are sub-sonic in an 18" carbine. I've done this for much longer than I've owned the suppressor and this has been going on since 2008 or 2009.
Probably an important factor is that I use mostly Unique, some HP38/W231, but have also played a little with 2400, 300MP and IMR4227 in the few heavier loads I've messed with on this project, but have stuck with the same SPP/SRP qualifier. My loads must be able to use ANY primer I can get my hands on.
In the process of printing five shot groups at fifty yards with the various carbines at fifty yards, I've been able to shoot just over half-inch groups to just over one-inch groups regularly and reliably. I've shot from 125 grain LEE RFNs, LEEs TL 148 WC, various 158s, NOE 360180 WFN, 190 RDOs. Lube has mostly been 45-45-10 or BLL, a little PC, very little 50/50 Alox/Beeswax (traditional) and very few gas checks.
Maybe the 357 is just magic, or like cheating, but I'll be dipped if I could tell anyone that I could see any difference in what the primers are doing for me. In fact, I can't promise any of the above factors in any combination have had much of an effect at all, differentiating them from any other combination. This is in the carbine. The revolver has preferences, but they are related to it being a revolver. But then, the point of my experimentation has been to come up with loads which are safe and accurate (enough) using whatever I can get my hands on anyway.
The one thing that I can say distinguishes any above factor is that the 180 and 190 grain bullets tend to show a bit tighter grouping at fifty yards and POIs between ten yards and fifty yards are the same with these bullets. My barrel is an 18" MGM Contender Carbine barrel, full profile, 1:14" twist. The gun is not particularly well-suited to shooting teensy groups off the bench to begin with, being a break-open, short, light, etc. Likely, someone could hoot much better groups with stated loads than I can with this, but it's still no slouch.
EDIT: I"ve only found enlarging the flash-hole helpful with REALLY light charges of pistol powder in bottle-necked cases. This did elimate the problem of setting the shoulder back. The primers were backed out a wee bit before I started doing this, and stopped doing it once I enlarged the flash-holes. I won't get into the argument of how/why/what-if - I can only report what I just did - primers would be backed out without enlarging. Primers were flush after enlarging. At the risk of drawing criticism, censure, dire warnings, etc., I will share that the "really light loads" were as low as 1.2 grains of HP38/W231 in the 222 case with a 50 and 55 grain cast bullet. I've done the same with t he 357, but the rime negates the primer issue. These load cleared the (carbine) muzzle 100% of the time, were very accurate and very effective on varmints/vermin at close range (one to twenty yards).
