Mohammed Imran Ghare1, Daniela Tirziu1, Jinnette Dawn Abbott2, Elissa Altin3, Yiping Yang1, Vivian Ng4, Cindy Grines5, Alexandra Lansky1,6. 1. Section of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA. 2. Department of Medicine, Brown University, Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, Rhode Island, USA. 3. Department of Internal Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA. 4. Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York, USA. 5. Northside Cardiovascular Institute, Atlanta, Georgia, USA. 6. Barts Heart Center, St Bartholomew's Hospital and William Harvey Research Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom.
Abstract
Background: Females have historically been underrepresented in cardiovascular device trials. As a result, differences in outcomes for males and females are not possible to be determined in subanalyses. Materials and Methods: Against a backdrop of troubling trends in cardiovascular outcomes for females, we provide a narrative review on the differences in outcomes observed in females undergoing device evaluations in multiple fields of cardiovascular medicine, including coronary revascularization, structural heart disease, and heart failure. We also review predictors of cardiovascular trial nonparticipation as it may provide avenues by which female enrollment in cardiovascular device trials can be improved. Results: Advances have been made in structural heart therapy, where female representation in transcatheter aortic valve replacement studies was nearly 50%. For other indications, coronary revascularization and heart failure, there was clearly a disparity in female recruitment. On average, female representation was 25% in major clinical trials evaluating drug eluting stents, implantable cardioverter defibrillators, cardiac resynchronization defibrillators, and ventricular assist devices. As a result, the best treatment recommendations for females in these fields are currently guided by outcomes evaluated primarily in males. Conclusions: Female enrollment in device clinical trials for coronary revascularization and heart failure has lagged, leaving uncertainty in making benefit/risk assessments of device therapy. The predictors of female nonparticipation in clinical trials can inform a comprehensive strategy to facilitate and enrich the enrollment of females in cardiovascular device trials. This is critical to ensure that sex differences can be considered in treatment selection, so that patients can receive the best available care.
Background: Females have historically been underrepresented in cardiovascular device trials. As a result, differences in outcomes for males and females are not possible to be determined in subanalyses. Materials and Methods: Against a backdrop of troubling trends in cardiovascular outcomes for females, we provide a narrative review on the differences in outcomes observed in females undergoing device evaluations in multiple fields of cardiovascular medicine, including coronary revascularization, structural heart disease, and heart failure. We also review predictors of cardiovascular trial nonparticipation as it may provide avenues by which female enrollment in cardiovascular device trials can be improved. Results: Advances have been made in structural heart therapy, where female representation in transcatheter aortic valve replacement studies was nearly 50%. For other indications, coronary revascularization and heart failure, there was clearly a disparity in female recruitment. On average, female representation was 25% in major clinical trials evaluating drug eluting stents, implantable cardioverter defibrillators, cardiac resynchronization defibrillators, and ventricular assist devices. As a result, the best treatment recommendations for females in these fields are currently guided by outcomes evaluated primarily in males. Conclusions: Female enrollment in device clinical trials for coronary revascularization and heart failure has lagged, leaving uncertainty in making benefit/risk assessments of device therapy. The predictors of female nonparticipation in clinical trials can inform a comprehensive strategy to facilitate and enrich the enrollment of females in cardiovascular device trials. This is critical to ensure that sex differences can be considered in treatment selection, so that patients can receive the best available care.
Authors: Rashmee U Shah; Marilyn A Winkleby; Linda Van Horn; Lawrence S Phillips; Charles B Eaton; Lisa W Martin; Milagros C Rosal; Joann E Manson; Hongyan Ning; Donald M Lloyd-Jones; Liviu Klein Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2011-09-27 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Anthony S L Tang; George A Wells; Mario Talajic; Malcolm O Arnold; Robert Sheldon; Stuart Connolly; Stefan H Hohnloser; Graham Nichol; David H Birnie; John L Sapp; Raymond Yee; Jeffrey S Healey; Jean L Rouleau Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2010-11-14 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Sana M Al-Khatib; Anne S Hellkamp; Adrian F Hernandez; Gregg C Fonarow; Kevin L Thomas; Hussein R Al-Khalidi; Paul A Heidenreich; Stephen Hammill; Clyde Yancy; Eric D Peterson Journal: Circulation Date: 2012-01-27 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Gennaro Giustino; Usman Baber; Melissa Aquino; Samantha Sartori; Gregg W Stone; Martin B Leon; Philippe Genereux; George D Dangas; Jaya Chandrasekhar; Takeshi Kimura; Olga Salianski; Giulio G Stefanini; P Gabriel Steg; Stephan Windecker; William Wijns; Patrick W Serruys; Marco Valgimigli; Marie-Claude Morice; Edoardo Camenzind; Giora Weisz; Pieter C Smits; David E Kandzari; Soren Galatius; Clemens Von Birgelen; Robert Saporito; Raban V Jeger; Ghada W Mikhail; Dipti Itchhaporia; Laxmi Mehta; Rebecca Ortega; Hyo-Soo Kim; Adnan Kastrati; Alaide Chieffo; Roxana Mehran Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2016-04-11 Impact factor: 11.195
Authors: Rohan Khera; Jonathan C Hong; Anshul Saxena; Alejandro Arrieta; Salim S Virani; Ron Blankstein; James A de Lemos; Harlan M Krumholz; Khurram Nasir Journal: Circulation Date: 2017-11-13 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Carl J Pepine; Richard A Kerensky; Charles R Lambert; Karen M Smith; Gregory O von Mering; George Sopko; C Noel Bairey Merz Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2006-02-07 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Alexander Weymann; Nikhil Prakash Patil; Anton Sabashnikov; Prashant N Mohite; Diana García Sáez; Mohamed Amrani; Toufan Bahrami; Fabio De Robertis; Thorsten Wahlers; Nicholas R Banner; Aron-Frederik Popov; André R Simon Journal: Artif Organs Date: 2014-08-29 Impact factor: 3.094
Authors: Steven V Manoukian; Frederick Feit; Roxana Mehran; Michele D Voeltz; Ramin Ebrahimi; Martial Hamon; George D Dangas; A Michael Lincoff; Harvey D White; Jeffrey W Moses; Spencer B King; E Magnus Ohman; Gregg W Stone Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2007-03-09 Impact factor: 24.094