4.7 Article

Women with familial hypercholesterolemia phenotype are undertreated and poorly controlled compared to men

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 13, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-27963-z

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) is a common autosomal dominant disease associated with early coronary heart disease (CHD). A study of over 2 million individuals showed that women with FH are less likely to receive high-intensity lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) and have poorer adherence to LLT compared to men. Additionally, women have a lower probability of achieving their LDL-c goals, especially in secondary prevention.
Familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) is an autosomal dominant disease that has a prevalence of approximately 1/250 inhabitants and is the most frequent cause of early coronary heart disease (CHD). We included 1.343.973 women and 1.210.671 men with at least one LDL-c measurement from the Catalan primary care database. We identified 14.699 subjects with Familial hypercholesterolemia-Phenotype (FH-P) based on LDL-c cut-off points by age (7.033 and 919 women, and 5.088 and 1659 men in primary and secondary prevention, respectively). Lipid lower therapy (LLT), medication possession ratio (MPR) as an indicator of adherence, and number of patients that reached their goal on lipid levels were compared by sex. In primary and secondary prevention, 69% and 54% of women (P = 0.001) and 64% and 51% of men (P = 0.001) were on low-to-moderate-potency LLT. Adherence to LLT was reduced in women older than 55 years, especially in secondary prevention (P = 0.03), where the percentage of women and men with LDL-c > 1.81 mmol/L were 99.9% and 98.9%, respectively (P = 0.001). Women with FH-P are less often treated with high-intensity LLT, less adherent to LLT, and have a lower probability of meeting their LDL-c goals than men, especially in secondary prevention.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available