4.4 Article

Gender-related lipid and/or lipoprotein responses to statins in subjects in primary and secondary prevention

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL LIPIDOLOGY
Volume 9, Issue 2, Pages 226-233

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jacl.2014.12.003

Keywords

Gender; HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors; Ischemic heart disease; Lipid disorders/atherosclerosis; Risk factors

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular risk in men rises around the fourth decade of life, whereas women appear to be protected by sex hormones until menopause. This, in turn, tends to negatively affect the lipid profile. Since the 1980s, the incidence of cardiovascular diseases has been reported to progressively decline in men, but it has persisted almost unchanged in women. Major clinical trials on statins have been mostly conducted in men and have fostered the introduction of these agents into clinical practice worldwide. However, only few reports have examined a possible differential activity of statins in the 2 genders, providing in some cases opposite findings. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate gender-related differences in statin responses. METHODS: Variations of lipid profile after 1-year of treatment with different statins in 337 dyslipidemic patients (171 men and 166 women). RESULTS: In this series of patients, a significantly attenuated reduction of total cholesterol and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol in women vs men on drug treatment was noted after adjustment for dose and statin power (low-density lipoprotein cholesterol: -28.5 +/- 11.8% in men vs -22.7 +/- 11.8% in women; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The present study indicates that statin treatment has a reduced effectiveness in improving the plasma lipid profile in dyslipidemic women vs men. Whether such gender-related differences may have an impact on clinical outcomes remains to be elucidated. (C) 2015 National Lipid Association. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available