Differences in lipid treatment patterns in women versus men in a large cohort of patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease in Ontario, Canada
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background/Introduction The prevalence of ischaemic heart disease is lower in women vs men in Canada. Studies have shown that women are more likely to be underdiagnosed and less likely to receive guideline-recommended treatments than men. Women receiving lipid-lowering therapies (LLTs) are also less likely to attain treatment goals vs men. Purpose We analysed use of LLTs and attainment of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) treatment goals in a recent longitudinal cohort of patients with ASCVD with public drug coverage in Ontario to describe differences observed between female and male patients. Methods Patients ≥65 years with a primary ASCVD event/procedure between 1 Apr 2005 and 31 Mar 2016, treated with an LLT and with index and follow up LDL-C values were identified from claims data at the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences data repository. Patients were assessed over a 1 year follow up period for LDL-C goal attainment (<2.0 mmol/L or 50% reduction from index LDL-C as per Canadian Cardiovascular Society Guidelines) and analysed by LLT category. Results 143,302 patients with ASCVD ≥65 years on LLTs were identified of which 41% were female. A higher proportion of female vs male patients were prescribed low (3% vs 2%) and medium intensity statins (51% vs 44%) compared with high intensity statins (43% vs 52%). A higher proportion of women failed to attain LDL-C goal compared to men (33% vs 24%) (Figure). When analysed by low, moderate or high intensity statin, 65%, 35%, and 27% of female patients and 49%, 25% and 19% of male patients failed to attain LDL-C goal at follow up. Conclusions In this retrospective study, women with a diagnosis of ASCVD were more frequently treated with low/moderate intensity statins whereas men were more frequently treated with high intensity statins. Approximately 2 of 3 women and 3 of 4 men receiving statin treatment attained LDL-C goal during the 1-year follow up period. Overall, there appear to be treatment differences between female and male patients with ASCVD, with males receiving higher intensity statin therapy and attaining LDL-C goal more frequently. Further research is needed to determine why these discrepancies exist. This study made use of de-identified data from the ICES Data Repository, which is managed by the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences with support from its funders and partners: Canada's Strategy for Patient-Oriented Research (SPOR), the Ontario SPOR Support Unit, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the Government of Ontario. The opinions, results and conclusions reported are those of the authors. No endorsement by ICES or any of its funders or partners is intended or should be inferred. Parts of this material are based on data and/or information compiled and provided by CIHI. However, the analyses, conclusions, opinions and statements expressed in the material are those of the author(s), and not necessarily those of CIHI. Figure 1 Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: Private company. Main funding source(s): Amgen Canada Inc
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».