Dataset Information

Sex differences in management and outcomes of patients with stable symptoms suggestive of coronary artery disease: Insights from the PROMISE trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Although sex differences exist in the management of acute coronary syndromes, less is known about the management and outcomes of women and men with suspected coronary artery disease being evaluated with noninvasive testing (NIT).

Methods

We investigated sex-based differences in NIT results and subsequent clinical management in 4,720 women and 4,246 men randomized to CT angiography versus stress testing in the PROMISE trial. Logistic regression models assessed relationships between sex and referral for catheterization, revascularization, and aspirin or statin use. Cox regression models assessed the relationship between sex and the composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or unstable angina.

Results

Women more often had normal NITs than men (61.0% vs 49.6%, P < .001) and less often had mild (29.3% vs 35.4%, P < .001), moderate (4.0% vs 6.8%, P < .001), or severe abnormalities (5.7% vs 8.3%, P < .001) found on NIT. Women were less likely to be referred for catheterization than men (7.6% vs 12.6%, adjusted OR 0.75 [0.62-0.90]; P = .002). Of those who underwent catheterization within 90 days of randomization (358 women, 534 men), fewer women than men had obstructive coronary artery disease (40.8% vs 60.9%, P < .001). At a 60-day visit, women were significantly less likely than men to report statin use when indicated (adjusted OR 0.81 [0.73-0.91]; P < .001) but were similarly likely to report aspirin use when indicated (adjusted OR 0.78 [0.56-1.08]; P = .13). Over a median follow-up of 25 months, women had better outcomes than men (adjusted OR 0.73 [0.57-0.94]; P = .017).

Conclusions

Although women more frequently had normal NITs compared with men, those with abnormalities on NIT were less likely to be referred for catheterization or to receive statin therapy. The high rates of negative NIT in women, coupled with the better outcomes compared with men, strongly support the need for a sex-specific algorithm to guide NIT and chest pain management.

SUBMITTER: Pagidipati NJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6382571 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Sex differences in management and outcomes of patients with stable symptoms suggestive of coronary artery disease: Insights from the PROMISE trial.

Pagidipati Neha J NJ Coles Adrian A Hemal Kshipra K Lee Kerry L KL Dolor Rowena J RJ Pellikka Patricia A PA Mark Daniel B DB Patel Manesh R MR Litwin Sheldon E SE Daubert Melissa A MA Shah Svati H SH Hoffmann Udo U Douglas Pamela S PS

American heart journal 20181109

<h4>Background</h4>Although sex differences exist in the management of acute coronary syndromes, less is known about the management and outcomes of women and men with suspected coronary artery disease being evaluated with noninvasive testing (NIT).<h4>Methods</h4>We investigated sex-based differences in NIT results and subsequent clinical management in 4,720 women and 4,246 men randomized to CT angiography versus stress testing in the PROMISE trial. Logistic regression models assessed relationsh ...[more]

PMID: 30529930

Similar Datasets

Project description:The aim of this study was to determine whether presentation, risk assessment, testing choices, and results differ by sex in stable symptomatic outpatients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD).Although established CAD presentations differ by sex, little is known about stable, suspected CAD.The characteristics of 10,003 men and women in the PROMISE (Prospective Multicenter Imaging Study for Evaluation of Chest Pain) trial were compared using chi-square and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests. Sex differences in test selection and predictors of test positivity were examined using logistic regression.Women were older (62.4 years of age vs. 59.0 years of age) and were more likely to be hypertensive (66.6% vs. 63.2%), dyslipidemic (68.9% vs. 66.3%), and to have a family history of premature CAD (34.6% vs. 29.3) (all p values <0.005). Women were less likely to smoke (45.6% vs. 57.0%; p < 0.001), although their prevalence of diabetes was similar to that in men (21.8% vs. 21.0%; p = 0.30). Chest pain was the primary symptom in 73.2% of women versus 72.3% of men (p = 0.30), and was characterized as “crushing/pressure/squeezing/tightness” in 52.5% of women versus 46.2% of men (p < 0.001). Compared with men, all risk scores characterized women as being at lower risk, and providers were more likely to characterize women as having a low (<30%) pre-test probability of CAD (40.7% vs. 34.1%; p < 0.001). Compared with men, women were more often referred to imaging tests (adjusted odds ratio: 1.21; 95% confidence interval: 1.01 to 1.44) than nonimaging tests. Women were less likely to have a positive test (9.7% vs. 15.1%; p < 0.001). Although univariate predictors of test positivity were similar, in multivariable models, age, body mass index, and Framingham risk score were predictive of a positive test in women, whereas Framingham and Diamond and Forrester risk scores were predictive in men.Patient sex influences the entire diagnostic pathway for possible CAD, from baseline risk factors and presentation to noninvasive test outcomes. These differences highlight the need for sex-specific approaches for the evaluation of CAD.

Project description:ObjectivesThis study sought to externally validate prediction models for the presence of obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD).BackgroundA better assessment of the probability of CAD may improve the identification of patients who benefit from noninvasive testing.MethodsStable chest pain patients from the PROMISE (Prospective Multicenter Imaging Study for Evaluation of Chest Pain) trial with computed tomography angiography (CTA) or invasive coronary angiography (ICA) were included. The authors assumed that patients with CTA showing 0% stenosis and a coronary artery calcium (CAC) score of 0 were free of obstructive CAD (≥50% stenosis) on ICA, and they multiply imputed missing ICA results based on clinical variables and CTA results. Predicted CAD probabilities were calculated using published coefficients for 3 models: basic model (age, sex, chest pain type), clinical model (basic model + diabetes, hypertension, dyslipidemia, and smoking), and clinical + CAC score model. The authors assessed discrimination and calibration, and compared published effects with observed predictor effects.ResultsIn 3,468 patients (1,805 women; mean 60 years of age; 779 [23%] with obstructive CAD on CTA), the models demonstrated moderate-good discrimination, with C-statistics of 0.69 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.67 to 0.72), 0.72 (95% CI: 0.69 to 0.74), and 0.86 (95% CI: 0.85 to 0.88) for the basic, clinical, and clinical + CAC score models, respectively. Calibration was satisfactory although typical chest pain and diabetes were less predictive and CAC score was more predictive than was suggested by the models. Among the 31% of patients for whom the clinical model predicted a low (≤10%) probability of CAD, actual prevalence was 7%; among the 48% for whom the clinical + CAC score model predicted a low probability the observed prevalence was 2%. In 2 sensitivity analyses excluding imputed data, similar results were obtained using CTA as the outcome, whereas in those who underwent ICA the models significantly underestimated CAD probability.ConclusionsExisting clinical prediction models can identify patients with a low probability of obstructive CAD. Obstructive CAD on ICA was imputed for 61% of patients; hence, further validation is necessary.

Project description:BackgroundCoronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is associated with both cardiovascular disease (CVD) and non-CVD traits. In addition, women's prognosis after coronary events and revascularizations is worse than in men. As the course of CVD in women differs from that of men, we performed a phenome-wide analysis on the sex differences in CABG -related morbidity and mortality.Materials and methodsWe performed an untargeted analysis on the sex differences in predictors and outcomes of CABG. We studied a sample of 176,680 FinnGen participants, including 5,950 individuals who underwent CABG (4,988 men and 962 women) and were followed between 1998 and 2019. Over 1,100 different traits were analyzed for both sexes and the results were adjusted with age, smoking status and BMI. Cox proportional hazards models with sex-trait interactions were used to estimate the associations between (1) traits and incident CABG; and (2) CABG and incident traits.ResultsIn women, CABG was more strongly related to greater increases in risk of diseases such as hypertension, Alzheimer's, aortic aneurysms, gout, and chronic kidney disease compared to risk increases observed in men (all interaction p-values < 0.03). After CABG, men had 2.5-fold (p = 3.1E-15) and women 6.3-fold (p = 9.4E-08) greater risk of cardiac death compared to same-sex individuals who did not undergo CABG (p for interaction 8.2E-4). Moreover, the risk of death in women remained higher even 12 years after CABG, whereas the long-term risk of death in men was not increased, compared to same-sex individuals who did not undergo CABG.ConclusionThe adverse outcomes after CABG, both quantity and quality, also appear to differ between men and women. In women, CABG is related to greater long-term increases in risk of cardiac death and several other disease states than in men. Consideration should therefore be given to whether women receive adequate long-term post-operative therapy and follow-up as CABG is not associated with equally improved cardiovascular disease prognosis in women than in men.

Dataset Information

Sex differences in management and outcomes of patients with stable symptoms suggestive of coronary artery disease: Insights from the PROMISE trial.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Sex differences in management and outcomes of patients with stable symptoms suggestive of coronary artery disease: Insights from the PROMISE trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets