Affiliations 

  • 1 Institute for Medical Information Processing, Biometry, and Epidemiology Pettenkofer School of Public Health, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany
  • 2 Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands
  • 3 Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Karolinska Insitutet, Stockholm, Sweden
  • 4 Medical Affairs & Pharmacovigilance, Berlin, Germany
  • 5 Department of Cardiology, Erasmus MC University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
  • 6 Biomedical Data Science II, Bayer AG, Berlin, Germany
  • 7 Department of Cardiology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Cardiovascular Sciences, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  • 8 Institut de Recherches Internationales Servier (I.R.I.S.), Suresnes, France
  • 9 Vifor Pharma Ltd, Glattbrugg, Switzerland
  • 10 Statistics and Data Insights, Bayer AG, Berlin, Germany
  • 11 Cronin Pharma Consulting, Lucerne, Switzerland
  • 12 Department of Cardiology, Green Heart Hospital, Gouda, The Netherlands
Eur J Heart Fail, 2023 Jun;25(6):912-921.
PMID: 37101398 DOI: 10.1002/ejhf.2868

Abstract

AIMS: In order to understand how sex differences impact the generalizability of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in patients with heart failure (HF) and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), we sought to compare clinical characteristics and clinical outcomes between RCTs and HF observational registries stratified by sex.

METHODS AND RESULTS: Data from two HF registries and five HFrEF RCTs were used to create three subpopulations: one RCT population (n = 16 917; 21.7% females), registry patients eligible for RCT inclusion (n = 26 104; 31.8% females), and registry patients ineligible for RCT inclusion (n = 20 810; 30.2% females). Clinical endpoints included all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and first HF hospitalization at 1 year. Males and females were equally eligible for trial enrolment (56.9% of females and 55.1% of males in the registries). One-year mortality rates were 5.6%, 14.0%, and 28.6% for females and 6.9%, 10.7%, and 24.6% for males in the RCT, RCT-eligible, and RCT-ineligible groups, respectively. After adjusting for 11 HF prognostic variables, RCT females showed higher survival compared to RCT-eligible females (standardized mortality ratio [SMR] 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.62-0.83), while RCT males showed higher adjusted mortality rates compared to RCT-eligible males (SMR 1.16; 95% CI 1.09-1.24). Similar results were also found for cardiovascular mortality (SMR 0.89; 95% CI 0.76-1.03 for females, SMR 1.43; 95% CI 1.33-1.53 for males).

CONCLUSION: Generalizability of HFrEF RCTs differed substantially between the sexes, with females having lower trial participation and female trial participants having lower mortality rates compared to similar females in the registries, while males had higher than expected cardiovascular mortality rates in RCTs compared to similar males in registries.

* Title and MeSH Headings from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.