Abstract
Background In the US, women have similar cardiovascular death rates than men. Less is known about sex differences in statin use for primary prevention and associated atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) outcomes.
Methods Statin prescriptions using electronic health records were examined in patients without ASCVD (myocardial infarction (MI), revascularization or ischemic stroke) between 2013-2019. Guideline-directed statin intensity (GDSI) at index and follow-up visits were compared among sexes across ASCVD risk groups, defined by pooled-cohort equation. Cox regression hazard ratios (HR) [95% CI] were calculated for statin use and outcomes (myocardial infarction, stroke/transient ischemic attack (TIA), and all-cause mortality) stratified by sex. Interaction terms (statin and sex) were applied.
Results Among 282,298 patients, (mean age ∼ 50 years) 17.1% women and 19.5% men were prescribed any statin at index visit. Time to GDSI was similar between sexes, but the proportion of high-risk women on GDSI at follow-ups was lower compared to high-risk men (2-years: 27.7 vs 32.0%, and 5-years: 47.2 vs 55.2%, p<0.05). When compared to GDSI, no statin use was associated with higher risk of MI and ischemic stroke/TIA amongst both sexes. High-risk women on GDSI had a lower risk of mortality (HR=1.39 [1.22-1.59]) versus men (HR=1.67 [1.50-1.86]) of similar risk (p value interaction=0.004).
Conclusion In a large contemporary healthcare system, there was underutilization of statins across both sexes in primary prevention. High-risk women were less likely to be initiated on GDSI compared with high-risk men. GDSI significantly improved the survival in both sexes regardless of ASCVD risk group. Future strategies to ensure continued use of GDSI, specifically among women, should be explored.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
No external funding.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This study was approved by a Quality Improvement and Institutional Review Board committees at University of Pittsburgh Medical Center under IRB approval number QRC #1559. This study was restricted to secondary analysis of deidentified data, and thus, the requirement for informed consent from participants was waived.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Data may be provided upon reasonable requests.
Abbreviations
- ASCVD
- Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease
- AHA
- American Heart Association
- EHR
- Electronic health record
- GDSI
- Guideline-directed statin intensity
- MI
- Myocardial infarction
