Dataset Information

Sex-differences in circulating biomarkers during acute myocardial infarction: An analysis from the SWEDEHEART registry.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Sex-differences in the pathobiology of myocardial infarction are well established but incompletely understood. Improved knowledge on this topic may help clinicians to improve management of men and women with myocardial infarction.

Methods

In this registry-based cohort study (SWEDEHEART), we analyzed 175 circulating biomarkers reflecting various pathobiological axes in 856 men and 243 women admitted to Swedish coronary care units because of myocardial infarction. Two multimarker panels were applied (Proximity Extension Assay [Olink Bioscience], Multiple Reaction Monitoring mass spectrometry). Lasso analysis (penalized logistic regression), multiple testing-corrected Mann-Whitney tests and Cox regressions were used to assess sex-differences in the concentrations of these biomarkers and their implications on all-cause mortality and major adverse events (median follow-up up to 6.6 years).

Results

Biomarkers provided a very high discrimination between both sexes, when considered simultaneously (c-statistics 0.972). Compared to women, men had higher concentrations of six biomarkers with the most pronounced differences seen for those reflecting atherogenesis, myocardial necrosis and metabolism. Women had higher concentrations of 14 biomarkers with the most pronounced differences seen for those reflecting activation of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone axis, inflammation and for adipokines. There were no major variations between sexes in the associations of these biomarkers with outcome.

Conclusions

Severable sex-differences exist in the expression of biomarkers in patients with myocardial infarction. While these differences had no impact on outcome, our data suggest the presence of various sex-related pathways involved in the development of coronary atherosclerosis, the progression to plaque rupture and acute myocardial damage, with a greater heterogeneity in women.

SUBMITTER: Eggers KM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8031406 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:This study assessed sex differences in treatments, all-cause mortality, relative survival, and excess mortality following acute myocardial infarction. METHODS AND RESULTS:A population-based cohort of all hospitals providing acute myocardial infarction care in Sweden (SWEDEHEART [Swedish Web System for Enhancement and Development of Evidence-Based Care in Heart Disease Evaluated According to Recommended Therapies]) from 2003 to 2013 was included in the analysis. Excess mortality rate ratios (EMRRs), adjusted for clinical characteristics and guideline-indicated treatments after matching by age, sex, and year to background mortality data, were estimated. Although there were no sex differences in all-cause mortality adjusted for age, year of hospitalization, and comorbidities for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-STEMI at 1 year (mortality rate ratio: 1.01 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.96-1.05] and 0.97 [95% CI, 0.95-0.99], respectively) and 5 years (mortality rate ratio: 1.03 [95% CI, 0.99-1.07] and 0.97 [95% CI, 0.95-0.99], respectively), excess mortality was higher among women compared with men for STEMI and non-STEMI at 1 year (EMRR: 1.89 [95% CI, 1.66-2.16] and 1.20 [95% CI, 1.16-1.24], respectively) and 5 years (EMRR: 1.60 [95% CI, 1.48-1.72] and 1.26 [95% CI, 1.21-1.32], respectively). After further adjustment for the use of guideline-indicated treatments, excess mortality among women with non-STEMI was not significant at 1 year (EMRR: 1.01 [95% CI, 0.97-1.04]) and slightly higher at 5 years (EMRR: 1.07 [95% CI, 1.02-1.12]). For STEMI, adjustment for treatments attenuated the excess mortality for women at 1 year (EMRR: 1.43 [95% CI, 1.26-1.62]) and 5 years (EMRR: 1.31 [95% CI, 1.19-1.43]). CONCLUSIONS:Women with acute myocardial infarction did not have statistically different all-cause mortality, but had higher excess mortality compared with men that was attenuated after adjustment for the use of guideline-indicated treatments. This suggests that improved adherence to guideline recommendations for the treatment of acute myocardial infarction may reduce premature cardiovascular death among women. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION:URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02952417.

Project description:BackgroundThe diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is missed more frequently in young women than men, which may be related to the cognitive psychology of the diagnostic process. Physicians start the diagnostic process by intuitively recognizing familiar symptom phenotypes, but little is known about how symptoms combine in individuals as unique symptom phenotypes. We examined how symptoms of AMI combine as unique symptom phenotypes in individual patients to compare the distribution of symptom phenotypes in women versus men.Methods and resultsThe VIRGO study (Variation in Recovery: Role of Gender on Outcomes of Young AMI Patients) was a multicenter, observational cohort study of 3501 young adults hospitalized with AMI. Data were collected on presenting symptoms with standardized interviews and from medical record abstraction. The number and distribution of unique symptom phenotypes were compared between women and men. Because of the 2:1 female-to-male enrollment ratio, women and men were compared with permutation testing and repeated subsampling. There were 426 interview-symptom phenotypes in women and 280 in men. The observed difference between women and men of 146 phenotypes was significant, even allowing for the greater enrollment of women (permutation P=0.004, median difference 110 under the null hypothesis of no association between sex and phenotype). The repeated subsample analysis also showed significantly more interview-symptom phenotypes in women than men (206.8±7.3 versus 188.6±6.0, P<0.001). Women were more broadly distributed among symptom phenotype subgroups than men (P<0.001). Similar findings were observed in the analysis of symptoms abstracted from the medical record.ConclusionsWomen exhibited substantially more variation in unique symptom phenotypes than men, regardless of whether the symptoms were derived from structured interviews or abstracted from the medical record. These findings may provide an explanation for the higher missed diagnosis rate in young women with AMI and may have important implications for teaching and improving clinicians' ability to recognize the diagnosis of AMI in women.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:We aimed to assess the patient experience of informed consent (IC) during acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in a sub-study of the VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART trial. The original trial compared two anticoagulant agents in patients undergoing coronary intervention. A witnessed oral IC was required prior to randomization in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, which was subsequently complemented with a written IC after percutaneous coronary intervention. Written consent was obtained before angiography in patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. BACKGROUND:The IC process in patients with AMI is under debate. Earlier trials in this population have required prospective consent before randomization. A trial published some years ago used deferred consent, but the patient experience of this process is poorly studied. METHODS:A total of 414 patients who participated in the main trial were enrolled and asked the following questions: (1) Do you remember being asked to participate in a study? (2) How was your experience of being asked to participate; do you remember it being positive or negative? (3) Would you have liked more information about the study? (4) Do you think it would have been better if you were included in the study without being informed until a later time? RESULTS:Of these patients, 94% remembered being included; 85% of them experienced this positively, 12% were neutral and 3% negative. Regarding more information, 88% did not want further information, and 68% expressed that they wanted to be consulted before inclusion. Of the patients, 5% thought it would have been better to have study inclusion without consent, and 27% considered it of no importance. CONCLUSION:It is reasonable to ask patients for verbal IC in the acute phase of AMI. Most patients felt positively about being asked to participate and had knowledge of being enrolled in a scientific study. In addition they objected to providing IC after randomization and treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION:VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART European Union Clinical Trials Register: 2012-005260-10. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02311231. Registered on 8 Dec 2014.