Melloni Chiara, Berger Jeffrey S, Wang Tracy Y, Gunes Funda, Stebbins Amanda, Pieper Karen S, Dolor Rowena J, Douglas Pamela S, Mark Daniel B, Newby L Kristin
Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC 27705, USA.
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2010 Mar;3(2):135-42. doi: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.110.868307. Epub 2010 Feb 16.
The 2007 American Heart Association guidelines for cardiovascular disease prevention in women drew heavily on results from randomized clinical trials; however, representation of women in trials of cardiovascular disease prevention has not been systematically assessed.
We abstracted 156 randomized clinical trials cited by the 2007 women's prevention guidelines to determine female representation over time and by clinical indication, prevention type, location of trial conduct, and funding source. Both women and men were represented in 135 of 156 (86.5%) trials; 20 trials enrolled only men; 1 enrolled only women. Among all trials, the proportion of women increased significantly over time, from 9% in 1970 to 41% in 2006. Considering only trials that enrolled both women and men, female enrollment was 18% in 1970 and increased to 34% in 2006. Female representation was higher in international versus United States-only trials (32.7% versus 26.7%) and primary versus secondary prevention trials (42.6% versus 26.6%). Female enrollment was comparable in government/foundation-funded versus industry-funded trials (31.9% versus 31.5%). Representation of women was highest among trials in hypertension (44%), diabetes (40%), and stroke (38%) and lowest for heart failure (29%), coronary artery disease (25%), and hyperlipidemia (28%). By contrast, women accounted for 53% of all individuals with hypertension, 50% with diabetes, 51% with heart failure, 49% with hyperlipidemia, and 46% with coronary artery disease. Sex-specific results were discussed in only 31% of primary trial publications.
Enrollment of women in randomized clinical trials has increased over time but remains low relative to their overall representation in disease populations. Efforts are needed to reach a level of representation that is adequate to ensure evidence-based sex-specific recommendations.
2007年美国心脏协会关于女性心血管疾病预防的指南大量借鉴了随机临床试验的结果;然而,女性在心血管疾病预防试验中的代表性尚未得到系统评估。
我们摘录了2007年女性预防指南引用的156项随机临床试验,以确定不同时间以及按临床指征、预防类型、试验开展地点和资金来源划分的女性代表性情况。156项试验中的135项(86.5%)纳入了男性和女性;20项试验仅纳入男性;1项试验仅纳入女性。在所有试验中,女性的比例随时间显著增加,从1970年的9%增至2006年的41%。仅考虑同时纳入男性和女性的试验,1970年女性入组率为18%,2006年增至34%。国际试验中女性的代表性高于仅在美国开展的试验(32.7%对26.7%),一级预防试验高于二级预防试验(42.6%对26.6%)。政府/基金会资助的试验与行业资助的试验中女性入组率相当(31.9%对31.5%)。女性在高血压试验(44%)、糖尿病试验(40%)和中风试验(38%)中的代表性最高,在心力衰竭试验(29%)、冠状动脉疾病试验(25%)和高脂血症试验(28%)中最低。相比之下,高血压患者中女性占53%,糖尿病患者中占50%,心力衰竭患者中占51%,高脂血症患者中占49%,冠状动脉疾病患者中占46%。仅31%的主要试验出版物讨论了性别特异性结果。
随机临床试验中女性的入组率随时间有所增加,但相对于她们在疾病人群中的总体占比仍较低。需要做出努力,使女性的代表性达到足以确保基于证据的性别特异性建议的水平。