Key result
Current cardiovascular risk stratification strategies underestimate CVD risk in women, highlighting the need to incorporate female-specific biological differences to improve clinical outcomes.
Why the study?
Current CVD risk strategies underestimate risk in women, and female-specific biological factors contributing to CVD remain understudied and excluded from risk stratification.
This review highlights the underestimation of cardiovascular disease risk in women and emphasizes the need to incorporate female-specific biological differences into risk stratification and therapeutic strategies.
Cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains the leading cause of death globally, despite significant public health efforts. The identification and targeting of modifiable risk factors - including hypertension, dyslipidemia, diabetes mellitus, smoking and obesity - have led to significant improvements in patient outcomes over the past 60 years. However, current strategies based on this model have been shown to underestimate CVD risk in women and they are less frequently targeted compared to men. In addition, female-specific biological differences known to contribute to CVD are frequently understudied or excluded from risk stratification efforts. This review explores the unique epidemiological burden, pathobiology and outcomes of CVD in women; the influence of traditional and sex-specific risk factors; and both diagnostic and therapeutic strategies that may improve clinical outcomes in the future.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Figtree et al. (2025) conducted a review in Cardiovascular disease in women. Current cardiovascular risk stratification strategies underestimate CVD risk in women, highlighting the need to incorporate female-specific biological differences to improve clinical outcomes.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: