Why the study?
Does statin therapy reduce all-cause and cardiac mortality differently in men and women after acute myocardial infarction?
Does statin therapy reduce all-cause and cardiac mortality differently in men and women after acute myocardial infarction?
Statin therapy after AMI reduces all-cause and cardiac mortality in both sexes, with the benefit increasing over time, though women may experience slightly less risk reduction than men.
Supports post-MI statin benefit in both sexes with modestly smaller effect in women; leaves open randomized confirmation of sex differences.
BACKGROUND: We sought to investigate the sex differences in the effectiveness of statins in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). METHODS: Linking hospital discharge and drug claims databases from Quebec, Canada (1998-2004), we identified statin users (n = 14 710) and non-users (n = 23 833) discharged from hospital after an AMI-related hospital stay and followed up for as long as 7 years. RESULTS: All-cause death rates were 4.1 and 14.6 per 100 person-years among users and non-users, respectively, whereas cardiac death rates were 2.2 and 7.4 per 100 person-years. For death from any cause, the adjusted hazard ratios associated with statin use in women were 0.61 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54-0.69) within 1 year of follow-up, 0.55 (0.48-0.63) at 1-3 years and 0.38 (0.31-0.49) at > 3 years; in men, the corresponding estimates were 0.54 (0.48-0.60), 0.48 (0.42-0.55) and 0.34 (0.30-0.39). For cardiac-related death, the adjusted hazard ratios associated with statin use in women were 0.70 (0.60-0.81) within 1 year, 0.56 (0.46-0.68) at 1-3 years and 0.44 (0.31-0.62) at > 3 years of follow-up, whereas in men, the estimates were 0.59 (0.51-0.69), 0.47 (0.39-0.58) and 0.37 (0.30-0.45), respectively. INTERPRETATION: Statin therapy after an AMI was associated with reduced rates of all-cause and cardiac mortality. The effect increased with time in both sexes, but the degree of risk reduction was less for women than for men.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Karp et al. (2007) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: