Key result
Young women show ~2.2-fold higher serum leptin concentrations alongside distinct adipokine and inflammatory profiles versus men.
Why the study?
Gender influences the prevalence and pathophysiology of cardiometabolic risk factors in young adults, but comparative assessments of these differences are limited.
Cross-Sectional (n=251)
No
Absolute Event Rate: 34.6% vs 15.5%
p-value: p=<0.05
Does not support gender-tailored cardiometabolic screening in young adults; leaves open need for longitudinal validation.
Aim. To carry out a comparative assessment of cardiometabolic risk factors in men and women aged 18–44 years. Methods. The cross-sectional study included 251 patients divided into 2 groups. Group 1 consisted of 124 men; group 2 had 127 women in it. All participants of the study underwent anamnesis collection, blood pressure measurement, and assessment of anthropometric parameters, physical examination, biochemical and immunological tests. Results. The most significant gender differences were noted in the levels of leptin and adiponectin, fibrinogen and plasminogen activator inhibitor type 1, angiotensin II and interleukin-10 in the blood serum with no differences in cardiometabolic risk factors, including glucose and lipid metabolism. Conclusion. The revealed features of changes in adipokines and cytokines, indicators of hemostasis and vasoconstrictors in men and women expand the current knowledge about the role of some pathophysiological mechanisms in the development of cardiovascular pathology at a young age in the context of cardiometabolic risk concept.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Чулков et al. (2021) conducted a cross-sectional in Cardiometabolic risk (n=251). Female sex vs. Male sex was evaluated on Serum leptin concentration (ng/ml) (p=<0.05). Young women exhibited significantly higher serum concentrations of leptin, adiponectin, and fibrinogen compared to men, while men had higher levels of angiotensin II, PAI-1, and interleukin-10.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: