Prognostic impact of high-intensity lipid-lowering therapy under-prescription after acute myocardial infarction in women.

Abstract

Aims: Women are less likely to receive lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) after acute myocardial infarction (AMI). We analysed whether this under-prescription currently persists and has an impact on long-term outcomes.

Methods and results: The FAST-MI programme consists of nationwide registries including all patients admitted for AMI ≤ 48 h from onset over a 1 month period in 2005, 2010, and 2015, with long-term follow-up. This analysis focused on high-intensity LLT (atorvastatin ≥ 40 mg or equivalent, or any combination of statin and ezetimibe) in women and men. Women accounted for 28% (N = 3547) of the 12 659 patients. At discharge, high-intensity LLT was significantly less prescribed in women [54 vs. 68% in men, P < 0.001, adjusted odds ratio (OR) 0.78(95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71-0.87)], a trend that did not improve over time: 2005, 25 vs. 35% (P = 0.14); 2010, 66 vs. 79% (P < 0.001); 2015, 67 vs. 79.5% (P = 0.001). In contrast, female sex was not associated with a lack of other recommended treatments at discharge: beta-blockers [adjusted OR 0.98(95% CI 0.88-1.10), P = 0.78], or renin-angiotensin blockers [adjusted OR 0.94(95% CI 0.85-1.03), P = 0.18]. High-intensity LLT at discharge was significantly associated with improved 5 year survival and infarct- and stroke-free survival in women [adjusted hazard ratios (HR) 0.74(95% CI 0.64-0.86), P < 0.001 and adjusted HR: 0.81(95% CI: 0.74-0.89); P < 0.001, respectively]. Similar results were found using a propensity score-matched analysis [HR for 5 year survival in women with high-intensity LLT: 0.82(95% CI 0.70-0.98), P = 0.03].

Conclusion: Women suffer from a bias regarding the prescription of high-intensity LLT after AMI, which did not attenuate between 2005 and 2015, with potential consequences on both survival and risk of cardiovascular events.