Cited 23 times since 2009 (1.6 per year) source: EuropePMC American heart journal, Volume 158, Issue 5, 1 1 2009, Pages 860-866 Low- and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol goal attainment in dyslipidemic women: The Lipid Treatment Assessment Project (L-TAP) 2. Santos RD, Waters DD, Tarasenko L, Messig M, Jukema JW, Ferrières J, Verdejo J, Chiang CW, L-TAP 2 Investigators

Background

Differences between women and men have been documented for both diagnostic testing and treatment in cardiology. This analysis evaluates whether low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) success rates according to current guidelines and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels differ by gender in the L-TAP 2 population.

Methods

Patients aged > or =20 years with dyslipidemia on stable lipid-lowering therapy were assessed in 9 countries between September 2006 and April 2007. Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol goal attainment by cardiovascular risk level and region and determinants of low HDL-C were compared between genders.

Results

Of 9,955 patients (45.3% women) evaluated, women had a significantly lower overall LDL-C success rate than men (71.5% vs 73.7%, P = .014), due entirely to the difference in the high-risk/coronary heart disease (CHD) group (LDL-C goal <100 mg/dL, 62.6% vs 70.6%, P < .0001) Among CHD patients with > or =2 additional risk factors, only 26.7% of women and 31.5% of men (P = .021) attained the optional LDL-C goal of <70 mg/dL. High-density lipoprotein cholesterol was <50 mg/dL in 32.2% of women and <40 mg/dL in 26.8% of men (P < .0001), including 38.2% of women and 29.8% of men in the high risk/CHD group (P < .0001). Predictors of low HDL-C in women included diabetes, smoking, waist circumference, and hypertension.

Conclusions

Cholesterol treatment has improved substantially since the original L-TAP a decade ago, when only 39% of women attained their LDL-C goal. However, high-risk women are undertreated compared to men, and a substantial opportunity remains to reduce their cardiovascular risk.

Am Heart J. 2009 11;158(5):860-866