Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Population Study to Determine the Biologic Sex Ratio in Dilated Cardiomyopathy.

IF 35.5 1区 医学 Q1 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Circulation Pub Date : 2025-02-18 Epub Date: 2025-02-03 DOI:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.124.070872
Natalie Bergan, Ishika Prachee, Lara Curran, Kathryn A McGurk, Chang Lu, Antonio de Marvao, Wenjia Bai, Brian P Halliday, John Gregson, Declan P O'Regan, James S Ware, Upasana Tayal
{"title":"Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Population Study to Determine the Biologic Sex Ratio in Dilated Cardiomyopathy.","authors":"Natalie Bergan, Ishika Prachee, Lara Curran, Kathryn A McGurk, Chang Lu, Antonio de Marvao, Wenjia Bai, Brian P Halliday, John Gregson, Declan P O'Regan, James S Ware, Upasana Tayal","doi":"10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.124.070872","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) appears to be diagnosed twice as often in male than in female patients. This could be attributed to underdiagnosis in female patients or sex differences in susceptibility. Up to 30% of cases have an autosomal dominant monogenic cause, where equal sex prevalence would be expected. The aim of this systematic review, meta-analysis, and population study was to assess the sex ratio in patients with DCM, stratified by genetic status, and evaluate whether this is influenced by diagnostic bias.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A literature search identified DCM patient cohorts with discernible sex ratios. Exclusion criteria were studies with a small (n<100), pediatric, or peripartum population. Meta-analysis and metaregression compared the proportion of female participants for an overall DCM cohort and the following subtypes: all genetic DCM, individual selected DCM genes (<i>TTN</i> and <i>LMNA</i>), and gene-elusive DCM. Population DCM sex ratios generated from diagnostic codes were also compared with those from sex-specific means using the UK Biobank imaging cohort; this established ICD coded, novel imaging-first, and genotype first determined sex ratios.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 99 studies, with 37 525 participants, were included. The overall DCM cohort had a 0.30 female proportion (95% CI, 0.28-0.32), corresponding to a male:female ratio (M:F) of 2.38:1. This was similar to patients with an identified DCM variant (0.31 [95% CI, 0.26-0.36]; M:F 2.22:1; <i>P</i>=0.56). There was also no significant difference when compared with patients with gene-elusive DCM (0.30 [95% CI, 0.24-0.37]; M:F 2.29:1; <i>P</i>=0.81). Furthermore, the ratio within autosomal dominant gene variants was not significantly different for <i>TTN</i> (0.28 [95% CI, 0.22-0.36]; M:F 2.51:1; <i>P</i>=0.82) or <i>LMNA</i> (0.35 [95% CI, 0.27-0.44]; M:F 1.84:1; <i>P</i>=0.41). Overall, the sex ratio for DCM in people with disease attributed to autosomal dominant gene variants was similar to the all-cause group (0.34 [95% CI, 0.28-0.40]; M:F 1.98:1; <i>P</i>=0.19). In the UK Biobank (n=47 549), DCM defined by International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision, coding had 4.5:1 M:F. However, implementing sex-specific imaging-first and genotype-first diagnostic approaches changed this to 1.7:1 and 2.3:1, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study demonstrates that DCM is twice as prevalent in male patients. This was partially mitigated by implementing sex-specific DCM diagnostic criteria. The persistent male excess in genotype-positive patients with an equally prevalent genetic risk suggests additional genetic or environmental drivers for sex-biased penetrance.</p><p><strong>Registration: </strong>URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero; Unique identifier: CRD42023451944.</p>","PeriodicalId":10331,"journal":{"name":"Circulation","volume":" ","pages":"442-459"},"PeriodicalIF":35.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11827689/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Circulation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.124.070872","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) appears to be diagnosed twice as often in male than in female patients. This could be attributed to underdiagnosis in female patients or sex differences in susceptibility. Up to 30% of cases have an autosomal dominant monogenic cause, where equal sex prevalence would be expected. The aim of this systematic review, meta-analysis, and population study was to assess the sex ratio in patients with DCM, stratified by genetic status, and evaluate whether this is influenced by diagnostic bias.

Methods: A literature search identified DCM patient cohorts with discernible sex ratios. Exclusion criteria were studies with a small (n<100), pediatric, or peripartum population. Meta-analysis and metaregression compared the proportion of female participants for an overall DCM cohort and the following subtypes: all genetic DCM, individual selected DCM genes (TTN and LMNA), and gene-elusive DCM. Population DCM sex ratios generated from diagnostic codes were also compared with those from sex-specific means using the UK Biobank imaging cohort; this established ICD coded, novel imaging-first, and genotype first determined sex ratios.

Results: A total of 99 studies, with 37 525 participants, were included. The overall DCM cohort had a 0.30 female proportion (95% CI, 0.28-0.32), corresponding to a male:female ratio (M:F) of 2.38:1. This was similar to patients with an identified DCM variant (0.31 [95% CI, 0.26-0.36]; M:F 2.22:1; P=0.56). There was also no significant difference when compared with patients with gene-elusive DCM (0.30 [95% CI, 0.24-0.37]; M:F 2.29:1; P=0.81). Furthermore, the ratio within autosomal dominant gene variants was not significantly different for TTN (0.28 [95% CI, 0.22-0.36]; M:F 2.51:1; P=0.82) or LMNA (0.35 [95% CI, 0.27-0.44]; M:F 1.84:1; P=0.41). Overall, the sex ratio for DCM in people with disease attributed to autosomal dominant gene variants was similar to the all-cause group (0.34 [95% CI, 0.28-0.40]; M:F 1.98:1; P=0.19). In the UK Biobank (n=47 549), DCM defined by International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision, coding had 4.5:1 M:F. However, implementing sex-specific imaging-first and genotype-first diagnostic approaches changed this to 1.7:1 and 2.3:1, respectively.

Conclusions: This study demonstrates that DCM is twice as prevalent in male patients. This was partially mitigated by implementing sex-specific DCM diagnostic criteria. The persistent male excess in genotype-positive patients with an equally prevalent genetic risk suggests additional genetic or environmental drivers for sex-biased penetrance.

Registration: URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero; Unique identifier: CRD42023451944.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Circulation
Circulation 医学-外周血管病
CiteScore
45.70
自引率
2.10%
发文量
1473
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Circulation is a platform that publishes a diverse range of content related to cardiovascular health and disease. This includes original research manuscripts, review articles, and other contributions spanning observational studies, clinical trials, epidemiology, health services, outcomes studies, and advancements in basic and translational research. The journal serves as a vital resource for professionals and researchers in the field of cardiovascular health, providing a comprehensive platform for disseminating knowledge and fostering advancements in the understanding and management of cardiovascular issues.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信