Differences between men and women in guideline-directed medical therapy implementation, tolerability, and outcomes in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction

Clicks: 43
ID: 322541
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #35 of 88 articles by views in european heart journal - quality of care and clinical outcomes

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Abstract Background Guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is well established, but data on differences between men and women in real-world use, tolerability, and outcomes are limited. We examined these differences in contemporary HFrEF patients. Methods and results TITRATE-HF is a prospective registry across 48 Dutch hospitals (inclusion June 2022-February 2024), enrolling patients with de novo, chronic, and worsening heart failure (HF). This analysis studied 3,367 HFrEF patients and compared men and women regarding GDMT implementation, side effects, change in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), and clinical outcomes (composite endpoint: first HF hospitalization or all-cause death). The cohort included 2,408 men (71.5%; 71 years [IQR 63-77]) and 959 women (28.5%; 72 years [IQR 64-79]). At 12-month follow-up, 59.0% of men and 59.7% of women received quadruple therapy (p=0.729). Men more often achieved quadruple therapy at ≥50% of target doses (16.2% versus 11.9%, p=0.004). Compared to men, women experienced more downgrades of ARB (11.6% versus 6.9%, p=0.040) and MRA (13.2% versus 10.4%, p=0.038) due to side effects. In de novo HFrEF, women showed greater LVEF improvement than men (15% versus 13%, p=0.005). In chronic HFrEF, women had lower risk of the composite endpoint compared to men (aHR 0.64, 95% CI 0.45–0.91; p=0.015). Conclusions GDMT initiation and sequencing were comparable between men and women, but differences were observed in dose achievement, treatment tolerability, and clinical outcomes. These findings underscore the need for implementation and dosing strategies that account for differences between men and women.
Reference Key
openalex_W7171258650 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors M I Wilde, J J N Krabbe, L J Bouhuijzen, G P J van Hout, M M de Leau, K W Wu, E A van Beek, T Hesselink, L Kleijn, M J M Kurvers, R A Tio, C M Gijsberts, C Ghossein-Doha, Peter van der Meer, R A de Boer, H P Brunner-La Rocca, S Koudstaal, Jasper J. Brugts
Are you one of these authors? Claim your profile
Journal european heart journal - quality of care and clinical outcomes
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/ehjqcco/qcag116
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjqcco/qcag116
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.