Sex-Based Differences Among Experimental Swine Abdominal Aortic aneurysms

Gender Bias in Clinical Trial Enrollment: Female Authorship Matters

BACKGROUND

Despite initiatives to promote equal enrollment of human subjects in clinical trials, females continue to be underrepresented. The goal of this work is to determine if female enrollment in human clinical trials published in 3 high-impact journals from 2015 to 2019 is correlated with gender of first and/or senior authors.

METHODS

Clinical trials published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), The Lancet, and the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2019, were reviewed. Trials were excluded for ongoing enrollment, sex-specific disease research, or author name without gender assignment. One-sample χ2 pairwise comparisons and two-tailed proportion tests on the proportion of females between gender author pairings were done overall and for each subset analysis.

RESULTS

In total, 1,427 articles enrolled a total of 2,104,509 females and 2,616,981 males (44.6% vs. 55.4%, P ≤ 0.0001) in clinical trials. Overall, more females were enrolled if both first and senior authors were female (51.7% vs. 48.3%, P ≤ 0.0001). Proportion of females enrolled decreased with the following first and senior author pairings: female-male (48.9%), male-female (48.6%), and male-male (40.5%, P ≤ 0.0001 compared to female-female authorship). Greater female enrollment in clinical trials with female-female compared to male-male authorship persisted in subset analyses by funding source, phase, randomization for study participants, drug and/or device trial, and geographic location. Female enrollment was higher in 3 surgical specialties: neurosurgery (all authors: 52%, P ≤ 0.01), ophthalmology (all authors: 53.6%, P ≤ 0.0001), and surgery (all authors: 54.4%, P ≤ 0.0001). The majority of surgical specialties did not publish trials with female-female authorship but when stratifying by author gender pairing, surgical oncology had the highest female enrollment with female-female authorship (98.4%, P ≤ 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Female authorship of clinical trial publications, specifically having both first and senior authors as female, was correlated with higher female enrollment in clinical trials when compared to male authorship and endured with multiple subset analyses.

Sex-Related Differences in Proximal Neck Anatomy and Their Consequences in Patients after EVAR: A Matched Cohort Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Studies comparing male and female patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms have shown that female patients are generally older and more often experience postoperative complications after endovascular and open repair. There are also indications that female patients have more extensive neck pathologies and that they more often have postoperative complications related to proximal neck pathology.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This retrospective study describes all consecutive female patients who underwent EVAR between 1 January 2012 and 31 December 2021. Propensity-score matching was used to obtain a matched control male cohort. Propensity scores were generated with the following anatomic parameters: infrarenal and suprarenal angulation, proximal and distal neck diameter and neck length. 1 Female patient was matched with 3 male patients.

RESULTS

A total of 160 patients were included, namely 120 male patients and 40 female patients. Due to matching, there were no significant differences regarding infrarenal and suprarenal angulation and proximal and distal neck diameter and length. All-cause and aneurysm-related mortality were comparable (p = 0.19 and p = 0.98). The necessity of neck-related secondary procedures was significantly higher in female patients (p = 0.02). In the multivariate analysis, the female sex was a significant predictor of endoleak type IA within 30 days. However, there was no significant association between intraoperative endoleak type IA and endoleak type IA at the end of follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that there was a higher initial incidence of endoleak type IA in female patients, despite thematched preoperative anatomic parameter. Due to the relatively low number of included female patients, conclusions should be drawn carefully.

Rethinking Routine Intensive Care After Cytoreductive Surgery With Heated Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy: The Fiscal Argument

BACKGROUND

Patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) are frequently admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) for mitigation of potential complications, although ICU length of stay (LOS) is a significant driver of cost. This study asked whether a fiscal argument could be made for the selective avoidance of ICU admission after CRS/HIPEC.

METHODS

Prospective data for select low-risk patients (e.g., lower peritoneal cancer index [PCI]) admitted to the intermediate care unit (IMC) instead of the ICU after CRS/HIPEC were matched with a historic cohort routinely admitted to the ICU. Cohort comparisons and the impact of the intervention on cost were assessed.

RESULTS

The study matched 81 CRS/HIPEC procedures to form a cohort of 49 pre- and 15 post-intervention procedures for patients with similar disease burdens (mean PCI, 8 ± 6.7 vs. 7 ± 5.1). The pre-intervention patients stayed a median of 1 day longer in the ICU (1 day [IQR, 1-1 day] vs. 0 days [IQR, 0-0 days]) and had a longer LOS (8 days [IQR, 7-11 days] vs. 6 days [IQR, 5.5-9 days]). Complications and complication severity did not differ statistically. The median total hospital cost was lower after intervention ($30,845 [IQR, $30,181-$37,725] vs. $41,477 [IQR, $33,303-$51,838]), driven by decreased indirect fixed cost ($8984 [IQR, $8643-$11,286] vs. $14,314 [IQR, $12,206-$18,266]). In a weighted multiple variable linear regression analysis, the intervention was associated with a savings of $2208.68 per patient.

CONCLUSIONS

Selective admission to the IMC after CRS/HIPEC was associated with $2208.68 in savings per patient without added risk. In this era of cost-conscious practice of medicine, these data highlight an opportunity to decrease cost by more than 5% for patients undergoing CRS/HIPEC.