Skip to content
Review Open access

Sex-Based Differences in Chronic Heart Failure: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Oct 2026 · European Journal of Heart Failure · 0 citations
Medicine

Abstract

Background

Sex-based disparities in patient enrollment and treatment effects in heart failure (HF) randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been reported. We aim to systematically analyze sex-based enrollment and treatment effect differences in HF RCTs over time.

Methods

RCTs enrolling patients with chronic HF were systematically searched on PubMed-MEDLINE. Eligible trials included pharmacological or device-based interventions with a hard primary endpoint (mortality and hospitalization) and reporting enrollment of women. Sex-specific treatment effects (HR or RR) were extracted. Meta-analyses were performed using random-effects models, and pre-specified subgroup analyses were performed.

Results

A total of 56 RCTs (39 drug, 17 device) were included. The pooled proportion of women enrollment was 27.0% (95%CI: 22.0% to 32.4%) in drug trials and 25.3% (95%CI: 21.0% to 29.9%) in device trials. Women were more underrepresented in HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) than in HF with preserved EF (HFpEF) trials (21.0% vs 49.6%, p < 0.001). Among drug trials reporting sex-specific effects, the pooled sex interaction for RCTs reporting HR was 0.94 (95%CI 0.89-1.01) and RR was 0.81 (95%CI 0.68-0.96), suggesting potentially greater benefit for women. No interaction was observed between HFrEF and HFpEF trials (HR: p = 0.44; RR: p = 0.95). The pooled interaction estimate on event counts was 0.90 (95%CI 0.84-0.96). For devices, the pooled sex interaction for RCTs reporting HR was 1.05 (95%CI 0.90-1.22) and RR was 0.68 (95%CI 0.50-0.93).

Conclusion

Women remain underrepresented in HF RCTs. Sex-stratified analyses suggest a potentially greater relative benefit of drug intervention in women, which might inform future RCTs. Further studies are required to investigate the mechanisms of these differences.

Read PDF

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.