Current Cardiovascular Risk Reports

, Volume 5, Issue 3, pp 280–286

Should There Be a Different Cardiovascular Prevention Polypill Strategy for Women and Men?

  • Mark D. Huffman
  • Mohammed K. Ali
  • K. M. Venkat Narayan
Article
  • 51 Downloads

Abstract

The concept of a polypill for cardiovascular disease prevention has attracted widespread attention since Wald and Law’s seminal paper in 2003. The authors estimated > 80% reduction in coronary heart disease and stroke deaths through mass application of a polypill in people aged 55 years and older. Although their proposition has been subject to criticisms and heated debate regarding side effects, efficacy, and appropriateness of the intervention, few have discussed the differential risks and benefits of a polypill for women and men and whether sex-specific polypill strategies should be developed. In this review, we discuss the benefits and drawbacks of sex-specific polypill strategies by evaluating the published literature regarding 1) sex differences in cardiovascular risk and risk reduction, 2) risks and benefits of a polypill in women compared to men, 3) anticipated hurdles to implementing a polypill strategy, 4) special considerations related to low- and middle-income country settings, and 5) potential sex-specific polypill strategies.

Keywords

Polypill Women Cardiovascular disease Prevention 

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. 1.
    Wald NJ, Law MR. A strategy to reduce cardiovascular disease by more than 80%. BMJ. 2003;326:1419.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Yusuf S. Two decades of progress in preventing vascular disease. Lancet. 2002;360:2–3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    World Health Organization. Secondary prevention of non-communicable disease in low and middle income countries through community-based and health service interventions. WHO-Wellcome Trust Meet. Rep. 1–3. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2002.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fahey T, Brindle P, Ebrahim S. The polypill and cardiovascular disease. BMJ. 2005;330:1035–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Narayan KM, Mensah GA, Sorensen S, et al. Combination pharmacotherapy for cardiovascular disease prevention: threat or opportunity for public health? Am J Prev Med. 2005;29:134–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Smith, R. The most important BMJ in 50 years? BMJ. 2003;326(7404).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gaziano TA, Opie LH, Weinstein MC. Cardiovascular disease prevention with a multidrug regimen in the developing world: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Lancet. 2006;368:679–86.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Reddy KS. The preventive polypill–much promise, insufficient evidence. N Engl J Med. 2007;356:212.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    •• Yusuf S, Pais P, Afzal R, et al. Effects of a polypill (Polycap) on risk factors in middle-aged individuals without cardiovascular disease (TIPS): a phase II, double-blind, randomised trial. Lancet 2009;373:1341–51. The Indian Polypcap Study (TIPS) was the first phase 2 polypill study published, reflecting the global interest in a polypill strategy. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Malekzadeh F, Marshall T, Pourshams A, et al. A pilot double-blind randomised placebo-controlled trial of the effects of fixed-dose combination therapy (‘polypill’) on cardiovascular risk factors. Int J Clin Pract. 2010;64:1220–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    UMPIRE—Use of a Multidrug Pill In Reducing Cardiovascular Events. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01057537. Available at: http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01057537?term=umpire&rank=1. Accessed 27 November 2010.
  12. 12.
    Lloyd-Jones DM, Larson MG, Beiser A, Levy D. Lifetime risk of developing coronary heart disease. Lancet. 1999;353:89–92.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Yusuf S, Hawken S, Ounpuu S, et al. Effect of potentially modifiable risk factors associated with myocardial infarction in 52 countries (the INTERHEART study): case-control study. Lancet. 2004;364:937–52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lewington S, Clarke R, Qizilbash N, Peto R, Collins R. Age-specific relevance of usual blood pressure to vascular mortality: a meta-analysis of individual data for one million adults in 61 prospective studies. Lancet. 2002;360:1903–13.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Marma AK, Berry JD, Ning H, Persell SD, Lloyd-Jones DM. Distribution of 10-year and lifetime predicted risks for cardiovascular disease in US adults: findings from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2003 to 2006. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2010;3:8–14.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Stamler J, Stamler R, Neaton JD, et al. Low risk-factor profile and long-term cardiovascular and noncardiovascular mortality and life expectancy: findings for 5 large cohorts of young adult and middle-aged men and women. JAMA. 1999;282:2012–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Daviglus ML, Stamler J, Pirzada A, et al. Favorable cardiovascular risk profile in young women and long-term risk of cardiovascular and all-cause mortality. JAMA. 2004;292:1588–92.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Calderon-Margalit R, Schwartz SM, Wellons MF, et al. Prospective association of serum androgens and sex hormone-binding globulin with subclinical cardiovascular disease in young adult women: the “Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults” women’s study. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2010;95:4424–31.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lloyd-Jones DM. Cardiovascular risk prediction: basic concepts, current status, and future directions. Circulation. 2010;121:1768–77.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Manson JE, Hsia J, Johnson KC, et al. Estrogen plus progestin and the risk of coronary heart disease. N Engl J Med. 2003;349:523–34.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    • Baigent C, Blackwell L, Collins R, et al. Aspirin in the primary and secondary prevention of vascular disease: collaborative meta-analysis of individual participant data from randomised trials. Lancet 2009;373:1849–60. These data from the Antithrombotic Trialists’ Collaboration reflect the most up-to-date evaluation of the risks and benefits of aspirin in women and men in the prevention of cardiovascular disease. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    De Berardis G, Sacco M, Strippoli GF, et al. Aspirin for primary prevention of cardiovascular events in people with diabetes: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ. 2009;339:b4531.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Baigent C, Keech A, Kearney PM, et al. Efficacy and safety of cholesterol-lowering treatment: prospective meta-analysis of data from 90, 056 participants in 14 randomised trials of statins. Lancet. 2005;366:1267–78.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Baigent C, Blackwell L, Emberson J, et al. Efficacy and safety of more intensive lowering of LDL cholesterol: a meta-analysis of data from 170, 000 participants in 26 randomised trials. Lancet. 2010;376:1670–81.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rothwell PM, Coull AJ, Silver LE, et al. Population-based study of event-rate, incidence, case fatality, and mortality for all acute vascular events in all arterial territories (Oxford Vascular Study). Lancet. 2005;366:1773–83.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Seshadri S, Beiser A, Kelly-Hayes M, et al. The lifetime risk of stroke: estimates from the Framingham Study. Stroke. 2006;37:345–50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Gueyffier F, Boutitie F, Boissel JP, et al. Effect of antihypertensive drug treatment on cardiovascular outcomes in women and men. A meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomized, controlled trials. The INDANA Investigators. Ann Intern Med. 1997;126:761–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Turnbull F, Woodward M, Neal B, et al. Do men and women respond differently to blood pressure-lowering treatment? Results of prospectively designed overviews of randomized trials. Eur Heart J. 2008;29:2669–80.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Czernichow S, Zanchetti A, Turnbull F, et al. The effects of blood pressure reduction and of different blood pressure-lowering regimens on major cardiovascular events according to baseline blood pressure: meta-analysis of randomized trials. J Hypertens 2010:[Epub ahead of print].Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Trewby P, Trewby C. “Polypill” to fight cardiovascular disease: patients before populations. BMJ. 2003;327:807. discussion 9; author reply 9–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Lloyd-Jones DM, Wang TJ, Leip EP, et al. Lifetime risk for development of atrial fibrillation: the Framingham Heart Study. Circulation. 2004;110:1042–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Lloyd-Jones DM, Larson MG, Leip EP, et al. Lifetime risk for developing congestive heart failure: the Framingham Heart Study. Circulation. 2002;106:3068–72.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Mosca L, Ferris A, Fabunmi R, Robertson RM. Tracking women’s awareness of heart disease: an American Heart Association national study. Circulation. 2004;109:573–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Yang J, Hammond D, Driezen P, Fong GT, Jiang Y. Health knowledge and perception of risks among Chinese smokers and non-smokers: findings from the Wave 1 ITC China Survey. Tob Control. 2010;19 Suppl 2:i18–23.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Roger VL, Farkouh ME, Weston SA, et al. Sex differences in evaluation and outcome of unstable angina. JAMA. 2000;283:646–52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Mendis S, Abegunde D, Yusuf S, et al. WHO study on Prevention of REcurrences of Myocardial Infarction and StrokE (WHO-PREMISE). Bull World Health Organ. 2005;83:820–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Goyal A, Bhatt DL, Steg PG, et al. Attained educational level and incident atherothrombotic events in low- and middle-income compared with high-income countries. Circulation. 2010;122:1167–75.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Niens LM, Cameron A, Van de Poel E, Ewen M, Brouwer WB, Laing R. Quantifying the impoverishing effects of purchasing medicines: a cross-country comparison of the affordability of medicines in the developing world. PLoS Med 2010;7.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    •• van Mourik MS, Cameron A, Ewen M, Laing RO. Availability, price and affordability of cardiovascular medicines: a comparison across 36 countries using WHO/HAI data. BMC Cardiovasc Disord 2010;10:25. This article, based on data from the World Health Organization/Health Action International database, provides the most up-to-date, comprehensive perspective on cardiovascular drug costs around the world, including in LMICs. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Sanz G, Fuster V. Fixed-dose combination therapy and secondary cardiovascular prevention: rationale, selection of drugs and target population. Nat Clin Pract Cardiovasc Med. 2009;6:101–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Grant RM, Lama JR, Anderson PL, et al. Preexposure chemoprophylaxis for HIV prevention in men who have sex with men. N Engl J Med 2010:[Epub ahead of print].Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Petrilla AA, Benner JS, Battleman DS, Tierce JC, Hazard EH. Evidence-based interventions to improve patient compliance with antihypertensive and lipid-lowering medications. Int J Clin Pract. 2005;59:1441–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Lim SS, Gaziano TA, Gakidou E, et al. Prevention of cardiovascular disease in high-risk individuals in low-income and middle-income countries: health effects and costs. Lancet. 2007;370:2054–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    O’Donnell MJ, Xavier D, Liu L, et al. Risk factors for ischaemic and intracerebral haemorrhagic stroke in 22 countries (the INTERSTROKE study): a case-control study. Lancet. 2010;376:112–23.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Cannon CP. Can the polypill save the world from heart disease? Lancet. 2009;373:1313–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Callaghan M, Ford N, Schneider H. A systematic review of task- shifting for HIV treatment and care in Africa. Hum Resour Health. 2010;8:8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Mwanahamuntu MH, Sahasrabuddhe VV, Pfaendler KS, et al. Implementation of ‘see-and-treat’ cervical cancer prevention services linked to HIV care in Zambia. AIDS. 2009;23:N1–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Viera AJ, Sheridan SL, Edwards T, Soliman EZ, Harris R, Furberg CD. Acceptance of a polypill approach to prevent cardiovascular disease among a sample of U.S. physicians. Prev Med 2010.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Lonn E, Bosch J, Teo KK, Pais P, Xavier D, Yusuf S. The polypill in the prevention of cardiovascular diseases: key concepts, current status, challenges, and future directions. Circulation. 2010;122:2078–88.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Jha P. Avoidable global cancer deaths and total deaths from smoking. Nat Rev Cancer. 2009;9:655–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    World Population Highlights: Key findings from PRB’s 2009 world population data sheet. Population Bulletin 64, no. 3 (2009).Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Aspirin for the prevention of cardiovascular disease: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med 2009;150:396–404.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mark D. Huffman
    • 1
  • Mohammed K. Ali
    • 2
  • K. M. Venkat Narayan
    • 3
  1. 1.Departments of Preventive Medicine and Medicine (Cardiology)Northwestern University Feinberg School of MedicineChicagoUSA
  2. 2.Hubert Department of Global HealthEmory University Rollins School of Public HealthAtlantaUSA
  3. 3.Hubert Department of Global HealthEmory University Rollins School of Public HealthAtlantaUSA

Personalised recommendations