Effects of Losartan in Women With Hypertension and Left Ventricular Hypertrophy: Results From the Losartan Intervention For Endpoint Reduction in Hypertension Study

• Published in: Hypertension (Dallas, Tex. 1979) Tex. 1979), 2008-04, Vol.51 (4, Part 2 Suppl), p.1103-1108
• Main Authors: Os, Ingrid, Franco, Veronica, Kjeldsen, Sverre E, Manhem, Karin, Devereux, Richard B, Gerdts, Eva, Hille, Darcy A, Lyle, Paulette A, Okin, Peter M, Dahlöf, Björn, Oparil, Suzanne
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Angina Pectoris - mortality; Antihypertensive Agents - administration & dosage; Antihypertensive Agents - adverse effects; Atenolol - administration & dosage; Atenolol - adverse effects; Blood Pressure - drug effects; Female; Humans; Hypertension - drug therapy; Hypertension - mortality; Hypertrophy, Left Ventricular - drug therapy; Hypertrophy, Left Ventricular - mortality; Losartan - administration & dosage; Losartan - adverse effects; Male; Middle Aged; Myocardial Infarction - mortality; Risk Factors; Risk Reduction Behavior; Sex Distribution; Stroke - mortality
• ISSN: 0194-911X; 1524-4563
• DOI: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.107.105296

Hypertension is a risk factor for cardiovascular disease and outcomes in women. These posthoc analyses from the Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension (LIFE) study evaluated losartan- versus atenolol-based therapy on the primary composite end point of cardiovascular death, stroke, and myocardial infarction and other end points in 4963 women. Fewer events occurred in women versus men. Women in the losartan group had significant reductions in the primary end point (215 [18.2 per 1000 patient-years] versus 261 [22.5 per 1000 patient-years]; hazard ratio [HR]0.82 [95% CI0.68 to 0.98]; P=0.031), stroke (109 versus 154; HR0.71 [95% CI0.55 to 0.90]; P=0.005), total mortality (HR0.77 [95% CI0.63 to 0.95]; P=0.014), and new-onset diabetes (HR0.75 [95% CI0.59 to 0.94]; P=0.015) versus the atenolol group, with no between-treatment difference for myocardial infarction (HR1.02 [95% CI0.74 to 1.39]; P=0.925), cardiovascular mortality (HR0.86 [95% CI0.64 to 1.14]; P=0.282), or hospitalization for heart failure (HR0.94 [95% CI0.68 to 1.28]; P=0.677). More women in the losartan group required hospitalization for angina (HR1.70 [95% CI1.16 to 2.51]; P=0.007). Risk reductions for the primary composite end point, stroke, total mortality, and new-onset diabetes were significantly greater with losartan- versus atenolol-based treatment in women with hypertension and left ventricular hypertrophy in the LIFE study. The risk reductions for losartan, along with the tests for the interaction of treatment and gender, indicated that the treatment effect was consistent in men and women for all of the end points tested, with the exception of hospitalization for angina.