Published online before print January 22, 2002, doi: 10.1161/hc0802.104280
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(Circulation. 2002;105:917.)
© 2002 American Heart Association, Inc.
Clinical Investigation and Reports |
Subgroup Interactions in the Heart and Estrogen/Progestin Replacement Study
Lessons Learned
From the Wake Forest University School of Medicine (C.D.F., D.M.H.), Winston-Salem, NC; the University of California (E.V., J.A.S., S.H.), San Francisco, Calif; the Chicago Center for Clinical Research (M.D.), Chicago, Ill; and Emory University School of Medicine (N.K.W.), Atlanta, Ga.
Correspondence to Curt D. Furberg, MD, PhD, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC 27157-1063. E-mail cfurberg{at}wfubmc.edu
Background— The Heart and Estrogen/Progestin Replacement Study (HERS) showed no overall benefit of postmenopausal hormone treatment in women with coronary heart disease (CHD). We analyzed the HERS data to determine whether there were specific subgroups of women who responded differently to treatment, either during the first year or in the overall study.
Methods and Results— In the search for significant treatment interactions, we analyzed a total of 86 subgroups defined by baseline characteristics. These included demographics and lifestyle factors, laboratory and physical examination variables, medical history and symptoms by self-report, medication use, and prior CHD history by chart review. We examined within-subgroup treatment effects for baseline variables that significantly interacted with treatment assignment. Under the null hypothesis, 4 (5%) of the 86 interactions would be expected to be nominally significant (P<0.05) by chance alone at each time point. Six of the interaction values were P<0.05 at 1 year, and 3 were P<0.05 at trial completion. The findings are discussed in the context of known mechanisms of action and prior scientific knowledge. Use of digitalis and history of myocardial infarction emerged as 2 possible modifiers of the effect of hormone therapy during the first year, and lipoprotein(a) emerged as a possible modifier during the overall study.
Conclusions— Extensive post hoc analyses did not identify any subgroup of HERS participants in which postmenopausal hormone treatment was clearly beneficial or harmful, but several possibilities emerged for testing in future trials.
Key Words: women • coronary disease • hormones • trials
This article has been cited by other articles:
 |
|
 |
|
  E. Barrett-Connor Hormones and Heart Disease in Women: The Timing Hypothesis Am. J. Epidemiol., September 1, 2007; 166(5): 506 - 510. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 N. Jochmann, K. Stangl, E. Garbe, G. Baumann, and V. Stangl Female-specific aspects in the pharmacotherapy of chronic cardiovascular diseases Eur. Heart J., August 2, 2005; 26(16): 1585 - 1595. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. F. Kernohan, A. Spiers, N. Sattar, C. Hillier, S. J Cleland, M. Small, M.-A. Lumsden, J. M. Connell, and J. R Petrie Effects of low-dose continuous combined HRT on vascular function in women with type 2 diabetes Diabetes and Vascular Disease Research, October 1, 2004; 1(2): 82 - 88. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 E. Barrett-Connor Commentary: Observation versus intervention--what's different? Int. J. Epidemiol., June 1, 2004; 33(3): 457 - 459. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 D. D. Waters, D. Gordon, J. E. Rossouw, R. O. Cannon III, P. Collins, D. M. Herrington, J. Hsia, R. Langer, L. Mosca, P. Ouyang, et al. Women's Ischemic Syndrome Evaluation: Current Status and Future Research Directions Report of the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute Workshop : October 2-4, 2002 : Section 4: Lessons From Hormone Replacement Trials Circulation, February 17, 2004; 109 (6): e53 - e55. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 E. Barrett-Connor Diabetes and Heart Disease Diabetes Care, October 1, 2003; 26(10): 2947 - 2958. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 E. Barrett-Connor An Epidemiologist Looks at Hormones and Heart Disease in Women J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., September 1, 2003; 88(9): 4031 - 4042. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. E. Manson, J. Hsia, K. C. Johnson, J. E. Rossouw, A. R. Assaf, N. L. Lasser, M. Trevisan, H. R. Black, S. R. Heckbert, R. Detrano, et al. Estrogen plus Progestin and the Risk of Coronary Heart Disease N. Engl. J. Med., August 7, 2003; 349(6): 523 - 534. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. P. Blaustein, S. W. Robinson, S. S. Gottlieb, C. W. Balke, and J. M. Hamlyn Sex, Digitalis, and the Sodium Pump Mol. Interv., March 1, 2003; 3(2): 68 - 72. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. P. Miller and S. Oparil Secondary Prevention of Coronary Heart Disease in Women: A Call to Action Ann Intern Med, January 21, 2003; 138(2): 150 - 151. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. S. Rathore, Y. Wang, and H. M. Krumholz Sex-Based Differences in the Effect of Digoxin for the Treatment of Heart Failure N. Engl. J. Med., October 31, 2002; 347(18): 1403 - 1411. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Buse and L. Raftery What We Think and What We Know Diabetes Care, October 1, 2002; 25(10): 1876 - 1878. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 D. Grady, D. Herrington, V. Bittner, R. Blumenthal, M. Davidson, M. Hlatky, J. Hsia, S. Hulley, A. Herd, S. Khan, et al. Cardiovascular Disease Outcomes During 6.8 Years of Hormone Therapy: Heart and Estrogen/Progestin Replacement Study Follow-up (HERS II) JAMA, July 3, 2002; 288(1): 49 - 57. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. Barrett-Connor Looking for the Pony in the HERS Data Circulation, February 26, 2002; 105(8): 902 - 903. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|