Sex differences in heart failure

Heart failure (HF) represents a global pandemic health problem with a high impact on health-care costs, affecting about 26 million adults worldwide. The overall HF prevalence and incidence are ~2% and ~0.2% per year, respectively, in Western countries, with half of the HF population with reduced ejection fraction (HFpEF) and half with preserved (HFpEF) or mid-range ejection fraction (HFmrEF). Sex differences may exist in HF. More males have HFrEF or HFmrEF and an ischemic etiology, whereas more females have HFpEF and hypertension, diastolic dysfunction, and valvular pathologies as HF etiologies. Females are generally older, have a higher EF, higher frequency of HF-related symptoms, and lower NYHA functional status. Generally, it is observed that female HF patients tend to have more comorbidities such as atrial fibrillation, diabetes, hypertension, anemia, iron deficiency, renal disease, arthritis, frailty, depression, and thyroid abnormalities. However, overall, females have better prognosis in terms of mortality and hospitalization risk compared with men, regardless of EF. Potential sex differences in HF characteristics may be underestimated because of the underrepresentation of females in cardiovascular research and, in particular, the sex imbalance in clinical trial enrollment may avoid to identify sex-specific differences in treatments’ benefit

From adversity to psychosis: pathways and mechanisms from specific adversities to specific symptoms

Purpose Although there is considerable evidence that adversities in childhood such as social deprivation, sexual abuse, separation from parents, neglect and exposure to deviant parental communication are associated with psychosis in later life, most studies have considered broad diagnoses as outcomes. In this review we consider evidence for pathways between specific types of adversity and specific symptoms of psychosis. Methods We present theoretical arguments for expecting some degree of specificity (although by no means perfect specificity) between different kinds of adversity and different symptoms of psychosis. We review studies that have investigated social–environmental risk factors for thought disorder, auditory–verbal hallucinations and paranoid delusions, and consider how these risk factors may impact on specific psychological and biological mechanisms. Results Communication deviance in parents has been implicated in the development of thought disorder in offspring, childhood sexual abuse has been particularly implicated in auditory–verbal hallucinations, and attachment-disrupting events (e.g. neglect, being brought up in an institution) may have particular potency for the development of paranoid symptoms. Current research on psychological mechanisms underlying these symptoms suggests a number of symptom-specific mechanisms that may explain these associations. Conclusions Few studies have considered symptoms, underlying mechanisms and different kinds of adversity at the same time. Future research along these lines will have the potential to elucidate the mechanisms that lead to severe mental illness, and may have considerable clinical implications