Today, the scientific  journal, Nature, released a Commentary by Institute Director Teresa Woodruff and two of her post doctorate students that we hope will open up the dialogue about the current status of women's health research.  For the reader's convenience, the entire press release is listed below as well as a link to the article.  More examples of sex bias will be featured on this blog over the next two weeks, so we hope you will tag this site!

CHICAGO --- Women remain vastly underrepresented in biomedical research despite significant differences in the way they experience many diseases, medications and therapies compared to men. Despite federal mandates to include women in studies, there is much that still needs to be done, says Teresa Woodruff, a leading women’s health scientist at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, in a June 9 commentary in the journal Nature.

“It’s time for the sex bias in basic research and clinical medicine to end,” writes senior author Woodruff, executive director of the Institute for Women's Health Research and the Thomas J. Watkins Professor of Obstetrics and Gynecology at Feinberg. This bias, she says, has an enormous effect on women’s health, resulting, for example, in delayed diagnosis of cardiovascular disease, the leading killer of women, and in adverse reactions to medication. Alison Kim and Candace Tingen, post-doctoral fellows at Feinberg, are coauthors on the paper.

Women need to be adequately represented in studies, and results need to be specifically designed and analyzed to determine sex differences, the authors note, in order for both men and women to receive more tailored care. Understanding sex as a determinant of disease and care is the first step towards personalized care for every patient. Sex differences in the incidence, prevalence, symptoms and severity of disease have already been shown in autoimmune diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis and multiple sclerosis; in psychological disorders including depression, autism, eating disorders and schizophrenia; and in asthma and several types of cancer.

“Differences are particularly acute in cardiovascular disease, the leading cause of death for both men and women,” Woodruff writes. Women in the early stages of cardiovascular disease may experience fatigue, abdominal discomfort and back, jaw or neck pain, all of which are considered atypical because diagnostics were mainly established from research conducted primarily on men. “As a result, women can be subject to potentially life-threatening delays before crucial diagnostic tests are administered,” she said. And some of those tests, like exercise electrocardiography, can’t detect cardiovascular disease as well in women as in men.

Northwestern is a good example of making significant strides in treating women with heart disease and in sex-balanced health research, Woodruff noted. She pointed to Feinberg’s Institute for Women’s Health Research, which supports clinical research trials that focus on women’s health and sex-balanced research, and the institute’s Illinois Women’s Health Registry, a growing database of 4,500 potential study subjects, that has encouraged Northwestern researchers to do more research in sex differences. About 1,000 of these women have participated in trials.

In addition, the Center for Women’s Cardiovascular Health at the Bluhm Cardiovascular Institute of Northwestern Memorial Hospital has a unique clinical program focusing on women’s heart health.   Women also respond differently to medication than men, yet drugs are rarely prescribed accordingly, according the Nature article. “This may be part of the reason why women are 1.5 times more likely to develop an adverse reaction to prescription drugs than men,” Woodruff notes. For example, a 2005 study of new drug applications found that even the drugs that had substantial differences in how they were metabolized by women and men did not have sex-specific dosage recommendations on the labels.

How to fix the void? Among the authors’ suggestions:

  • Journals should indicate if results are in male or female animal models.
  • Regulatory and funding agencies should require appropriate representation of both sexes in human and animal trials and require researchers to consider sex differences when they analyze data.
  • Educate doctors in the clinical importance of sex differences. The Food and Drug Administration also should mandate that medication dosages be sex-specific based on clinical studies.

To read the complete article, click here.



Interesting subject. Women need to be more conscious about the impact of medications to their bodies. Hopefully this subject and future studies will also help any women to be able to avoid any unnecessary excess of their medications, for the sake of their quality of life.

yes I agree, that women need to pay more attention to how medications can affect their body. Hopefully more women will, with more studeies. Thanks for the info.

Just read a fascinating article about the differences between the sleep patterns of men and women and how the sleep differences have a direct affect on depression. Educating doctors seems like a bit of a chore (sarcasm). Bottom line, if we need to regulate it, we need to ensure that women are adequately represented in clinical studies and that medication doses are gender specific. If the pharmacists know the difference, they'd be a good back up on doctors. Don

This is a perplexing study in clinical research. As a former hospital administrator, turned clinical research director, I don't understand the disconnect. When I worked in a hospital, we focused on Women's Health programs simply because women had a higher rate of medical insurance coverage. Since pharmaceutical companies focus on ROI when they initiate clinical trials, you would think more focus would be on women's health.

Add new comment

This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.