scholarly journals Sex and gender differences in hypertensive kidney injury

2017 ◽  
Vol 313 (4) ◽  
pp. F1009-F1017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer C. Sullivan ◽  
Ellen E. Gillis

Hypertension is a complex, multifaceted disorder, affecting ~1 in 3 adults in the United States. Although hypertension occurs in both men and women, there are distinct sex differences in the way in which they develop hypertension, with women having a lower incidence of hypertension until the sixth decade of life. Despite observed sex differences in hypertension, little is known about the molecular mechanisms underlying the development of hypertension in females, primarily because of their underrepresentation in both clinical and experimental animal studies. The first goal of this review is to provide a concise overview of the participation of women in clinical trials, including a discussion of the importance of including females in basic science research, as recently mandated by the National Institutes of Health. The remaining portion of the review is dedicated to identifying clinical and experimental animal studies that concentrate on gender and sex differences in hypertensive kidney disease, ending with a proposed role for T cells in mediating sex differences in blood pressure.

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 238212051989425
Author(s):  
Helena Schluchter ◽  
Ahmad T Nauman ◽  
Sabine Ludwig ◽  
Vera Regitz-Zagrosek ◽  
Ute Seeland

Background: Sex- and gender-based medicine (SGBM) should be a mandatory part of medical education. We compared the quantity and quality of sex- and gender-related content of e-learning materials commonly used by German and American medical students while preparing for national medical examinations. Methods: Quantitative, line-by-line analysis of the preparatory materials AMBOSS 2017 and USMLE Step 1 Lecture Notes (2017) by KAPLAN MEDICAL was performed between April and October 2017. Subjects were allocated to one of the three main fields: clinical subjects, behavioral and social science, and pharmacology. Qualitative analysis comprised binary categorization into sex- and gender-based aspects and qualification with respect to the presence of a pathophysiological explanation for the sex or gender difference. Results: In relation to the total content of AMBOSS and KAPLAN, the sex- and gender-based share of the clinical subjects content was 26.8% (±8.2) in AMBOSS and 21.1% (±10.2) in KAPLAN. The number of sex- and gender-based aspects in the behavioral and social science learning material differed significantly for AMBOSS and KAPLAN (4.4% ± 3.1% vs 10.7% ± 7.5%; P = .044). Most of the sex- and gender-related content covered sex differences. Most learning cards and texts did not include a detailed pathophysiological explanation for sex- or gender-based aspects. The knowledge provided in the preparatory documents represents only a small part of facts that are already known about sex and gender differences. Conclusions: The preparatory materials focused almost exclusively on biological sex differences and the sociocultural dimension in particular is underrepresented. A lot more evidence-based facts are known and should be integrated into the materials to reflect the importance of SGBM as an integral component of patient-centered medicine.


2016 ◽  
Vol 130 (17) ◽  
pp. 1481-1497 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neza Grgurevic ◽  
Gregor Majdic

Although considerable progress has been made in our understanding of brain function, many questions remain unanswered. The ultimate goal of studying the brain is to understand the connection between brain structure and function and behavioural outcomes. Since sex differences in brain morphology were first observed, subsequent studies suggest different functional organization of the male and female brains in humans. Sex and gender have been identified as being a significant factor in understanding human physiology, health and disease, and the biological differences between the sexes is not limited to the gonads and secondary sexual characteristics, but also affects the structure and, more crucially, the function of the brain and other organs. Significant variability in brain structures between individuals, in addition to between the sexes, is factor that complicates the study of sex differences in the brain. In this review, we explore the current understanding of sex differences in the brain, mostly focusing on preclinical animal studies.


2020 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Camila M. Lopes-Ramos ◽  
John Quackenbush ◽  
Dawn L. DeMeo

Despite their known importance in clinical medicine, differences based on sex and gender are among the least studied factors affecting cancer susceptibility, progression, survival, and therapeutic response. In particular, the molecular mechanisms driving sex differences are poorly understood and so most approaches to precision medicine use mutational or other genomic data to assign therapy without considering how the sex of the individual might influence therapeutic efficacy. The mandate by the National Institutes of Health that research studies include sex as a biological variable has begun to expand our understanding on its importance. Sex differences in cancer may arise due to a combination of environmental, genetic, and epigenetic factors, as well as differences in gene regulation, and expression. Extensive sex differences occur genome-wide, and ultimately influence cancer biology and outcomes. In this review, we summarize the current state of knowledge about sex-specific genetic and genome-wide influences in cancer, describe how differences in response to environmental exposures and genetic and epigenetic alterations alter the trajectory of the disease, and provide insights into the importance of integrative analyses in understanding the interplay of sex and genomics in cancer. In particular, we will explore some of the emerging analytical approaches, such as the use of network methods, that are providing a deeper understanding of the drivers of differences based on sex and gender. Better understanding these complex factors and their interactions will improve cancer prevention, treatment, and outcomes for all individuals.


2017 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 6-9
Author(s):  
Aaron Frank ◽  
Deborah Clegg

Flip through a few TV channels or browse the Internet for a bit and you will be quickly reminded that, in our day and age, everyone is thinking about ‘sex’. Biologists think about sex too – albeit more in the biological sense than the act itself. The problem is they don't think enough about it. Indeed, though most animals display marked differences in sexual anatomy and reproductive function, sex is regularly overlooked in biomedical research at both the clinical and basic science levels1. Over 25 years ago, The National Institutes of Health recognized this as problematic; exclusion of women from large clinical trials blunted their ability to detect sex differences in the safety and efficacy of therapeutic drugs. In 2001, the Institute of Medicine echoed these concerns, calling for expansion of research into sex differences at the biochemical and cellular levels2. Despite this, investigators still regularly ignore the sex of cell lines studied in vitro2, as well as failing to include both sexes in animal studies. In this article, we briefly discuss the nature of sex differences and highlight their importance to future basic and translational research.


2020 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 247028972098001
Author(s):  
Rebecca Leeds ◽  
Ari Shechter ◽  
Carmela Alcantara ◽  
Brooke Aggarwal ◽  
John Usseglio ◽  
...  

Sex differences in cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality have been attributed to differences in pathophysiology between men and women and to disparities in CVD management that disproportionately affect women compared to men. Similarly, there has been investigation of differences in the prevalence and presentation of insomnia attributable to sex. Few studies have examined how sex and insomnia interact to influence CVD outcomes, however. In this review, we summarize the literature on sex-specific differences in the prevalence and presentation of insomnia as well as existing research regarding the relationship between insomnia and CVD outcomes as it pertains to sex. Research to date indicate that women are more likely to have insomnia than men, and there appear to be differential associations in the relation between insomnia and CVD by sex. We posit potential mechanisms of the relationship between sex, insomnia and CVD, discuss gaps in the existing literature, and provide commentary on future research needed in this area. Unraveling the complex relations between sex, insomnia, and CVD may help to explain sex-specific differences in CVD, and identify sex-specific strategies for promotion of cardiovascular health. Throughout this review, terms “men” and “women” are used as they are in the source literature, which does not differentiate between sex and gender. The implications of this are also discussed.


2004 ◽  
Vol 10 (7) ◽  
pp. 1026-1027
Author(s):  
Jeannette McGlone

Hines finds it impossible to make distinctions between the terms “sex” and “gender,” hence their refreshing, non-political interchangeability in her new book. After examining hormonal and brain-based data, Hines concludes that science cannot yet inform us which differences are determined biologically, socially, and/or both.


2016 ◽  
Vol 2016 ◽  
pp. 1-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emanuela Zagni ◽  
Lucia Simoni ◽  
Delia Colombo

There are important sex differences in the brain that seem to arise from biology as well as psychosocial influences. Sex differences in several aspects of human behavior and cognition have been reported. Gonadal sex steroids or genes found on sex chromosomes influence sex differences in neuroanatomy, neurochemistry and neuronal structure, and connectivity. There has been some resistance to accept that sex differences in the human brain exist and have biological relevance; however, a few years ago, it has been recommended by the USA National Institute of Mental Health to incorporate sex as a variable in experimental and clinical neurological and psychiatric studies. We here review the clinical literature on sex differences in pain and neurological and psychiatric diseases, with the aim to further stimulate interest in sexual dimorphisms in the brain and brain diseases, possibly encouraging more research in the field of the implications of sex differences for treating these conditions.


2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 1477
Author(s):  
Mauro Vaccarezza ◽  
Veronica Papa ◽  
Daniela Milani ◽  
Arianna Gonelli ◽  
Paola Secchiero ◽  
...  

In the last two decades, new insights have been gained regarding sex/gender-related differences in cardiovascular disease (CVD). CVD represents the leading cause of death worldwide in both men and women, accounting for at least one-third of all deaths in women and half of deaths in women over 50 years in developing countries. Important sex-related differences in prevalence, presentation, management, and outcomes of different CVDs have been recently discovered, demonstrating sex/gender-specific pathophysiologic features in the presentation and prognosis of CVD in men and women. A large amount of evidence has highlighted the role of sex hormones in protecting women from CVDs, providing an advantage over men that is lost when women reach the menopause stage. This hormonal-dependent shift of sex-related CVD risk consequently affects the overall CVD epidemiology, particularly in light of the increasing trend of population aging. The benefits of physical activity have been recognized for a long time as a powerful preventive approach for both CVD prevention and aging-related morbidity control. Exercise training is indeed a potent physiological stimulus, which reduces primary and secondary cardiovascular events. However, the underlying mechanisms of these positive effects, including from a sex/gender perspective, still need to be fully elucidated. The aim of this work is to provide a review of the evidence linking sex/gender-related differences in CVD, including sex/gender-specific molecular mediators, to explore whether sex- and gender-tailored physical activity may be used as an effective tool to prevent CVD and improve clinical outcomes in women.


Author(s):  
Hasia R. Diner ◽  
Jonathan Safran Foer

This book explores how the making of Judaism and the making of Jewish meals have been intertwined throughout history and in contemporary Jewish practices. It is an invitation not only to delve into the topic but to join in the growing number of conversations and events that consider the intersections between Judaism and food. Seventeen original chapters advance the state of both Jewish studies and religious studies scholarship on food in accessible prose. Insights from recent work in growing subfields such as food studies, sex and gender studies, and animal studies permeate the volume. Encompassing historical, ethnographic, critical theoretical, and history of religions methodologies, the volume introduces readers to historic and ongoing Jewish food practices and helps them engage the charged ethical debates about how our food choices reflect competing Jewish values. The book’s three sections respectively include chronologically arranged historical overviews (first section), essays built around particular foods and theoretical questions (second section), and essays addressing ethical issues (third and final section). The first section provides the historical and textual overview that is necessary to ground any discussion of food and Jewish traditions. The second section provides studies of food and culture from a range of time periods, and each chapter addresses not only a particular food but also a theoretical issue of broader interest in the study of religion. The final section focuses on moral and ethical questions generated by and answered through Jewish engagements with food.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document