To the Editor: In the SELECT trial, Lincoff and colleagues (Dec. 14 issue)¹ found that weekly subcutaneous semaglutide, a glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist, was superior to placebo in the reduction of cardiovascular events at 3 years in patients who had preexisting cardiovascular disease and overweight or obesity but who did not have diabetes. In contrast to previous semaglutide trials involving patients with overweight or obesity (in which 74.1% of the patients were women),² only 27.7% of the patients in the SELECT trial were women. Could this striking difference have resulted from the definition of “preexisting cardiovascular disease” as previous . . .

致编辑：在 SELECT 试验中，Lincoff 及其同事（12 月 14 日期）¹发现，每周皮下注射 semaglutide（一种胰高血糖素样肽 1 (GLP-1) 受体激动剂）在减少心血管事件方面优于安慰剂。患有心血管疾病、超重或肥胖但未患有糖尿病的患者在 3 岁时进行研究。与之前涉及超重或肥胖患者的索马鲁肽试验（其中 74.1% 的患者为女性）相比，² SELECT 试验中只有 27.7% 的患者为女性。这种显着差异是否是由于之前对“既存心血管疾病”的定义造成的？。。