The Risk for Myocardial Infarction with Cyclooxygenase-2 Inhibitors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Letters18 October 2005The Risk for Myocardial Infarction with Cyclooxygenase-2 InhibitorsJames M. Brophy, MD, PhD, Linda E. Lévesque, BScPhm, MSc, and Bin Zhang, MScJames M. Brophy, MD, PhDFrom McGill University, Montréal, Québec H3A 1A1, Canada.Search for more papers by this author, Linda E. Lévesque, BScPhm, MScFrom McGill University, Montréal, Québec H3A 1A1, Canada.Search for more papers by this author, and Bin Zhang, MScFrom McGill University, Montréal, Québec H3A 1A1, Canada.Search for more papers by this authorAuthor, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-143-8-200510180-00023 SectionsAboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail IN RESPONSE:We agree with Kim and colleagues that, while celecoxib appears to be less cardiotoxic than rofecoxib in several observational studies (1-3), there is nevertheless reason for concern—particularly when the drug is given in higher doses (as in the APC trial) or in the largely unstudied group of patients with previous myocardial infarctions. We also agree that any cardioprotective benefits of aspirin in rofecoxib users may be offset by a significant reduction in gastrointestinal protection.As Pijak and colleagues point out, the exact cardioprotective mechanism of aspirin and its potential interaction with COX-2 inhibitors is far from established and ...References1. Graham DJ, Campen D, Hui R, Spence M, Cheetham C, Levy G, et al. Risk of acute myocardial infarction and sudden cardiac death in patients treated with cyclo-oxygenase 2 selective and non-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs: nested case–control study. Lancet. 2005;365:475-81. [PMID: 15705456] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar2. Solomon DH, Schneeweiss S, Glynn RJ, Kiyota Y, Levin R, Mogun H, et al. Relationship between selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors and acute myocardial infarction in older adults. Circulation. 2004;109:2068-73. [PMID: 15096449] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar3. Ray WA, Stein CM, Hall K, Daugherty JR, Griffin MR. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and risk of serious coronary heart disease: an observational cohort study. Lancet. 2002;359:118-23. [PMID: 11809254] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar Author, Article, and Disclosure InformationAffiliations: From McGill University, Montréal, Québec H3A 1A1, Canada.Disclosures: None disclosed. PreviousarticleNextarticle Advertisement FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsSee AlsoThe Risk for Myocardial Infarction with Cyclooxygenase-2 Inhibitors: A Population Study of Elderly Adults Linda E. Lévesque , James M. Brophy , and Bin Zhang The Risk for Myocardial Infarction with Cyclooxygenase-2 Inhibitors Jeong A. Kim , Youn Seon Choi , Dokyung Yoon , and Kyung Hwan Cho The Risk for Myocardial Infarction with Cyclooxygenase-2 Inhibitors Michal R. Pijak , Igor Huzicka , and Frantisek Gazdik The Risk for Myocardial Infarction with Cyclooxygenase-2 Inhibitors Ken Shinmura and Roberto Bolli Metrics Cited byCurrent awareness: Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety 18 October 2005Volume 143, Issue 8Page: 617-618KeywordsConflicts of interestDrugsInflammationMyocardial infarctionObservational studies ePublished: 18 October 2005 Issue Published: 18 October 2005 Copyright & PermissionsCopyright © 2005 by American College of Physicians. All Rights Reserved.PDF downloadLoading ...
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".