Effects of fondaparinux in patients with ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction not receiving reperfusion treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: At least one quarter of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients do not receive reperfusion therapy, and these patients are at high risk for new ischaemic events. We evaluated fondaparinux treatment vs. usual care, i.e. placebo or unfractionated (UF) heparin, in a pre-specified subgroup of 2867 (out of 12 092) patients not receiving reperfusion treatment in the OASIS-6 trial. METHODS: In all, 1458 patients were randomized to fondaparinux 2.5 mg once daily subcutaneously up to 8 days and 1409 patients to usual care (control). Randomization was stratified by indication for UF heparin (stratum II, n = 1226) or not (stratum I, n = 1641) based on the investigator's judgment. RESULTS: The proportion of patients who suffered death or myocardial re-infarction at 30 days (primary outcome) was 12.2% in the fondaparinux vs. 15.1% in the control group, hazard ratio (HR) 0.80; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.65-0.98. There was no increase in severe bleedings, HR 0.82; CI 0.44-1.55, or strokes, HR 0.62; CI 0.29-1.33. Consequently, the composite of death, myocardial re-infarction, or severe bleeding were significantly reduced at 30 days, HR 0.81; CI 0.67-0.99. Reductions in death or myocardial re-infarction at 30 days were consistent in stratum I with fondaparinux vs. placebo, HR 0.88; 95% CI 0.65-1.19, and in stratum II with fondaparinux vs. UF heparin infusion for 24-48 h (n = 806), HR 0.74; CI 95% 0.57-0.97, P = 0.41 for heterogeneity. CONCLUSION: In STEMI patients not receiving reperfusion treatment, fondaparinux reduces the composite of death or myocardial re-infarction without an increase in severe bleedings or strokes as compared to placebo or UF heparin.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".