MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cardiovascular Risks of Nonsteroidal Antiinflammatory Drugs in Patients After Hospitalization for Serious Coronary Heart Disease

2009· article· en· W2134617241 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Wayne A. Ray, Cristina Varas‐Lorenzo, Cecilia P. Chung, Jordi Castellsagué, Katherine T. Murray, Christoph Stein, James R. Daugherty, Patrick G. Arbogast, Luis A. García‐Rodríguez

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInflammatory mediators and NSAID effects
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMyocardial infarctionRofecoxibInternal medicineAspirinAnginaDiclofenacUnstable anginaCoronary artery diseaseRelative riskCohortCelecoxibCardiologyAnesthesiaConfidence intervalCyclooxygenase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The cardiovascular safety of individual nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) is highly controversial, particularly in persons with serious coronary heart disease. METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a multisite retrospective cohort study of commonly used individual NSAIDs in Tennessee Medicaid, Saskatchewan Health, and United Kingdom General Practice Research databases. The cohort included 48566 patients recently hospitalized for myocardial infarction, revascularization, or unstable angina pectoris with more than 111000 person-years of follow-up. Naproxen users had the lowest adjusted rates of serious coronary heart disease (myocardial infarction, coronary heart disease death) and serious cardiovascular disease (myocardial infarction, stroke)/death from any cause, with respective incidence rate ratios (relative to NSAID nonusers) of 0.88 (95% CI, 0.66 to 1.17) and 0.91 (0.78 to 1.06). Risk did not increase with doses >or=1000 mg. Relative to NSAID nonusers, serious coronary heart disease risk increased with short term (<90 days) use for ibuprofen (1.67 [1.09 to 2.57]), diclofenac (1.86 [1.18 to 2.92]), celecoxib (1.37 [0.96 to 1.94]), and rofecoxib (1.46 [1.03 to 2.07]), but not for naproxen (0.88 [0.50 to 1.55]). Relative to naproxen, current users of diclofenac had increased risk of serious coronary heart disease (1.44 [0.96 to 2.15], P=0.076) and serious cardiovascular disease/death (1.52 [1.22 to 1.89], P=0.0002), and those of ibuprofen had increased risk of the latter end point (1.25 [1.02 to 1.53], P=0.032). Compared to naproxen in doses >or=1000 mg, serious coronary heart disease incidence rate ratios were increased for rofecoxib >25 mg (2.29 [1.24 to 4.22], P=0.008) and celecoxib >200 mg (1.61 [1.01 to 2.57], P=0.046). CONCLUSIONS: In patients recently hospitalized for serious coronary heart disease, naproxen had better cardiovascular safety than did diclofenac, ibuprofen, and higher doses of celecoxib and rofecoxib.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.272 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations145
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation Cardiovascular Quality and OutcomesSame topicInflammatory mediators and NSAID effectsFrench-language works237,207