MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Randomized Comparison of Prasugrel (CS-747, LY640315), a Novel Thienopyridine P2Y <sub>12</sub> Antagonist, With Clopidogrel in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

2005· article· en· W2156506897 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAntiplatelet Therapy and Cardiovascular Diseases
Canadian institutionsTrillium Health Centre
FundersEli Lilly and Company
KeywordsPrasugrelMedicineClopidogrelThienopyridinePercutaneous coronary interventionInternal medicineTIMICardiologyMyocardial infarctionTiclopidineAnesthesia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Despite the current standard antiplatelet regimen of aspirin and clopidogrel (with or without glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors) in percutaneous coronary intervention patients, periprocedural and postprocedural ischemic events continue to occur. Prasugrel (CS-747, LY640315), a novel potent thienopyridine P2Y(12) receptor antagonist, has the potential to achieve higher levels of inhibition of ADP-induced platelet aggregation than currently approved doses of clopidogrel. METHODS AND RESULTS: Joint Utilization of Medications to Block Platelets Optimally-Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction 26 (JUMBO-TIMI 26) was a phase 2, randomized, dose-ranging, double-blind safety trial of prasugrel versus clopidogrel in 904 patients undergoing elective or urgent percutaneous coronary intervention. Patients were randomized to either standard dosing with clopidogrel or 1 of 3 prasugrel regimens. Subjects were monitored for 30 days for bleeding and clinical events. The primary end point of the trial was clinically significant (TIMI major plus minor) non-CABG-related bleeding events in prasugrel- versus clopidogrel-treated patients. Hemorrhagic complications were infrequent, with no significant difference between patients treated with prasugrel or clopidogrel in the rate of significant bleeding (1.7% versus 1.2%; hazard ratio, 1.42; 95% CI, 0.40, 5.08). In prasugrel-treated patients, there were numerically lower incidences of the primary efficacy composite end point (30-day major adverse cardiac events) and of the secondary end points myocardial infarction, recurrent ischemia, and clinical target vessel thrombosis. CONCLUSIONS: In this phase 2 study, which was designed to assess safety when administered at the time of percutaneous coronary intervention, prasugrel and clopidogrel both resulted in low rates of bleeding. The results of this trial serve as a foundation for the large phase 3 clinical trial designed to assess both efficacy and safety.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.220
Threshold uncertainty score0.823

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.255 · 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