Influence of smoking on the antiplatelet effect of clopidogrel differs according to clopidogrel dose: Insights from the GRAVITAS trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine the influence of smoking on the antiplatelet effect of clopidogrel following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). BACKGROUND: Certain studies suggest smokers may have enhanced clopidogrel-induced platelet inhibition compared to non-smokers after PCI. Whether this is affected by clopidogrel dose is unknown. METHODS: In this study, we conducted an analysis of 5,429 patients in the Gauging Responsiveness With A VerifyNow P2Y12 Assay: Impact on Thrombosis and Safety (GRAVITAS) trial. Platelet reactivity was assessed 12-24 hr after PCI (baseline). Patients with high on-treatment platelet reactivity (OTR) (P2Y12 reaction units [PRU] ≥ 230) were randomized to clopidogrel 75 mg or 150 mg daily. Reactivity was subsequently assessed at 30-days, and 6-months. Patients were stratified by smoking status. RESULTS: Smoking was independently associated with lower PRU (P = 0.001), and smokers were less likely to have high OTR (odds ratio 0.80, 95% confidence interval 0.68-0.94; P = 0.006) at baseline. Among patients assigned to clopidogrel 75 mg, smokers had lower PRU and were less likely to still have high OTR at 30-days (P < 0.001) and 6-months (P < 0.001). However, in patients assigned clopidogrel 150 mg, PRU and high OTR did not differ by smoking status at any time. Tests demonstrated an interaction between smoking and dose at 30 days (P = 0.007), and a trend at 6-months (P = 0.098). CONCLUSIONS: Smokers treated with clopidogrel exhibit reduced platelet reactivity and are less likely to have persistent high OTR than non-smokers. This difference is mitigated by clopidogrel 150 mg, indicating non-smokers may require double-dose therapy to achieve a similar antiplatelet effect after PCI. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".