Outcomes after planned invasive or conservative treatment strategy in patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome and a normal value of high sensitivity troponin at randomisation: A Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial biomarker substudy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Current guidelines for patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) recommend early invasive treatment in intermediate-to-high risk patients based on medical history, electrocardiogram (ECG) and elevated troponin. Patients with normal levels of cardiac troponin measured with a high-sensitivity method (cTnT-hs) might not benefit from early invasive procedures. METHODS AND RESULTS: percentile (<14 ng/l) at randomisation. The outcomes in relation to a planned invasive ( n=473) vs planned conservative treatment ( n=759), were evaluated by adjusted Cox proportional hazard analyses. In patients with a normal cTnT-hs at randomisation, regardless of randomised treatment, a planned invasive vs conservative treatment was associated with a 2.3-fold higher risk (7.3% vs 3.4%, p=0.0028) for cardiovascular (CV) death or myocardial infarction (MI), driven by higher rates of procedure-related MI (3.4% vs 0.1%), while there were no differences in rates of CV death (1.3% vs 1.3%, p=0.72) or spontaneous MI (3.0% vs 2.1%, p=0.28). There were significantly more major bleeds (hazard ratio (HR) 2.98, p<0.0001), mainly due to coronary artery bypass graft (CABG)-related (HR 4.05, p<0.0001) and non-CABG procedural-related major bleeding events (HR 5.31, p=0.0175), however there were no differences in non-procedure-related major bleeding (1.5% vs 1.9%, p=0.45). Findings were consistent for patients with a normal cTnI-hs at randomisation. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with NSTE-ACS and normal cTnT-hs, a planned early invasive treatment strategy was associated with increased rates of procedure-related MI and bleeding but no differences in long-term spontaneous MI, non-procedure-related bleeding or mortality.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".