Biolimus A9 polymer-free coated stents in high bleeding risk patients undergoing complex PCI: evidence from the LEADERS FREE randomised clinical trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: The LEADERS FREE trial has demonstrated that a polymer-free Biolimus A9-coated stent (BA9-DCS) is superior to a bare metal stent (BMS) for high bleeding risk (HBR) patients when treated with one month of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). This analysis aimed to determine the impact of PCI procedure complexity on the two-year results. METHODS AND RESULTS: Six hundred and sixty-seven (667) patients enrolled in the LEADERS FREE (BA9-DCS 346, BMS 321) underwent a complex PCI, defined by one or more of eight characteristics: total stent length ≥60 mm, ≥3 vessels or lesions treated, ≥3 stents implanted, bifurcation lesion treated with ≥2 stents, chronically occluded, restenotic or saphenous vein graft lesion. Patients undergoing complex PCI were older, more often male, and presented with more ACS, diabetes, renal insufficiency, anaemia and multivessel disease. They derived major benefit from DCS over BMS for safety (16.2% vs. 21.7%, HR 0.70 [0.49-0.99], p<0.05) and for efficacy (10.8% vs. 18.1%, HR 0.54 [0.35-0.83], p<0.005). For the 1,746 patients with non-complex PCI, DCS demonstrated superior efficacy (5.3% vs. 9.9%, HR 0.52 [0.36-0.75], p<0.001, p for interaction NS) and similar safety to BMS (11.1% vs. 12.6%, NS, p for interaction NS). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to BMS, the BA9-DCS maintained both efficacy and safety benefits when used in complex PCI procedures.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".