Synergy of Dual Pathway Inhibition in Chronic Cardiovascular Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although acetylsalicylic acid is of proven benefit for secondary prevention in patients with cardiovascular disease, the risk of recurrent ischemic events remains high. Intensification of antithrombotic therapy with more potent antiplatelet drugs, dual antiplatelet therapy, or vitamin K antagonists further reduces the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events compared with acetylsalicylic acid alone but increases the risk of bleeding without reducing mortality. In patients with prior coronary artery disease or peripheral arterial disease the COMPASS (Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies) trial revealed that compared with acetylsalicylic acid alone, dual pathway inhibition with low-dose rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice-daily), an oral factor Xa inhibitor, plus acetylsalicylic acid reduced major adverse cardiovascular event by 24%, major adverse limb events by 47%, and mortality by 18%. Major bleeding was increased by 70%, but there was no increase in fatal or intracranial bleeding. This article (1) reviews the results of the COMPASS trial, (2) explains why dual pathway inhibition is superior to antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy alone, (3) compares the results with rivaroxaban plus aspirin with those with other antithrombotic regimens, and (4) provides insight into how best to apply the COMPASS results into practice.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".