Impact of long-term ticagrelor monotherapy following 1-month dual antiplatelet therapy in patients who underwent complex percutaneous coronary intervention: insights from the Global Leaders trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To evaluate the impact of an experimental strategy [23-month ticagrelor monotherapy following 1-month dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT)] vs. a reference regimen (12-month aspirin monotherapy following 12-month DAPT) after complex percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS AND RESULTS: In the present post hoc analysis of the Global Leaders trial, the primary endpoint [composite of all-cause death or new Q-wave myocardial infarction (MI)] at 2 years was assessed in patients with complex PCI, which includes at least one of the following characteristics: multivessel PCI, ≥3 stents implanted, ≥3 lesions treated, bifurcation PCI with ≥2 stents, or total stent length >60 mm. In addition, patient-oriented composite endpoint (POCE) (composite of all-cause death, any stroke, any MI, or any revascularization) and net adverse clinical events (NACE) [composite of POCE or Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) Type 3 or 5 bleeding] were explored. Among 15 450 patients included in this analysis, 4570 who underwent complex PCI had a higher risk of ischaemic and bleeding events. In patients with complex PCI, the experimental strategy significantly reduced risks of the primary endpoint [hazard ratio (HR): 0.64, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.48-0.85] and POCE (HR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.69-0.93), but not in those with non-complex PCI (Pinteraction = 0.015 and 0.017, respectively). The risk of BARC Type 3 or 5 bleeding was comparable (HR: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.67-1.40), resulting in a significant risk reduction in NACE (HR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.69-0.92; Pinteraction = 0.011). CONCLUSION: Ticagrelor monotherapy following 1-month DAPT could provide a net clinical benefit for patients with complex PCI. However, in view of the overall neutral results of the trial, these findings of a post hoc analysis should be considered as hypothesis generating.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".