Clinical relevance of ticagrelor monotherapy following 1‐month dual antiplatelet therapy after bifurcation percutaneous coronary intervention: Insight from GLOBAL LEADERS trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of ticagrelor monotherapy following 1-month dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for bifurcation lesions. METHODS: GLOBAL LEADERS was a randomized, superiority, all-comers trial comparing 1-month DAPT with ticagrelor and aspirin followed by 23-month ticagrelor monotherapy (experimental treatment) with standard 12-month DAPT followed by 12-month aspirin monotherapy (reference treatment) in patients treated with a biolimus A9-eluting stent. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause death or new Q-wave myocardial infarction (MI) at 2 years. RESULTS: Among the 15,845 patients included in this subgroup analysis, 2,498 patients (15.8%) underwent PCI for at least one bifurcation lesion. The incidence of the primary endpoint was similar between the bifurcation and nonbifurcation groups (4.7 vs. 4.0%, p = .083). The experimental treatment had no significant effect on the primary endpoint according to the presence/absence of a bifurcation lesion (bifurcation: hazard ratio [HR]: 0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.51-1.07; nonbifurcation: HR: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.76-1.07, p for interaction = .343), but was associated with significant reduction in definite or probable stent thrombosis (p for interaction = .022) and significant excess of stroke (p for interaction = .018) when compared with the reference treatment. CONCLUSIONS: After PCI for bifurcation lesions using 1-month of DAPT followed by ticagrelor monotherapy for 23 months did not demonstrate explicit benefit regarding all-cause death or new Q-wave MI as in the overall trial.
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 | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".