MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2981803122 · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehz745.0119

4115Effect of alirocumab on recurrent cardiovascular events after acute coronary syndrome, according to the intensity of background statin treatment

2019· article· en· W2981803122 on OpenAlexaff
Rafael Díaz, Q H Li, Deepak L. Bhatt, Vera Bittner, Marie T. Baccara‐Dinet, Shaun G. Goodman, J. Wouter Jukema, Alexander Parkhomenko, Robert Pordy, Željko Reiner, Michael Szarek, Hung‐Fat Tse, Andreas M. Zeiher, Gregory G. Schwartz, Philippe Gabríel Steg

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRosuvastatinMaceAtorvastatinStatinAlirocumabInternal medicineAcute coronary syndromeHazard ratioCardiologyRosuvastatin CalciumClinical endpointRandomized controlled trialMyocardial infarctionCholesterolPercutaneous coronary interventionLipoproteinConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Statins are a cornerstone of therapy for coronary heart disease. We describe the effects of alirocumab (ALI) in patients (pts) with recent acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and dyslipidaemia per category of statin use. Methods ODYSSEY OUTCOMES compared ALI with placebo (PBO) in 18,924 pts with recent ACS and dyslipidaemia despite high-intensity/maximum tolerated statin (atorvastatin 40–80 mg/d or rosuvastatin 20–40 mg/d). Lower doses could be used if there were symptoms, laboratory abnormalities, or contraindications with higher doses. In cases of documented intolerance to ≥2 statins, pts could qualify on no statin treatment. Pts were randomized to ALI (75 mg SC Q2W, with possible uptitration to 150 mg Q2W) or PBO. Median follow-up was 2.8 years. Primary endpoint was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE: CHD death, non-fatal MI, ischaemic stroke, or unstable angina requiring hospitalization). Pts were categorized by statin therapy at baseline: high intensity (88.8%), low or moderate intensity (8.7%), or no statin use (2.4%). In each category we determined the relative (hazard ratio [HR]) and absolute risk reductions (ARR) for MACE with ALI. Results Overall, ALI reduced MACE (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.78–0.93; P<0.001). HRs were consistent across statin categories (Table). Baseline LDL-C increased across high-intensity, low/moderate-intensity, and no statin categories. Correspondingly, there was a gradient of the risk of MACE in the PBO group across these categories (10.8%, 10.7%, and 26%). With ALI treatment, the mean reduction in LDL-C from baseline to Month 4 increased across the 3 statin categories and correspondingly the ARRs for MACE were 1.3%, 3.2%, and 8.0% (P interaction <.001). LDL-C values and MACE events All patients High-intensity statin Low-/moderate-intensity statin No statin Interaction P-value N=18,924 (100%) N=16,811 (88.8%) N=1653 (8.7%) N=460 (2.4%) (treatment x statin category) PBO (N=9462) ALI (N=9462) PBO (N=8431) ALI (N=8380) PBO (N=804) ALI (N=849) PBO (N=227) ALI (N=233) LDL-C at baseline, mmol/L, mean (SE)* 2.39 (0.01) 2.39 (0.01) 2.35 (0.01) 2.35 (0.01) 2.41 (0.03) 2.43 (0.03) 3.76 (0.08) 3.82 (0.08) Change in LDL-C from baseline to Month 4, mmol/L, mean (SE) 0.03 (0.01) −1.4 (0.01) 0.03 (0.01) −1.37 (0.01) 0.01 (0.02) −1.47 (0.02) −0.004 (0.06) −2.27 (0.06) <0.001 MACE, n (%)* 1052 (11.1) 903 (9.5) 907 (10.8) 797 (9.5) 86 (10.7) 64 (7.5) 59 (26.0) 42 (18.0) HR (95% CI) 0.85 (0.78−0.93) 0.88 (0.80−0.96) 0.69 (0.50−0.95) 0.65 (0.43−0.96) 0.14 ARR (%) (95% CI) 1.6 (0.7−2.4) 1.3 (0.3−2.2) 3.2 (0.4−5.9) 8.0 (0.4−15.5) <0.001 *P<0.001 for difference among statin categories. Conclusions In ODYSSEY OUTCOMES, patients unable to receive high-intensity statin treatment showed greater ARRs with ALI, consistent with higher baseline LDL-C concentration and greater absolute LDL-C reduction. Patients unable to receive high-intensity statin treatment are an important group to consider for treatment with ALI after ACS. Acknowledgement/Funding Funded by Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.260 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart Journal→Same topicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health→French-language works237,207→