MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2982183151 · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehz746.1005

P6411Dyspnea in ticagrelor treated patients in the all-comer randomized GLOBAL LEADERS study and its association with clinical outcomes

2019· article· en· W2982183151 on OpenAlexaff
Mariusz Tomaniak, Ply Chichareon, Rodrigo Modolo, Sylvain Planté, Philippe Brunel, Farzin Beygui, Robert‐Jan van Geuns, Robert F. Storey, C. Hamm, Philippe Gabríel Steg, Pascal Vranckx, Stephan Windecker, Yoshinobu Onuma, Marco Valgimigli, Patrick W. Serruys

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAntiplatelet Therapy and Cardiovascular Diseases
Canadian institutionsSouthlake Regional Health Center
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTicagrelorPercutaneous coronary interventionConventional PCIInternal medicineContext (archaeology)AspirinStroke (engine)Acute coronary syndromeMyocardial infarctionClinical endpointRandomized controlled trialAdverse effectIncidence (geometry)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Dyspnea represents a drug adverse effect reported with a higher frequency for ticagrelor, as compared with other P2Y12 antagonists. The impact of dyspnea on clinical outcomes has not been yet evaluated in the context of aspirin-free therapies after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Purpose The study aimed to evaluate the incidence of dyspnea and its associations with demographic characteristics and clinical outcomes in patients undergoing PCI treated with ticagrelor either as monotherapy or as a part of a dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in the GLOBAL LEADERS cohort. Methods This is a sub-analysis of the randomized all-comer GLOBAL LEADERS study (n=15991), comparing the experimental strategy of ticagrelor monotherapy following one-month DAPT after PCI with the reference strategy of 12-month DAPT followed by 12-month aspirin monotherapy. The incidence of dyspnea reported as adverse event (AE) and its relation to demographic characteristics and 2-year clinical outcomes was evaluated (intention-to-treat analysis). Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were performed, including randomized treatment and incidence of first dyspnea event as a time-dependent covariate. The primary endpoint was a composite of 2-year all-cause mortality or centrally adjudicated, new Q-wave myocardial infarction (MI). Patient-oriented clinical endpoints (POCE) comprised all-cause death, any stroke, MI or revascularization, whereas net adverse clinical events (NACE) included POCE and Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC)-defined bleeding type 3 or 5. Results Overall, dyspnea was reported as an AE in 2101 patients (13.2%) up to two years of follow-up, with a higher frequency in the experimental arm (16.4%) as compared with the reference group (11.1%) (hazard ratio [HR]1.70, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.56–1.86, p=0.001). Predictors of dyspnea AE up to 2 years by multivariate analyses were: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (HR1.71, 95% CI 1.56–1.87, p=0.001), female gender (HR1.31, 95% CI 1.18–1.44, p=0.001), hypertension (HR1.31, 95% CI 1.19–1.44, p=0.001, prior coronary artery bypass grafting (HR1.30, 95% CI 1.10–1.54, p=0.003), left ventricle ejection fraction below 40% (HR1.22, 95% CI 1.04–1.42, p=0.012), presentation with acute coronary syndrome (HR1.19, 95% CI 1.09–1.29, p=0.001) and body mass index (≥27kg/m2) (HR1.17, 95% CI 1.08–1.28, p=0.001). In patients who reported dyspnea AE, the two-year rates of the efficacy and safety endpoints in the experimental and reference arm were: for the primary endpoint 3.4% vs. 4.3% (p adjusted=0.807), for POCE 15.8% vs. 17.6% (p adjusted=0.218), for NACE 17.2% vs. 19.6% (p adjusted=0.082), for BARC 3 or 5 type bleeding 17.2% vs. 19.6% (p adjusted=0.082), respectively. Conclusions The occurrence of dyspnea AE up to two years after PCI appeared not to affect the safety of the experimental treatment strategy of 23-month ticagrelor monotherapy following one-month DAPT after PCI. Acknowledgement/Funding Study founded by European Cardiovascular Research Institute, which received unrestricted grants from Biosensors Int., AstraZeneca, Medicines Company.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 designRandomized trial
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 topicAntiplatelet Therapy and Cardiovascular Diseases→French-language works237,207→