MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Comparative Methodological Assessment of the Randomized GLOBAL LEADERS Trial Using Total Ischemic and Bleeding Events

2020· article· en· W3046880024 on OpenAlexaff
Hironori Hara, David van Klaveren, Kuniaki Takahashi, Norihiro Kogame, Ply Chichareon, Rodrigo Modolo, Mariusz Tomaniak, Masafumi Ono, Hideyuki Kawashima, Rutao Wang, Chao Gao, Margit Niethammer, Géza Fontos, Michaël Angioı̈, Vasco Gama Ribeiro, Emanuele Barbato, Sergio Martins Leandro, Christian W. Hamm, Marco Valgimigli, Stephan Windecker, Peter Jüni, Philippe Gabríel Steg, Johan Verbeeck, Jan G.P. Tijssen, Faisal Sharif, Yoshinobu Onuma, Patrick W. Serruys

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAntiplatelet Therapy and Cardiovascular Diseases
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTicagrelorPercutaneous coronary interventionHazard ratioMyocardial infarctionInternal medicineAspirinRandomized controlled trialRevascularizationClinical endpointStroke (engine)CardiologyConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Time-to-first-event analysis considers only the first event irrespective of its severity. There are several methods to assess trial outcomes beyond time-to-first-event analysis, such as analyzing total events and ranking outcomes. In the GLOBAL LEADERS study, time-to-first-event analysis did not show superiority of ticagrelor monotherapy following one-month dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after percutaneous coronary intervention to conventional 12-month DAPT followed by aspirin monotherapy in the reduction of the primary composite end point of all-cause mortality or new Q-wave myocardial infarction. This study sought to explore various analytical approaches in assessing total ischemic and bleeding events after percutaneous coronary intervention in the GLOBAL LEADERS study. Methods and Results: Total ischemic and bleeding events were defined as all-cause mortality, any stroke, any myocardial infarction, any revascularization, or Bleeding Academic Research Consortium grade 2 or 3 bleeding. We used various analytical approaches to analyze the benefit of ticagrelor monotherapy over conventional DAPT. For ischemic and bleeding events at 2 years after percutaneous coronary intervention, ticagrelor monotherapy demonstrated a 6% risk reduction, compared with conventional 12-month DAPT in time-to-first-event analysis (hazard ratio, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.88–1.01]; log-rank P =0.10). In win ratio analysis, win ratio was 1.05 (95% CI, 0.97–1.13; P =0.20). Negative binomial regression and Andersen-Gill analyses which include repeated events showed statistically significant advantage for ticagrelor monotherapy (rate ratio, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.85–0.99; P =0.020] and hazard ratio, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.85–0.99; P =0.028], respectively), although in weighted composite end point analysis, the hazard ratio was 0.93 (95% CI, 0.84–1.04; log-rank P =0.22). Conclusions: Statistical analyses considering repeated events or event severity showed that ticagrelor monotherapy consistently reduced ischemic and bleeding events by 5% to 8%, compared with conventional 1-year DAPT. Applying multiple statistical methods could emphasize the multiple facets of a trial and result in accurate and more appropriate analyses. Considering the recurrence of ischemic and bleeding events, ticagrelor monotherapy appeared to be beneficial after percutaneous coronary intervention. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT01813435.

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)0.423
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.531
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.577
Threshold uncertainty score0.711

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.4230.531
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.019
Bibliometrics0.0060.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0040.005
Research integrity0.0050.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.309
GPT teacher head0.446
Teacher spread0.137 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
DomainMethods
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

Citations17
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation Cardiovascular Quality and OutcomesSame topicAntiplatelet Therapy and Cardiovascular DiseasesFrench-language works237,207