MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3108497567 · doi:10.1093/ehjci/ehaa946.1736

Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol <50 mg/dL is an appropriate target after acute coronary syndrome: propensity score-matched analysis of the ODYSSEY OUTCOMES trial

2020· article· en· W3108497567 on OpenAlexaff
Gregory G. Schwartz, Michael Szarek, Deepak L. Bhatt, Vera Bittner, Raphael Diaz, Shaun G. Goodman, Robert A. Harrington, J. Wouter Jukema, Y.U Kim, Q.H Li, Garen Manvelian, Harvey D. White, Andreas M. Zeiher, Philippe Gabríel Steg

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlirocumabMedicineMacePlaceboPCSK9Acute coronary syndromeInternal medicinePropensity score matchingLipoproteinClinical trialSimvastatinCholesterolCardiologyPercutaneous coronary interventionLDL receptorMyocardial infarctionPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background New ESC/EAS guidelines advise a low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) target level <55 mg/dL for patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS), and a level <40 mg/dL for those with recurrent events. Previous analyses of clinical trials have sought to define an optimal LDL-C target range to prevent major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). However, those analyses are limited because patients who achieve lower versus higher LDL-C levels on lipid-lowering therapy differ in other characteristics that are prognostic for MACE, including baseline LDL-C, lipoprotein(a), and medication adherence. Aim To overcome these limitations, we performed a propensity score-matching (PSM) analysis of the ODYSSEY OUTCOMES trial, which compared the PCSK9 inhibitor alirocumab with placebo in 18,924 patients with recent ACS. Methods Patients on alirocumab were classified in 1 of 3 pre-specified categories according to Month 4 LDL-C <25 (n=3357), 25–50 (n=3692) or >50 mg/dL (n=2197). Within each category, MACE after Month 4 was compared with patients on placebo using 1:1 PSM on demographic, clinical, and adherence variables. Because the trial design involved blinded substitution of placebo for alirocumab when consecutive LDL-C levels were <15 mg/dL on alirocumab, we also evaluated MACE in those patients (n=730) in comparison with patients chosen from the placebo group by 1:3 PSM. Results Patients in the three achieved LDL-C categories of the alirocumab group differed by baseline age, sex, geographic region; history of diabetes, smoking, peripheral artery disease, cerebrovascular disease, coronary revascularization, heart failure, obstructive pulmonary disease, or malignancy; type of index ACS event; baseline LDL-C, lipoprotein(a), estimated glomerular filtration rate, body mass index, systolic blood pressure; use of intensive statin therapy; and adherence with study medication. After PSM, patients in each LDL-C category on alirocumab were well matched to patients on placebo for these characteristics. Treatment hazard ratios (HRs) for MACE (Figure) were similar in those with achieved LDL-C <25 mg/dL or 25–50 mg/dL. Patients with achieved LDL-C >50 mg/dL achieved less benefit. Patients who achieved consecutive LDL-C levels <15 mg/dL and were switched to placebo nonetheless had a robust HR (0.71, 95% CI 0.52–0.98) and thus did not dilute efficacy of alirocumab among those in the <25 mg/dL achieved LDL-C category. Conclusion After accounting for differences in baseline characteristics and adherence, reduction in risk of MACE with alirocumab was similar in patients who achieved LDL-C <25 or 25–50 mg/dL. These data suggest that an LDL-C target of less than 50 mg/dL may be reasonable after ACS and is essentially congruent with new ESC/EAS guidelines. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: Private company. Main funding source(s): Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designNon-randomized 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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