‘Ticagrelor alone vs. dual antiplatelet therapy from 1 month after drug-eluting coronary stenting among patients with STEMI’: a <i>post hoc</i> analysis of the randomized GLOBAL LEADERS trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor monotherapy beyond 1 month and up to 24 months vs. standard 12-month dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and ticagrelor followed by aspirin monotherapy among ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the GLOBAL LEADERS trial. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a post hoc analysis of STEMI patients in the GLOBAL LEADERS trial comparing experimental ticagrelor monotherapy (1062 patients) with standard 12-month DAPT (1030 patients). We evaluated predefined primary and secondary endpoints in both treatment arms. Rates of net adverse clinical events (NACE), patient-oriented composite endpoints (POCE), and bleeding academic research consortium (BARC)-defined bleeding Type 3 or 5 were also evaluated. At 2 years, there were no significant differences in rates of primary endpoints in patients who had STEMI [0.89 (0.61-1.31)]. There were similar rates of NACE and POCE in both experimental and reference treatment groups at 2 years post-PCI [hazard ratio (HR) 0.96 (0.77-1.20) and 0.96 (0.77-1.21), respectively]. BARC 3 or 5 bleeding events were numerically less in experimental compared to reference treatment groups at 1 year [HR 0.55 (0.27-1.13)] and 2 years [0.61 (0.32-1.16)]. CONCLUSION: Presentation with STEMI has not influenced the incidence of GLOBAL LEADERS defined primary endpoints. There were no significant differences in rates of NACE, POCE, and BARC bleeding between the two treatment groups up to 2 years of follow-up. Although these findings should be viewed as exploratory, they expand the evidence on potential safety of aspirin-free antiplatelet strategies after PCI in STEMI.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".