Low-dose rivaroxaban plus aspirin in older patients with peripheral artery disease undergoing acute limb revascularization: insights from the VOYAGER PAD trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: In this secondary analysis of the VOYAGER trial, rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice/day plus aspirin 100 mg/day was assessed in older adults. Advanced age is associated with elevated bleeding risk and unfavourable net benefit for dual antiplatelet therapy in chronic coronary artery disease. The risk-benefit of low-dose rivaroxaban in patients ≥75 years with peripheral artery disease (PAD) after lower extremity revascularization (LER) has not been described. METHODS AND RESULTS: The primary endpoint was a composite of acute limb ischaemia, major amputation, myocardial infarction, ischaemic stroke, or cardiovascular death. The principal safety outcome was thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) major bleeding analysed by the pre-specified age cut-off of 75 years. Of 6564 patients randomized, 1330 (20%) were >75 years. Absolute 3-year Kaplan-Meier cumulative incidence rates for primary efficacy (23.4% vs. 19.0%) and safety (3.5% vs. 1.5%) endpoints were higher in elderly vs. non-elderly patients. Efficacy of rivaroxaban (P-interaction 0.83) and safety (P-interaction 0.38) was consistent irrespective of age. The combination of intracranial and fatal bleeding was not increased in patients >75 years (2 rivaroxaban vs. 8 placebo). Overall, benefits (absolute risk reduction 3.8%, number needed to treat 26 for the primary endpoint) exceeded risks (absolute risk increase 0.81%, number needed to harm 123 for TIMI major bleeding). CONCLUSION: Patients ≥75 years with PAD are at both heightened ischaemic and bleeding risk after LER. No excess harm with respect to major, intracranial or fatal bleeding was seen in older patients yet numerically greater absolute benefits were observed. This suggests that low-dose rivaroxaban combined with aspirin should be considered in PAD after LER regardless of age.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".