MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract 19049: Net Clinical Benefit of Vorapaxar in NSTE ACS: Role of Ischemic and Bleeding Risk Stratification

2012· article· en· W40077594 on OpenAlexaff
Pierluigi Tricoci, Zhen Huang, Frans Van de Werf, Harvey White, David J. Moliterno, Basil S. Lewis, Claes Held, Christoph Bode, Hisao Ogawa, Yuliya Lokhnygina, Philip E. Aylward, Lars Wallentin, Robert A. Harrington, Kenneth W. Mahaffey, Paul W. Armstrong

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRisk stratificationCardiologyInternal medicineStratification (seeds)Intensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: In 12,944 NSTE ACS pts included in the TRACER trial, platelet protease-activated-receptor 1 (PAR-1) antagonist vorapaxar, on top of standard of care with high thienopyridine use, was associated with an 11% reduction in CV death, MI, or stroke and an increased risk of bleeding. The trial was broadly inclusive and did not exclude pts based on bleeding risk. We evaluated the net clinical benefit of vorapaxar in the randomized population and according to patients’ predicted risks of ischemic events and major bleeding. Methods: Using multivariable models developed in the TRACER placebo group to predict 1-yr major bleeding (GUSTO severe or TIMI major bleeding) and recurrent ischemic events (composite of CV death, MI, stroke), patients were stratified into 2 bleeding risk categories (predicted rate >5% vs ≤5%) and 2 ischemic risk categories (predicted rate >13% vs ≤13%). Net clinical outcome was measured as the difference in treatment effects on the composite ischemic endpoint vs bleeding outcome. Results: Overall at 1-yr, vorapaxar resulted in a 1.30% absolute reduction in CV death, MI, and stroke and a 0.94% absolute increase in GUSTO severe bleeding (net benefit +0.34%). In pts with an increased risk of bleeding, vorapaxar had negative net clinical benefit (Figure). Among pts with high risk of ischemic events but low risk of bleeding (26% of the population), vorapaxar produced a favorable 2.8% absolute net benefit. Conclusion: Vorapaxar was associated with an improved net benefit in a selected but large group of NSTE ACS patients with high risk of recurrent ischemic events and low risk of bleeding, identified through the application of multivariable risk stratification strategies. Appropriate selection of patients in NSTE ACS, with the risk of bleeding balanced against that of recurrent ischemic events, appears to be a determinant of improved outcome with vorapaxar added to standard of care and high use of dual antiplatelet therapy.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics→French-language works237,207→