MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321455716 · doi:10.1161/jaha.121.026756

Cardiovascular Benefits of Icosapent Ethyl in Patients With and Without Atrial Fibrillation in REDUCE‐IT

2023· article· en· W4321455716 on OpenAlexafffund
Brian Olshansky, Deepak L. Bhatt, Michael Miller, Philippe Gabríel Steg, Eliot A. Brinton, Terry A. Jacobson, Steven Ketchum, Ralph T. Doyle, Rebecca A. Juliano, Lixia Jiao, Peter R. Kowey, James A. Reiffel, Jean‐Claude Tardif, Christie M. Ballantyne, Mina K. Chung

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Heart Association · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicFatty Acid Research and Health
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMontreal Heart Institute
FundersDuke Clinical Research InstituteNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institutes of HealthIdorsia PharmaceuticalsDaiichi Sankyo EuropeWake Forest UniversityServierSchool of Medicine, New York UniversityUniversity of PennsylvaniaNovo NordiskEli Lilly and CompanyYale New Haven HospitalAstraZenecaAmarin CorporationJoslin Diabetes CenterSanofiGeorge Washington UniversityBelvoir Media GroupU.S. Department of Veterans AffairsYale UniversityPennsylvania State UniversityAmgenPfizerYork UniversityCSL BehringSyracuse University
KeywordsMedicineAtrial fibrillationPlaceboMyocardial infarctionInternal medicineCardiologyUnstable anginaStroke (engine)Atrial flutterCoronary artery diseaseRandomizationRandomized controlled trialPost-hoc analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background In REDUCE‐IT (Reduction of Cardiovascular Events With Icosapent Ethyl–Intervention Trial), icosapent ethyl (IPE) versus placebo) reduced cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, coronary revascularization, or unstable angina requiring hospitalization, but was associated with increased atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter (AF) hospitalization (3.1% IPE versus 2.1% placebo; P =0.004). Methods and Results We performed post hoc efficacy and safety analyses of patients with or without prior AF (before randomization) and with or without in‐study time‐varying AF hospitalization to assess relationships of IPE (versus placebo) and outcomes. In‐study AF hospitalization event rates were higher in patients with prior AF (12.5% versus 6.3%, IPE versus placebo; P =0.007) versus without prior AF (2.2% versus 1.6%, IPE versus placebo; P =0.09). Serious bleeding rates trended higher in patients with (7.3% versus 6.0%, IPE versus placebo; P =0.59) versus without prior AF (2.3% versus 1.7%, IPE versus placebo; P =0.08). With IPE, serious bleeding trended higher regardless of prior AF (interaction P value [ P int ]=0.61) or postrandomization AF hospitalization ( P int =0.66). Patients with prior AF (n=751, 9.2%) versus without prior AF (n=7428, 90.8%) had similar relative risk reductions of the primary composite and key secondary composite end points with IPE versus placebo ( P int =0.37 and P int =0.55, respectively). Conclusions In REDUCE‐IT, in‐study AF hospitalization rates were higher in patients with prior AF especially in those randomized to IPE. Although serious bleeding trended higher in those randomized to IPE versus placebo over the course of the study, serious bleeding was not different regardless of prior AF or in‐study AF hospitalization. Patients with prior AF or in‐study AF hospitalization had consistent relative risk reductions across primary, key secondary, and stroke end points with IPE. Registration URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01492361 ; Unique Identifier: NCT01492361

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.285 · 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

Citations25
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Heart AssociationSame topicFatty Acid Research and HealthFrench-language works237,207