MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abstract 4140394: Substantial cardiovascular risk reduction with icosapent ethyl in patients with prior cardiovascular events regardless of coronary artery disease history: REDUCE-IT CAD

2024· article· en· W4404364053 on OpenAlexaff
Rahul Aggarwal, Deepak L. Bhatt, Christie M. Ballantyne, Michael Miller, Eliot A. Brinton, Terry A. Jacobson, Steven Ketchum, Armando Lira Pineda, Ralph T. Doyle, Jean‐Claude Tardif, Philippe Gabríel Steg

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Disease and Adiposity
Canadian institutionsMontreal Heart Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCoronary artery diseaseCardiologyInternal medicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: REDUCE-IT (Reduction of Cardiovascular Events with Icosapent Ethyl-Intervention Trial) was a multinational, double-blind trial that randomized 8,179 statin-treated patients with controlled low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, elevated triglycerides, and cardiovascular (CV) risk, to icosapent ethyl (IPE) 4 g daily or placebo. Randomization was stratified by established CV history (70.7%), or diabetes and other risk factors (29.3%). METHODS/RESULTS: We evaluated IPE in patients with CV history, further characterized as having a documented history of coronary artery disease (CAD), or not. Primary (CV death, nonfatal myocardial infarction [MI], nonfatal stroke, coronary revascularization, hospitalization for unstable angina) and key secondary (CV death, nonfatal MI, nonfatal stroke) CV endpoints were evaluated. Of the 5,785 (70.7%) REDUCE-IT patients with established CV disease, 4,532 patients had a history of CAD (multi vessel CAD, prior MI, hospitalization for high-risk non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome) and 1,253 patients did not. IPE reduced primary and key secondary first and total (first plus recurrent) events in patients with and without a history of CAD. In patients with CAD, IPE demonstrated a 25% relative risk reduction in first (HR 0.75; 95% CI 0.66, 0.84; P <0.0001; NNT 17) and 32% reduction in total primary endpoint events (RR 0.68; 95% CI 0.59, 0.78; P <0.0001) compared with placebo ( Figure 1A ). In patients without CAD, IPE demonstrated a 34% relative risk reduction in first (HR 0.66; 95% CI 0.51, 0.85; P =0.0012; NNT 13) and 47% reduction in total primary endpoint events (RR 0.53; 95% CI 0.40, 0.70; P <0.0001) ( Figure 1B ). In patients with and without CAD, similar robust reductions were observed for key secondary endpoint events. CV risk reductions were generally consistent across subgroup analyses by CAD history. Safety findings in patients with or without CAD were generally consistent with the overall study findings and did not differ substantially in patients with or without CAD. CONCLUSION: IPE demonstrated robust CV benefit in statin-treated patients with CV disease. Patients with and without CAD experienced large reductions in absolute and relative risk of CV events.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculationSame topicCardiovascular Disease and AdiposityFrench-language works237,207