Aspirin dosing after acute coronary syndrome with suspected aspirin resistance: the ANDAMAN trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Despite current antithrombotic treatments, the recurrence of ischaemic events remains high in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) or aspirin resistance after acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Whether twice-daily aspirin dosing reduces major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in this population remains unknown. METHODS: In this prospective multicentre, randomized trial, patients with ACS and DM or high-risk of aspirin resistance (HRAR) defined as: (i) an index event occurring while on aspirin; (ii) body mass index ≥27 kg/m2; or (iii) increased waist circumference were assigned to receive enteric-coated aspirin once daily (100 mg/day) or twice daily (100 mg morning and evening). The primary outcome was MACE, a composite of any death, myocardial infarction, stroke, urgent coronary revascularization, stent thrombosis, or acute arterial thrombotic event assessed using a time-to-first-event analysis. The main secondary outcome was major bleeding (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 3-5). RESULTS: In total, 2484 participants were enrolled (77.2% with DM, 55.5% with ST-elevation segment myocardial infarction). The median follow-up duration was 18 (interquartile range: 17.6-18.3) months. The primary outcome occurred in 95 of 1228 participants (7.7%) in the twice-daily aspirin group, and 110 of 1256 (8.8%) in the once-daily group (hazard ratio [HR] 0.90; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.69-1.19; P = .42). Major bleeding rates were similar between the groups (1.9% vs 2.1%; HR 0.88; 95% CI 0.50-1.55). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with ACS and DM or HRAR, twice-daily aspirin did not significantly reduce the risk of MACE compared to once-daily dosing. No significant difference was observed in major bleeding between groups. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02520921/EUDRACT No: 2015-000947-18.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".