ArticleCardiovascular diagnosis and therapy2016
Efficacy and safety of vorapaxar for the prevention of adverse cardiac events in patients with coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis.
Article in Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Vorapaxar: The missing link in antiplatelet therapy!Journal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCoronary artery disease (CAD) is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Vorapaxar, a protease-activated receptor-1 (PAR-1) antagonist, is a novel antiplatelet agent that may provide us a new way in antithrombotic therapy. Several studies had been conducted to evaluate the efficacy of vorapaxar in the treatment of CAD, but the results were inconsistent. Here a meta-analysis was made to assess the efficacy and safety of vorapaxar in reducing adverse cardiac events in patients with CAD.
methodsA comprehensive literature search was conducted. The primary efficacy endpoint was the major adverse cardiac events, which was defined as a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, urgent coronary revascularization, or recurrent ischemia with rehospitalization. The primary safety endpoint was the composite of major or minor bleeding events. Pooled effects were measured by odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). A random-effect or fixed model was used in this meta-analysis.
resultsTotally, 31,388 patients from four randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included in this meta-analysis. Patients who took vorapaxar combined with standard dual anti-platelet therapy (aspirin and thienopyridine) showed a lower incidence in major adverse cardiac events (OR, 0.86, 95% CI: 0.75-0.99, P=0.03), MI (OR, 0.79, 95% CI: 0.67-0.95, P=0.01) and ischemic stroke (OR, 0.72, 95% CI: 0.58-0.89, P=0.003) than those who only took placebo instead. But there was no significant reduction in cardiovascular death (OR, 0.95, 95% CI: 0.82-1.09, P=0.45). Nevertheless, the vorapaxar group were associated with a higher risk of bleeding events (P<0.001).
conclusionsThe result of this meta-analysis indicated that adding vorapaxar to the standard dual anti-platelet therapy may be efficient in reducing the incidence of major adverse cardiac events at the cost of increasing risk of bleeding events.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.