ArticleOncotarget2017
Efficacy and safety of triple
Article in Oncotarget, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative Safety of Anticoagulant, Antiplatelet and the Combination of Both for Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Aspirin-free P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy immediately after percutaneous coronary intervention: A systematic review.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Current update on herbal sources of antithrombotic activity-a comprehensive review.The Egyptian journal of internal medicine · 2022Review
- Role of Folic Acid Drugs in the Treatment with Antithrombotic and Anticoagulant Drugs for Patients with Cardiovascular Diseases Based on the Analysis of Virtual Reality Medical Data.Journal of healthcare engineering · 2021Article
- Antithrombotic Strategies in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Systemic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
- Ischemic and bleeding outcomes of triple therapy in patients on chronic anticoagulation undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: A meta-analysis of randomized trials.JRSM cardiovascular diseaseArticle
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
The optimal antithrombotic regimen for patients with atrial fibrillation and ischemic heart disease remains unclear. Therefore, we aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of triple therapy (TT [an anticoagulant and 2 antiplatelet drugs]) with dual therapy (DAPT [2 antiplatelet drugs] or DT [an anticoagulant and a single antiplatelet drug]) in patients with atrial fibrillation and ischemic heart disease. We systematically searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed and Embase databases for all relevant studies up to August 2017. The overall risk estimates were calculated using the random-effects model. A total of 17 observational studies were included. Regarding the efficacy outcomes, no differences were observed between the triple therapy and the dual therapy for all-cause death, cardiovascular death, or thrombotic complications (i.e., acute coronary syndrome, stent thrombosis, thromboembolism/stroke, and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events). Regarding the safety outcomes, compared with DAPT, TT was associated with increased risks of major bleeding (a relative risk of 1.96 [1.40-2.74]), minor bleeding (1.69 [1.06-2.71]) and overall bleeding (1.80 [1.23-2.64]). Compared wtih DT, TT was associated with a greater risk of major bleeding (1.65 [1.23-2.21]), but rates of minor bleeding (0.99 [0.56-1.77]) and overall bleeding (1.14 [0.76-1.71]) were similar. Overall, TT confers an increased hazard of major bleeding with no thromboembolic protection compared with dual therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation and ischemic heart disease.
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.