ArticleDrugs & aging2021
Efficacy and Safety of Oral P2Y12 Inhibitors in Older Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Frequentist Network Meta-Analysis.
Article in Drugs & aging, 2021. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Potent P2YCJC open · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivePrevious studies and meta-analyses have assessed optimal P2Y12 inhibitors following acute coronary syndrome in overall trial cohorts. However, there are insufficient data for the elderly cohort who are prone to high bleeding and ischemic events. We aimed to assess the optimal P2Y12 inhibitor therapy for older patients.
methodsPubMed, CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched from inception through July 2020 to identify randomized controlled trials and propensity-matched observational studies including older patients (aged ≥ 65 years) that reported study-defined major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) or major bleeding events. Outcomes at the mid-term follow-up were pooled to conduct a frequentist network meta-analysis.
resultsFourteen studies involving 12,953 older patients were included in our analysis. No significant difference was observed with MACE when all three P2Y12 inhibitors were compared with each other. Compared with clopidogrel, ticagrelor significantly increased the risk of major bleeding (risk ratio 1.35, 95% confidence interval 1.10-1.67) while prasugrel did not (risk ratio 1.02, 95% confidence interval 0.67-1.57). A sensitivity analysis of only randomized controlled trials yielded similar results for both MACE and major bleeding. The P score displayed prasugrel (0.5871) as the best treatment for MACE, while clopidogrel (0.7701) was the best P2Y12 inhibitor to decrease the risk of major bleeding. Ticagrelor (0.0634) was ranked the lowest because of an increased bleeding risk.
conclusionsNo significant difference is observed between the three P2Y12 inhibitors in study-defined MACE. Ranking by p-score suggests prasugrel as the best P2Y12 inhibitor to reduce the risk of MACE while clopidogrel is a better alternative than ticagrelor in older patients with acute coronary syndrome to decrease the risk of major bleeding. Because of a lack of individual-patient data analysis and heterogeneity amongst studies, future studies representing older patients with acute coronary syndrome are required to strengthen evidence regarding optimal antithrombotic therapy in this cohort.
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.