SynthesisTexas Heart Institute journal2023
P2Y12 Inhibitors for Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Texas Heart Institute journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and safety of low-dose prasugrel as dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with ischemic heart disease: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Cardiovascular intervention and therapeutics · 2025Pooled it
- Clopidogrel Versus Prasugrel Versus Ticagrelor in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome: New Insights from a Large Registry Compared to Randomized Clinical Trials-A Structured Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Article
- Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Novel Antiplatelets and Standard Therapy in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease.Cureus · 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
6 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFor patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS), prasugrel was recommended over ticagrelor in a recent randomized controlled trial, although more data are needed on the rationale. Here, the effects of P2Y12 inhibitors on ischemic and bleeding events in patients with NSTE-ACS were investigated.
methodsClinical trials that enrolled patients with NSTE-ACS were included, relevant data were extracted, and a network meta-analysis was performed.
resultsThis study included 37,268 patients with NSTE-ACS from 11 studies. There was no significant difference between prasugrel and ticagrelor for any end point, although prasugrel had a higher likelihood of event reduction than ticagrelor for all end points except cardiovascular death. Compared with clopidogrel, prasugrel was associated with decreased risks of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (hazard ratio [HR], 0.84; 95% CI, 0.71-0.99) and myocardial infarction (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.68-0.99) but not an increased risk of major bleeding (HR, 1.30; 95% CI, 0.97-1.74). Similarly, compared with clopidogrel, ticagrelor was associated with a reduced risk of cardiovascular death (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.66-0.94) and an increased risk of major bleeding (HR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.00-1.77; P = .049). For the primary efficacy end point (MACE), prasugrel showed the highest likelihood of event reduction (P = .97) and was superior to ticagrelor (P = .29) and clopidogrel (P = .24).
conclusionPrasugrel and ticagrelor had comparable risks for every end point, although prasugrel had the highest probability of being the best treatment for reducing the primary efficacy end point. This study highlights the need for further studies to investigate optimal P2Y12 inhibitor selection in patients with NSTE-ACS.
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.