ArticleJournal of thrombosis and thrombolysis2023
Usefulness of the PRECISE-DAPT score at differentiating between ticagrelor and prasugrel for dual antiplatelet therapy initiation.
Article in Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As a part of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), prasugrel or ticagrelor is prescribed along with aspirin to patients of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We aimed to assess if the PRECISE-DAPT score, which provides prediction of bleeding during DAPT, could be used to choose between prasugrel and ticagrelor for DAPT initiation. 181 patients out of which 71 received prasugrel and 110 received ticagrelor were enrolled in this prospective cohort study. PRECISE-DAPT score was calculated for everyone and was used to dichotomize patients into two subgroups (score <25 and ≥25). After balancing potential confounders in baseline characteristics of the subgroups using propensity scores, comparison of a composite outcome of 4-point major adverse cardiovascular events (4P-MACE) (i.e., cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, or coronary revascularization due to stent thrombosis) and bleeding (any type as defined by the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium) within 1-year post-PCI was performed among the subgroups using Cox proportional hazards regression. Prasugrel was associated with lower and comparatively higher 4P-MACE events in subgroups with score ≥25 (HR: 0.17; 95% CI, 0.04-0.77) and score <25 (HR: 3.58; 95% CI, 0.62-20.70) respectively. For bleeding outcome, prasugrel trended towards more clinical benefit for scores ≥25 (HR: 0.44; 95% CI, 0.10-1.93) than <25 (HR: 0.93; 95% CI, 0.13-6.58). Therefore, prasugrel was associated with better clinical effectiveness and trended towards a lower bleeding risk compared to ticagrelor within 1-year post-PCI for those with a high PRECISE-DAPT score (≥25). This finding requires validation through larger studies.
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.