ArticleEuropean heart journal2024
Bleeding risk prediction after acute myocardial infarction-integrating cancer data: the updated PRECISE-DAPT cancer score.
Article in European heart journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Antithrombotic Therapy After PCI in High-Risk Cardiovascular Patients: Navigating Complexity Beyond Guidelines.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- In Hospital Assessment and Management of High Bleeding Risk in Patients with ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (STEMI).Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2026Review
- First quinquennium completed: highlights fromEuropean heart journal open · 2026Article
- Cardiovascular Safety of Bruton Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors: From Ibrutinib to Next-Generation Agents.American journal of cardiovascular drugs : drugs, devices, and other interventions · 2026Review
- Revascularisation in Patients with Cancer: A Review.European cardiology · 2026Review
- Prediction of major bleeding events for patients with dual antiplatelet therapy after myocardial infarction-a validation of the PRECISE-DAPT cancer score.European heart journal open · 2025Article
- External Validation of the PRECISE-DAPT Cancer Score in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction.Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions · 2025Article
- The year in cardiovascular medicine 2024: the top 10 papers in cardio-oncology.European heart journal · 2025Article
- Impact of Socioeconomic Disparities on Care and Outcomes of Cancer Patients Presenting With STEMI Between 2005 and 2019; a Nationwide British Study.Clinical cardiology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsThis study assessed the impact of incorporating cancer as a predictor on performance of the PRECISE-DAPT score.
methodsA nationally linked cohort of ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients between 1 January 2005 and 31 March 2019 was derived from the UK Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project and the UK Hospital Episode Statistics Admitted Patient Care registries. The primary outcome was major bleeding at 1 year. A new modified score was generated by adding cancer as a binary variable to the PRECISE-DAPT score using a Cox regression model and compared its performance to the original PRECISE-DAPT score.
resultsA total of 216 709 ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients were included, of which 4569 had cancer. The original score showed moderate accuracy (C-statistic .60), and the modified score showed modestly higher discrimination (C-statistics .64; hazard ratio 1.03, 95% confidence interval 1.03-1.04) even in patients without cancer (C-statistics .63; hazard ratio 1.03, 95% confidence interval 1.03-1.04). The net reclassification index was .07. The bleeding rates of the modified score risk categories (high, moderate, low, and very low bleeding risk) were 6.3%, 3.8%, 2.9%, and 2.2%, respectively. According to the original score, 65.5% of cancer patients were classified as high bleeding risk (HBR) and 21.6% were low or very low bleeding risk. According to the modified score, 94.0% of cancer patients were HBR, 6.0% were moderate bleeding risk, and no cancer patient was classified as low or very low bleeding risk.
conclusionsAdding cancer to the PRECISE-DAPT score identifies the majority of patients with cancer as HBR and can improve its discrimination ability without undermining its performance in patients without cancer.
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.