SynthesisJournal of the American Heart Association2025
Ticagrelor Paradox: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBased on the landmark PLATO (Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes) and TRITON-TIMI 38 (Trial to Assess Improvement in Therapeutic Outcomes by Optimizing Platelet Inhibition With Prasugrel-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction) trials, current guidelines recommend ticagrelor and prasugrel over clopidogrel for acute coronary syndrome. However, subsequent studies have failed to replicate the reported benefits of ticagrelor, raising concerns about the validity of the PLATO trial's findings.
methodsRandomized trials published until January 2025 were searched on PubMed and Embase and included if they compared 2 of the 3 standard dual antiplatelet therapies: 12 months aspirin plus clopidogrel, prasugrel, or ticagrelor. We constructed a network with and without PLATO to assess its impact on the synthesized risk estimates on major adverse cardiovascular events, patient mortality, myocardial infarction, and stent thrombosis, as well as major bleeding and major or minor bleeding.
resultsTwelve trials, enrolling 52 415 patients (clopidogrel: 23 557; ticagrelor: 13 344, prasugrel: 15 514) were included. The analysis with PLATO showed lower hazard ratios for ticagrelor versus clopidogrel than the analysis without PLATO in major adverse cardiovascular events, mortality, myocardial infarction, and bleeding outcomes (e.g., cardiovascular mortality; hazard ratio [HR], 0.83 [95% CI, 0.72-0.96] when PLATO was included; HR, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.73-1.25] when PLATO was excluded). Ticagrelor and prasugrel were associated with higher incidences of major bleeding and major or minor bleeding for analyses including and excluding PLATO, altohugh the point estimates for ticagrelor were lower when PLATO was included.
conclusionsThe pooled estimates with PLATO favored ticagrelor compared with estimates without PLATO in several studied outcomes, potentially suggesting the substantial impacts of PLATO's findings on the pooled risk estimates; therefore, additional evidence may be needed given the large number of patients worldwide treated with dual antiplatelet therapy.
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.