Suppr超能文献

向美国食品药品监督管理局(FDA)报告的主要死亡原因表明,替卡格雷的死亡率获益低于提供给PLATO试验研究者的清单所示。

Primary Causes of Death Reported to the FDA Suggest Less Ticagrelor Mortality Benefit than the List Issued to the PLATO Trial Investigators.

作者信息

Serebruany Victor, Tanguay Jean-Francois, Marciniak Thomas

机构信息

Department of Neurology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA.

Montreal Heart Institute, Interventional Cardiology, Université de Montréal, Montreal, QC H3T 1J4, Canada.

出版信息

Rev Cardiovasc Med. 2022 Apr 8;23(4):132. doi: 10.31083/j.rcm2304132. eCollection 2022 Apr.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The PLATO trial data set reported to the FDA (DRFDA) revealed that some primary deaths causes (PDC) were inaccurately reported favoring ticagrelor. Trial Investigators (DRTI) received different data set with more ticagrelor mortality advantage. We compared these two death lists for the match in PDC.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The DRFDA contains 938 deaths, while the DRTI contains 905. We matched "vascular", "non-vascular", "unknown", "missed", and "other" causes of death between DRFDA and DRTI. The DRFDA used 14 vascular, 9 non-vascular, 1 unknown and 1 other PDC codes, while the DRTI used 14 but different vascular, 14 non-vascular but no unknown or other PDC codes. We observed a significant mismatch for the PDC codes between the DRFDA and DRTI data sets. Most DRFDA deaths were vascular (n = 677), fewer non-vascular (n = 159) and unexpectedly many unknown (n = 95) or other (n = 7) PDC. Surprisingly, the shorter DRTI contains more vascular (n = 795), fewer non-vascular (n = 110), but no unknown, other, or missed causes. There were more sudden deaths in DRTI than in DRFDA (161 vs. 138; 0.03), twice as many post-myocardial infarction deaths (373 vs. 178; 0.001) but fewer heart failure deaths (73 vs. 109; = 0.02). The reported non-vascular PDC match better except for 2 extra suicides in the clopidogrel arm of the DRTI.

CONCLUSIONS

Over 100 "unknown", "missed", or "other" PDC events reported by the trial sponsor to the FDA were omitted from the investigator data set contributing to the inflated differences in vascular mortality benefit of ticagrelor reported in numerous PLATO publications. Synchronization of PDC reporting between regulatory agencies and investigators was lacking in PLATO but remains mandatory to ensure quality for future indication-seeking trials.

摘要

背景

向美国食品药品监督管理局(FDA)报告的《血小板抑制和患者结局(PLATO)》试验数据集(DRFDA)显示,一些主要死亡原因(PDC)报告不准确,有利于替格瑞洛。试验研究者(DRTI)收到的不同数据集显示替格瑞洛有更大的死亡率优势。我们比较了这两份死亡清单中主要死亡原因的匹配情况。

方法与结果

DRFDA包含938例死亡病例,而DRTI包含905例。我们对DRFDA和DRTI之间“血管性”、“非血管性”、“不明”、“遗漏”和“其他”死亡原因进行了匹配。DRFDA使用了14个血管性、9个非血管性、1个不明和1个其他主要死亡原因编码,而DRTI使用了14个但不同的血管性、14个非血管性编码,但没有不明或其他主要死亡原因编码。我们观察到DRFDA和DRTI数据集之间主要死亡原因编码存在显著不匹配。DRFDA的大多数死亡病例是血管性的(n = 677),非血管性的较少(n = 159),不明或其他主要死亡原因的病例出乎意料地多(n = 95)或(n = 7)。令人惊讶的是,较短的DRTI包含更多的血管性死亡病例(n = 795),较少的非血管性死亡病例(n = 110),但没有不明、其他或遗漏的原因。DRTI中的猝死病例比DRFDA多(161例对138例;P = 0.03),心肌梗死后死亡病例是DRFDA的两倍(373例对178例;P = 0.001),但心力衰竭死亡病例较少(73例对109例;P = 0.02)。除了DRTI中氯吡格雷组有2例额外的自杀病例外,报告的非血管性主要死亡原因匹配得更好。

结论

试验申办者向FDA报告的100多例“不明”、“遗漏”或“其他”主要死亡原因事件未被纳入研究者数据集中,这导致了众多PLATO出版物中报道的替格瑞洛血管死亡率获益差异被夸大。PLATO试验中监管机构和研究者之间缺乏主要死亡原因报告的同步性,但这对于确保未来探索适应症试验的质量仍然是必不可少的。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3c04/11273766/391090506142/2153-8174-23-4-132-g1.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验