MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1177/1747493019851282

Медицинская библиотека · International journal of stroke : official journal of the International Stroke Society · 2019

Estimated treatment effect of ticagrelor versus aspirin by investigator-assessed events compared with judgement by an independent event adjudication committee in the SOCRATES trial.

Easton J Donald, Denison Hans, Evans Scott R, Knutsson Mikael, Amarenco Pierre, Albers Gregory W, Ladenvall Per, Minematsu Kazuo, Molina Carlos A, Wang Yongjun, Wong Ks Lawrence, Johnston S Claiborne, SOCRATES Steering Committee and Investigators

Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАПеревод пока не подготовлен

Аннотация

BACKGROUND

Adjudication of endpoints is a standard procedure in cardiovascular clinical trials. However, several studies indicate that the benefit of adjudication in estimating treatment effect may be limited.

AIMS: This post hoc analysis of SOCRATES (NCT01994720) compared the treatment effects and investigated the agreement of clinical event assessment by site investigators and independent adjudicators.

METHODS

SOCRATES compared ticagrelor and aspirin in 13,199 patients with acute minor stroke or high-risk transient ischemic attack. The primary endpoint was stroke, myocardial infarction, or death. Stroke was the major component of the primary endpoint and a secondary endpoint. The endpoints were adjudicated by a blinded independent committee. We compared the treatment effect on the primary endpoint and stroke alone based on the investigators' and adjudicators' assessments, and investigated the agreement rate on the stroke endpoint and major hemorrhages.

RESULTS

The hazard ratios (95% confidence interval) for ticagrelor versus aspirin therapy for the primary endpoint were 0.89 (0.78-1.01) when calculated on adjudicator-assessed events and 0.88 (0.78-1.00) for investigator-assessed events. The hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) for stroke were 0.86 (0.75-0.99) based on the adjudicators' diagnoses and 0.85 (0.75-0.97) based on the investigators' diagnoses. The overall agreement between adjudicator- and investigator-diagnosed stroke was 91%, and for major hemorrhages was 88%.

CONCLUSIONS

In SOCRATES, there was no clinically meaningful difference in the estimated treatment effect, on either the primary endpoint or stroke, by using investigator- or adjudicator-assessed events. Double-blind treatment outcome studies with stroke endpoints may not benefit from adjudication.

TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01994720.

Для цитирования: Easton J Donald, Denison Hans, Evans Scott R, Knutsson Mikael, Amarenco Pierre, Albers Gregory W, Ladenvall Per, Minematsu Kazuo, Molina Carlos A, Wang Yongjun, Wong Ks Lawrence, Johnston S Claiborne, SOCRATES Steering Committee and Investigators. Estimated treatment effect of ticagrelor versus aspirin by investigator-assessed events compared with judgement by an independent event adjudication committee in the SOCRATES trial.. International journal of stroke : official journal of the International Stroke Society. 2019. DOI: 10.1177/1747493019851282.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.