Key result
Cangrelor significantly reduced myocardial infarction at 48 hours identified by a clinical events committee compared with clopidogrel (3.8% vs 4.7%; OR 0.80; 95% CI 0.67-0.97; P=0.022).
Why the study?
This study aimed to explore the impact of event adjudication and the prognostic importance of MI reported by a clinical events committee versus site investigators in patients undergoing PCI.
Does central adjudication identify more prognostically important myocardial infarctions compared to site investigator reporting in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention?
RCT (n=10,942)
Does central adjudication identify more prognostically important myocardial infarctions compared to site investigator reporting in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention?
Odds Ratio: 0.8 (95% CI 0.67–0.97)
Absolute Event Rate: 3.8% vs 4.7%
p-value: p=0.022
Central adjudication by a clinical events committee identifies significantly more prognostically important myocardial infarctions than site investigators in PCI trials, impacting both event rates and treatment effect estimates.
CEC MI adjudication may better capture cangrelor benefit in PCI than site reports; leaves open whether this changes practice.
BACKGROUND: In the CHAMPION PHOENIX trial, cangrelor reduced the primary composite end point of death, myocardial infarction (MI), ischemia-driven revascularization, or stent thrombosis at 48 hours. This study aimed to explore the impact of event adjudication and the prognostic importance of MI reported by a clinical events committee (CEC) or site investigators (SIs). METHODS AND RESULTS: Data from the CHAMPION PHOENIX trial of patients undergoing elective or nonelective percutaneous coronary intervention were analyzed. A CEC systematically identified and adjudicated MI using predefined criteria, a computer algorithm to identify suspected events, and semilogarithmic plots to review biomarker changes. Thirty-day death was modeled using baseline characteristics. Of 10 942 patients, 462 (4.2%) patients had at least 1 MI by 48 hours identified by the CEC (207 [3.8%] cangrelor; 255 [4.7%] clopidogrel; odds ratio [OR] 0.80; 95% CI, 0.67-0.97; P=0.022), and 143 patients had at least 1 MI by 48 hours reported by the SI (60 [1.1%] cangrelor; 83 [1.5%] clopidogrel; OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.52-1.01; P=0.053). Of the 462 MIs identified by the CEC, 92 (20%) were reported by SI, and 370 (80%) were not. Of the 143 MI reported by the SI, 51 (36%) were not confirmed by CEC. All categories were associated with an increased adjusted risk for 30-day death (CEC: OR, 5.35; 95% CI, 2.56-11.2; P<0.001; SI: 9.08 [4.01-20.5]; P<0.001; CEC and SI: 10.9 [3.23-36.6]; P<0.001; CEC but not SI: 4.69 [1.94-11.3]; P<0.001; SI but not CEC: 15.4 [5.26-44.9]; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, CEC procedures identified 3 times as many MIs as the SI reported. Compared with clopidogrel, cangrelor significantly reduced MIs identified by the CEC with a qualitatively similar relative risk reduction in MIs reported by the SI. MIs identified by CEC or reported by SI were independently associated with worse 30-day death. Central adjudication identified additional, prognostically important events. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01156571.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Olivier et al. (2019) conducted an RCT in percutaneous coronary intervention (n=10,942). Cangrelor vs. Clopidogrel was evaluated on Myocardial infarction by 48 hours identified by the clinical events committee (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.67-0.97, p=0.022). Cangrelor significantly reduced myocardial infarction at 48 hours identified by a clinical events committee compared with clopidogrel (3.8% vs 4.7%; OR 0.80; 95% CI 0.67-0.97; P=0.022).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: