Victor Serebruany, Jean-Francois Tanguay, Hector A Cabrera-Fuentes, Milana L Gurvich, Thomas Marciniak
{"title":"报告来源对血小板抑制和治疗结果(PLATO)试验死亡人数的影响。","authors":"Victor Serebruany, Jean-Francois Tanguay, Hector A Cabrera-Fuentes, Milana L Gurvich, Thomas Marciniak","doi":"10.15190/d.2023.13","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Platelet Inhibition and Clinical Outcomes (PLATO) was a multicenter, randomized double-blind trial assessing efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndrome. The reported mortality benefit of ticagrelor in the PLATO trial has been challenged for over decade, and never confirmed in later trials.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare if there were any differences when deaths were reported to the FDAby the sponsors or by independent Contract Research Organizations (CRO).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We obtained the complete PLATO deaths dataset reported to the FDA and revealed that some events were inaccurately reported favoring ticagrelor. The entire FDA list contains precisely detailed 938 PLATO deaths. The CRO reported outcomes from the USA, Russia, Georgia, and most of Ukraine, while sites in 39 other countries were controlled by the trial sponsors. We compared vascular- (code \"11\"), non-vascular- (code \"12\"), and unknown (code \"97\") deaths triaged by the reporting source.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, most PLATO deaths were vascular (n=677), less non-vascular (n=159) andunexpectedly many of \"other\" (n=7) or \"unknown\" (n=95) origin reported either by sponsors (n=807) or CRO (n=131). The trial sponsors reported more clopidogrel deaths from vascular (313 vs.239), non-vascular (86 vs.58) and unknown (53 vs. 26) causes.In contrast, CRO-monitored sites reported significantly (72 vs. 53; p<0.01) more ticagrelordeaths than after clopidogrel from vascular (51 vs.39), non-vascular (8 vs.7) and unknown (10 vs. 4) causes.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Deaths were reported differently by sponsors and CRO within the same trial. Since some deaths were misreported by PLATO sponsors, only the CRO data seems mostly reliable. Among all countries, the CRO - reported PLATO-USA outcomes represent the largest and most realistic dataset of realistic evidence suggesting ticagrelor inferiority to clopidogrel for all primary endpoint components including vascular death.</p>","PeriodicalId":72829,"journal":{"name":"Discoveries (Craiova, Romania)","volume":"11 3","pages":"e174"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10890813/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of the reporting source on Platelet Inhibition and Treatment Outcomes (PLATO) trial deaths.\",\"authors\":\"Victor Serebruany, Jean-Francois Tanguay, Hector A Cabrera-Fuentes, Milana L Gurvich, Thomas Marciniak\",\"doi\":\"10.15190/d.2023.13\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Platelet Inhibition and Clinical Outcomes (PLATO) was a multicenter, randomized double-blind trial assessing efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndrome. The reported mortality benefit of ticagrelor in the PLATO trial has been challenged for over decade, and never confirmed in later trials.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare if there were any differences when deaths were reported to the FDAby the sponsors or by independent Contract Research Organizations (CRO).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We obtained the complete PLATO deaths dataset reported to the FDA and revealed that some events were inaccurately reported favoring ticagrelor. The entire FDA list contains precisely detailed 938 PLATO deaths. The CRO reported outcomes from the USA, Russia, Georgia, and most of Ukraine, while sites in 39 other countries were controlled by the trial sponsors. We compared vascular- (code \\\"11\\\"), non-vascular- (code \\\"12\\\"), and unknown (code \\\"97\\\") deaths triaged by the reporting source.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, most PLATO deaths were vascular (n=677), less non-vascular (n=159) andunexpectedly many of \\\"other\\\" (n=7) or \\\"unknown\\\" (n=95) origin reported either by sponsors (n=807) or CRO (n=131). The trial sponsors reported more clopidogrel deaths from vascular (313 vs.239), non-vascular (86 vs.58) and unknown (53 vs. 26) causes.In contrast, CRO-monitored sites reported significantly (72 vs. 53; p<0.01) more ticagrelordeaths than after clopidogrel from vascular (51 vs.39), non-vascular (8 vs.7) and unknown (10 vs. 4) causes.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Deaths were reported differently by sponsors and CRO within the same trial. Since some deaths were misreported by PLATO sponsors, only the CRO data seems mostly reliable. Among all countries, the CRO - reported PLATO-USA outcomes represent the largest and most realistic dataset of realistic evidence suggesting ticagrelor inferiority to clopidogrel for all primary endpoint components including vascular death.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72829,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Discoveries (Craiova, Romania)\",\"volume\":\"11 3\",\"pages\":\"e174\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10890813/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Discoveries (Craiova, Romania)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15190/d.2023.13\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/7/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Discoveries (Craiova, Romania)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15190/d.2023.13","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
研究背景血小板抑制与临床结果(PLATO)是一项多中心、随机双盲试验,旨在评估急性冠状动脉综合征患者服用替卡格雷与氯吡格雷的疗效和安全性。十多年来,PLATO 试验中报告的替卡格雷对死亡率的益处一直受到质疑,在后来的试验中也从未得到证实:比较申办者或独立合同研究组织(CRO)向美国食品药品管理局报告死亡病例时是否存在差异:我们获得了向 FDA 报告的 PLATO 死亡病例的完整数据集,发现有些事件的报告不准确,偏向于替卡格雷。美国食品药品管理局的整个列表精确详细地包含了938例PLATO死亡病例。CRO报告了美国、俄罗斯、格鲁吉亚和乌克兰大部分地区的结果,而其他39个国家的研究地点则由试验发起者控制。我们比较了报告来源分流的血管性死亡(代码 "11")、非血管性死亡(代码 "12")和未知死亡(代码 "97"):总体而言,大多数 PLATO 死亡病例为血管性死亡(677 例),非血管性死亡较少(159 例),但意外的是,申办者(807 例)或 CRO(131 例)报告的 "其他"(7 例)或 "未知"(95 例)死亡病例也很多。试验申办者报告的氯吡格雷死亡病例中,血管性死亡(313 例 vs. 239 例)、非血管性死亡(86 例 vs. 58 例)和不明原因死亡(53 例 vs. 26 例)较多:在同一试验中,申办者和 CRO 报告的死亡人数不同。由于PLATO申办者误报了一些死亡病例,因此只有CRO的数据看起来基本可靠。在所有国家中,CRO报告的PLATO-USA结果代表了最大、最真实的数据集,其真实证据表明,在包括血管死亡在内的所有主要终点成分方面,替卡格雷均劣于氯吡格雷。
Impact of the reporting source on Platelet Inhibition and Treatment Outcomes (PLATO) trial deaths.
Background: Platelet Inhibition and Clinical Outcomes (PLATO) was a multicenter, randomized double-blind trial assessing efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndrome. The reported mortality benefit of ticagrelor in the PLATO trial has been challenged for over decade, and never confirmed in later trials.
Objective: To compare if there were any differences when deaths were reported to the FDAby the sponsors or by independent Contract Research Organizations (CRO).
Methods: We obtained the complete PLATO deaths dataset reported to the FDA and revealed that some events were inaccurately reported favoring ticagrelor. The entire FDA list contains precisely detailed 938 PLATO deaths. The CRO reported outcomes from the USA, Russia, Georgia, and most of Ukraine, while sites in 39 other countries were controlled by the trial sponsors. We compared vascular- (code "11"), non-vascular- (code "12"), and unknown (code "97") deaths triaged by the reporting source.
Results: Overall, most PLATO deaths were vascular (n=677), less non-vascular (n=159) andunexpectedly many of "other" (n=7) or "unknown" (n=95) origin reported either by sponsors (n=807) or CRO (n=131). The trial sponsors reported more clopidogrel deaths from vascular (313 vs.239), non-vascular (86 vs.58) and unknown (53 vs. 26) causes.In contrast, CRO-monitored sites reported significantly (72 vs. 53; p<0.01) more ticagrelordeaths than after clopidogrel from vascular (51 vs.39), non-vascular (8 vs.7) and unknown (10 vs. 4) causes.
Conclusion: Deaths were reported differently by sponsors and CRO within the same trial. Since some deaths were misreported by PLATO sponsors, only the CRO data seems mostly reliable. Among all countries, the CRO - reported PLATO-USA outcomes represent the largest and most realistic dataset of realistic evidence suggesting ticagrelor inferiority to clopidogrel for all primary endpoint components including vascular death.