• Something wrong with this record ?

Inactivations, deletions, non-adjudications, and downgrades of clinical endpoints on ticagrelor: serious concerns over the reliability of the PLATO trial

JJ. DiNicolantonio, A. Tomek,

. 2013 ; 168 (4) : 4076-80.

Language English Country Netherlands

Document type Journal Article, Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE: Ascertain platelet inhibition and patient outcomes (PLATO) trial conduct. METHODS: We examined information from the FDA complete response review. RESULTS: FDA Medical Review indicated that (1) patients on ticagrelor monitored by the study sponsor had a lower odds ratio for the primary endpoint (p = 0.0004) versus ticagrelor patients monitored by a third party Clinical Research Organisation (CRO) independent of the study sponsor, (2) a significant interaction existed between ticagrelor and regions monitored by the study sponsor for all cause mortality through study end in favor of ticagrelor (p = 0.006), (3) ticagrelor faired worse than clopidogrel when regions were monitored independent of the study sponsor by a third party Contract Research Organisation (United States, Russia and Georgia), (OR = 1.21, 95% CI: 0.91 to 1.59, p = 0.2022), (4) 46% of all primary endpoint events favoring ticagrelor came from just two countries (Poland and Hungary), (5) PLATO was easy to unblind by breaking open a clopidogrel/dummy clopidogrel tablet with at least 452 patients being unblinded prior to the database lock, (6) significantly more cardiac events submitted for clopidogrel counted in the primary analysis as a myocardial infarction (MI) compared to those submitted for ticagrelor (p < 0.0001), (7) significantly more ticagrelor subjects hospitalized after an index event/hospitalization were not being reported as having a primary event compared to clopidogrel (p = 0.002 in favor of ticagrelor), (8) site-reported MI was not significantly reduced with ticagrelor versus clopidogrel, (9) an estimated 23 definite or possible cardiovascular events or deaths on ticagrelor were either not submitted for adjudication, inactivated, deleted or were downgraded to "softer" endpoints (this was not shown in the FDA review for clopidogrel), and (10) four FDA reviewers voted for non-approval of ticagrelor. DISCUSSION: The FDA report highlights what appear to be multiple serious deficiencies in the reporting of the PLATO results, which clinicians will not have gleaned from the primary publication alone. Individual clinicians may therefore wish to carefully reconsider their practice of ticagrelor prescription for this indication. Guideline bodies should also evaluate the information in its totality.

References provided by Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc15014611
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20150428093719.0
007      
ta
008      
150420s2013 ne f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1016/j.ijcard.2013.07.020 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)23911266
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a ne
100    1_
$a DiNicolantonio, James J $u Wegmans Pharmacy, Ithaca, NY, United States; Department of Neurology, Charles University in Prague, 2nd Faculty of Medicine, University Hospital Motol, Czech Republic. Electronic address: jjdinicol@gmail.com.
245    10
$a Inactivations, deletions, non-adjudications, and downgrades of clinical endpoints on ticagrelor: serious concerns over the reliability of the PLATO trial / $c JJ. DiNicolantonio, A. Tomek,
520    9_
$a OBJECTIVE: Ascertain platelet inhibition and patient outcomes (PLATO) trial conduct. METHODS: We examined information from the FDA complete response review. RESULTS: FDA Medical Review indicated that (1) patients on ticagrelor monitored by the study sponsor had a lower odds ratio for the primary endpoint (p = 0.0004) versus ticagrelor patients monitored by a third party Clinical Research Organisation (CRO) independent of the study sponsor, (2) a significant interaction existed between ticagrelor and regions monitored by the study sponsor for all cause mortality through study end in favor of ticagrelor (p = 0.006), (3) ticagrelor faired worse than clopidogrel when regions were monitored independent of the study sponsor by a third party Contract Research Organisation (United States, Russia and Georgia), (OR = 1.21, 95% CI: 0.91 to 1.59, p = 0.2022), (4) 46% of all primary endpoint events favoring ticagrelor came from just two countries (Poland and Hungary), (5) PLATO was easy to unblind by breaking open a clopidogrel/dummy clopidogrel tablet with at least 452 patients being unblinded prior to the database lock, (6) significantly more cardiac events submitted for clopidogrel counted in the primary analysis as a myocardial infarction (MI) compared to those submitted for ticagrelor (p < 0.0001), (7) significantly more ticagrelor subjects hospitalized after an index event/hospitalization were not being reported as having a primary event compared to clopidogrel (p = 0.002 in favor of ticagrelor), (8) site-reported MI was not significantly reduced with ticagrelor versus clopidogrel, (9) an estimated 23 definite or possible cardiovascular events or deaths on ticagrelor were either not submitted for adjudication, inactivated, deleted or were downgraded to "softer" endpoints (this was not shown in the FDA review for clopidogrel), and (10) four FDA reviewers voted for non-approval of ticagrelor. DISCUSSION: The FDA report highlights what appear to be multiple serious deficiencies in the reporting of the PLATO results, which clinicians will not have gleaned from the primary publication alone. Individual clinicians may therefore wish to carefully reconsider their practice of ticagrelor prescription for this indication. Guideline bodies should also evaluate the information in its totality.
650    _2
$a akutní koronární syndrom $x diagnóza $x farmakoterapie $x epidemiologie $7 D054058
650    _2
$a adenosin $x analogy a deriváty $x terapeutické užití $7 D000241
650    _2
$a stanovení cílového parametru $x metody $x normy $7 D023381
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    _2
$a inhibitory agregace trombocytů $x terapeutické užití $7 D010975
650    _2
$a antagonisté purinergních receptorů P2Y $x terapeutické užití $7 D058921
650    _2
$a reprodukovatelnost výsledků $7 D015203
650    _2
$a výsledek terapie $7 D016896
650    _2
$a Úřad Spojených států pro potraviny a léky $x normy $7 D014486
651    _2
$a Spojené státy americké $7 D014481
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
655    _2
$a randomizované kontrolované studie $7 D016449
700    1_
$a Tomek, Ales
773    0_
$w MED00002299 $t International journal of cardiology $x 1874-1754 $g Roč. 168, č. 4 (2013), s. 4076-80
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23911266 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y a $z 0
990    __
$a 20150420 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20150428094020 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 1072192 $s 897489
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC
BMC    __
$a 2013 $b 168 $c 4 $d 4076-80 $i 1874-1754 $m International journal of cardiology $n Int J Cardiol $x MED00002299
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20150420

Find record

Citation metrics

Loading data ...

Archiving options

Loading data ...