-
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,
Language English Country Netherlands
Document type Journal Article, Randomized Controlled Trial
- MeSH
- Adenosine analogs & derivatives therapeutic use MeSH
- Acute Coronary Syndrome diagnosis drug therapy epidemiology MeSH
- Purinergic P2Y Receptor Antagonists therapeutic use MeSH
- Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors therapeutic use MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Reproducibility of Results MeSH
- Endpoint Determination methods standards MeSH
- United States Food and Drug Administration standards MeSH
- Treatment Outcome MeSH
- Check Tag
- Humans MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
- Randomized Controlled Trial MeSH
- Geographicals
- United States MeSH
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