Time-based measures of treatment effect: reassessment of ticagrelor and clopidogrel from the PLATO trial

Andrea Bellavia, Lars Wallentin, Nicola Orsini, Stefan K James, Christopher P Cannon, Anders Himmelmann, Johan Sundström, Henrik Renlund, Per Lytsy, Andrea Bellavia, Lars Wallentin, Nicola Orsini, Stefan K James, Christopher P Cannon, Anders Himmelmann, Johan Sundström, Henrik Renlund, Per Lytsy

Abstract

Objective: Treatment effects to binary endpoints using time-to-event data in randomised controlled trials are typically summarised by reporting HRs derived with Cox proportional hazard models. Alternative and complementary methods include summarising the between-treatment differences on the metric time scale, quantifying the effect as delay of the event (DoE). The aim of this study was to reassess data from the PLATO study expressing the effects as the time by which the main outcomes are delayed or hastened due to treatment.

Methods: PLATO was a randomised controlled double-blind multicentre study (n=18,624), conducted between 2006 and 2008, which demonstrated superiority of the antiplatelet treatment ticagrelor over clopidogrel in reducing risk of several cardiovascular events. In the present study, four of the main PLATO outcomes were reassessed by calculating the time by which an event may be delayed due to the treatment.

Results: The effects of ticagrelor, as compared with clopidogrel, consisted of a substantial delay of the evaluated outcomes, ranging from 83 to 98 days over 400-day follow-up. The Delay of Events Curves showed that the effects progressively increased over time, and the significant findings were concordant with those presented in the original PLATO study.

Conclusions: This study confirmed evidence of a beneficial effect of ticagrelor over clopidogrel, and provided the magnitude of such effects in terms of delayed event time. Investigating time-to-event data with a percentile approach allows presenting treatment effects from randomised controlled studies as absolute measures of the time by which an event may be delayed due to the treatment.

Trial registration number: PLATO (www.clinicaltrials.gov; NCT00391872); Results.

Keywords: acute coronary syndrome; anticoagulation; clinical trials.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: ABE: None. L Wallentin: institutional research grants, consultancy fees, lecture fees, and travel support from Bristol-Myers Squibb/Pfizer, AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Boehringer Ingelheim; institutional research grants from Merck & Co, Roche; consultancy fees from Abbott; holds two patents involving GDF-15. NO: None. S James: institutional research grant, honoraria and consultant/advisory board fee fromAstraZeneca; institutional research grant and consultant/advisory board fee from Medtronic; institutional research grants and honoraria from The Medicines Company; consultant/advisory board fees from Janssen, Bayer. CPC: research grants from AstraZeneca, Takeda, GlaxoSmithKline, BoerhingerIngelheim, Merck, Arisaph, Janssen, Accumetrics; consultant fees from GlaxoSmithKline, Takeda, Merck, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Alnylam, Pfizer, Essentialis, Kowa, Lipimedix, Regeneron, Sanofi, Boerhinger Ingelheim; travel support from AstraZeneca, BoerhingerIngelheim; personal fees from CSL Behring. A H: employee of AstraZeneca. JS: None. H Renlund: institutional research grant from AstraZeneca. PL: None.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Cumulative incidence in clopidogrel and ticagrelor groups, and Delay of eEvents associated with ticagrelor use for death from vascular causes/MI or stroke (A), MI (B), death from vascular causes, MI, stroke (C), death from any cause, MI or stroke (D), total major bleeding (E) and non-CABG major bleeding (F). CABG, coronary-artery bypass grafting; MI, myocardial infarction; TIA, transient ischaemic attack; CV, cardiovascular; SRI, serious recurrent ischaemia; RI, recurrent ischaemia.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Cumulative incidence in clopidogrel and ticagrelor groups, and Delay of eEvents associated with ticagrelor use for death from vascular causes/myocardial infarction or stroke.

References

    1. Wallentin L, Becker RC, Budaj A, et al. . Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med 2009;361:1045–57.10.1056/NEJMoa0904327
    1. Anderson JL, Adams CD, Antman EM, et al. . 2012 ACCF/AHA focused update incorporated into the ACCF/AHA 2007 guidelines for the management of patients with unstable angina/non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013;61:e179–347.
    1. Steg PG, James SK, Gersh BJ. 2012 ESC STEMI guidelines and reperfusion therapy: evidence-based recommendations, ensuring optimal patient management. Heart 2013;99:1156–7.10.1136/heartjnl-2013-304498
    1. Roffi M, Patrono C, Collet JP, et al. . 2015 ESC guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation: task Force for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-Segment elevation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur Heart J 2016;37:267–315.10.1093/eurheartj/ehv320
    1. Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF, et al. . CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ 2010;340:c869.10.1136/bmj.c869
    1. Hernán MA. The hazards of hazard ratios. Epidemiology 2010;21:13–15.10.1097/EDE.0b013e3181c1ea43
    1. Uno H, Wittes J, Fu H, et al. . Alternatives to Hazard Ratios for comparing the efficacy or safety of therapies in noninferiority sStudies. Ann Intern Med 2015;163:127–34.10.7326/M14-1741
    1. Uno H, Claggett B, Tian L, et al. . Moving beyond the hazard ratio in quantifying the between-group difference in survival analysis. J Clin Oncol 2014;32:2380–5.10.1200/JCO.2014.55.2208
    1. Orsini N, Wolk A, Bottai M. Evaluating percentiles of survival. Epidemiology 2012;23:770–1.10.1097/EDE.0b013e3182625eff
    1. Lytsy P, Berglund L, Sundström J. A proposal for an additional clinical trial outcome measure assessing preventive effect as delay of events. Eur J Epidemiol 2012;27:903–9.10.1007/s10654-012-9752-0
    1. Bottai M, Zhang J. Laplace regression with censored data. Biom J 2010;52:487–503.10.1002/bimj.200900310
    1. Bellavia ABM, Orsini N. Evaluating additive interaction using survival percentiles. Epidemiology. In Press 2015.
    1. Berglund E, Westerling R, Sundström J, et al. . Treatment effect expressed as the novel delay of event measure is associated with high willingness to initiate preventive treatment-A randomized survey experiment comparing effect measures. Patient Educ Couns 2016;99:2005–11.10.1016/j.pec.2016.07.028
    1. Dahl R, Gyrd-Hansen D, Kristiansen IS, et al. . Can postponement of an adverse outcome be used to present risk reductions to a lay audience? A population survey. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2007;7:8.10.1186/1472-6947-7-8
    1. James S, Akerblom A, Cannon CP, et al. . Comparison of ticagrelor, the first reversible oral P2Y(12) receptor antagonist, with clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes: rationale, design, and baseline characteristics of the PLATelet inhibition and patient outcomes (PLATO) trial. Am Heart J 2009;157:599–605.10.1016/j.ahj.2009.01.003
    1. Frumento P, Bottai M. An estimating equation for censored and truncated quantile regression. Comput Stat Data Anal 2016. 10.1016/j.csda.2016.08.015
    1. Bobbio M, Demichelis B, Giustetto G. Completeness of reporting trial results: effect on physicians' willingness to prescribe. Lancet 1994;343:1209–11.10.1016/S0140-6736(94)92407-4
    1. Naylor CD, Chen E, Strauss B. Measured enthusiasm: does the method of reporting trial results alter perceptions of therapeutic effectiveness? Ann Intern Med 1992;117:916–21.10.7326/0003-4819-117-11-916
    1. Hux JE, Naylor CD. Communicating the benefits of chronic preventive therapy: does the format of efficacy data determine patients' acceptance of treatment? Med Decis Making 1995;15:152–7.10.1177/0272989X9501500208
    1. Bellavia A, Discacciati A, Bottai M, et al. . Using laplace regression to model and predict percentiles of age at death when age is the primary time scale. Am J Epidemiol 2015;182:271–7.10.1093/aje/kwv033
    1. Bottai M, Orsini N, Geraci M. A gradient search maximization algorithm for the Asymmetric Laplace likelihood. Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation 2014:1–7.
    1. Bottai M, Orsini N. A command for Laplace regression. Stata J 2013;13:302–14.
    1. Bellavia A, Larsson SC, Bottai M, et al. . Fruit and vegetable consumption and all-cause mortality: a dose-response analysis. Am J Clin Nutr 2013;98:454–9.10.3945/ajcn.112.056119
    1. Rizzuto D, Orsini N, Qiu C, et al. . Lifestyle, social factors, and survival after age 75: population based study. BMJ 2012;345:e5568.10.1136/bmj.e5568
    1. Bellavia A, Åkerstedt T, Bottai M, et al. . Sleep duration and survival percentiles across categories of physical activity. Am J Epidemiol 2014;179:484–91.10.1093/aje/kwt280

Source: PubMed

3
Abonneren