“There is a need to translate what we read in published journals as trials, i.e. the science, to what it means for the practitioner on a daily basis. What does it actually mean when a trial says that this treatment is better, or not, than another one. What does this information finally mean for the patient I am treating? This format is trying to get knowledgeable people, including a trialist, to talk about the specifics of the trial as it is published in order to tease out the data from it that are most relevant for our practice.”
“In NSTE-ACS patients managed invasively within 48 hours of admission, pre-treatment with prasugrel did not reduce major ischaemic events through 30 days, but increased major bleeding complications.”
“The ACCOAST trial is a wonderful trial that has tried to answer the clinically relevant question of whether pre-treatment with prasugrel would be beneficial to patients. The study was conducted within a practice environment that was situated with rapid access to a cath lab, showed that there is no benefit for pre-treatment with this half dose of prasugrel. It also showed more bleeding events in patients who received this dose. There are a number of very interesting questions about this trial, the main being that we are not sure whether we can extrapolate these results to pre-treatment with other drugs that have been shown to be beneficial in other trials.”
“The trial is relevant, but we need new trials to see whether we can advance the treatment for those patients,” he said.
Our mission: To reduce the burden of cardiovascular disease
© 2017 European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved