Stent thrombosis with ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes: an analysis from the prospective, randomized PLATO trial

BACKGROUND We aimed to describe the effects of ticagrelor versus clopidogrel on stent thrombosis in the Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial. METHODS AND RESULTS Of 18 624 patients hospitalized for acute coronary syndromes, 11 289 (61%) had at least 1 intracoronary stent. Ticagrelor reduced stent thrombosis compared with clopidogrel across all definitions: definite, 1.37% (n=71) versus 1.93% (n=105; hazard ratio [HR], 0.67; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.50-0.90; P=0.0091); definite or probable, 2.21% (n=118) versus 2.87% (n=157; HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.59-0.95; P=0.017); and definite, probable, and possible, 2.94% (n=154) versus 3.77 (n=201; HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.62-0.95). The reduction in definite stent thrombosis was consistent regardless of acute coronary syndrome type, presence of diabetes mellitus, stent type (drug-eluting or bare metal stent), CYP2C19 genetic status, loading dose of aspirin, dose of clopidogrel before randomization, and use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors at randomization. The reduction in stent thrombosis with ticagrelor was numerically greater for late (>30 days; HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.24-0.96) and subacute (4 hours-30 days; HR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.39-0.93) compared with acute (<24 hours; HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.43-2.05) stent thrombosis or for patients compliant to therapy (ie, taking blinded study treatment ≥80% of the time) compared with less compliant patients. Randomization to ticagrelor was a strong independent inverse predictor of definite stent thrombosis (HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.48-0.88). CONCLUSION Ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel reduces the incidence of stent thrombosis in patients with acute coronary syndromes, with consistent benefit across a broad range of patient, stent, and treatment characteristics.

Corrective experiences in psychotherapy: Definitions, processes, consequences, and research directions

After 5 years of conceptualizing, investigating, and writing about corrective experiences (CEs), we (the authors of this chapter) met to talk about what we learned. In this chapter, we summarize our joint understanding of (a) the definition of CEs; (b) the contexts in which CEs occur; (c) client, therapist, and external factors that facilitate CEs; (d) the consequences of CEs; and (e) ideas for future theoretical, clinical, empirical, and training directions. As will become evident, the authors of this chapter, who represent a range of theoretical orientations, reached consensus on some CE-related topics but encountered controversy and lively debate about other topics. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2013 APA, all rights reserved)