TARGET follow-up study

Abstract

The results of the 6-month follow-up of the TARGET study (Aug 3, p 355)1Moliterno DJ Yakubov SJ DiBatiste PM et al.Outcomes at 6 months for the direct comparison of tirofiban and abciximab during percutaneous coronary revascularisation with stent placement: the TARGET follow-up study.Lancet. 2002; 360: 355-360Summary Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (91) Google Scholar show no difference in events between the tirofiban and abciximab groups, whereas the 1-month results showed a significant advantage in favour of abciximab.2Topol EJ Moliterno DJ Herrmann HC et al.Comparison of two platelet glycoprotein Ilb/IIIa inhibitors, tirofiban and abciximab, for the prevention of ischemic events with percutaneous coronary revascularization.N Engl J Med. 2001; 344: 1888-1894Crossref PubMed Scopus (706) Google Scholar However, David Moliterno and colleagues do not elaborate on the difference in events between US and non-US patients, such as described in figure 3.1Moliterno DJ Yakubov SJ DiBatiste PM et al.Outcomes at 6 months for the direct comparison of tirofiban and abciximab during percutaneous coronary revascularisation with stent placement: the TARGET follow-up study.Lancet. 2002; 360: 355-360Summary Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (91) Google ScholarMore detailed information, available online,36 month results of TARGET (slideshow, slides 35, 36).http://www.clinicaltrialresults.orgGoogle Scholar shows a difference in events between the tirofiban and abciximab groups in non-US patients (11·6% vs 8·4%, respectively) but not in US patients (15·6% vs 15·7%, respectively). Moreover, in the non-US group, there is a significant difference in myocardial infarction between tirofiban and abciximab after 6 months (7·6% vs 3·6%, respectively; p=0·01). Additionally, the relative number of events in the US is almost twice the amount found in the non-US abciximab group.We suggest that, in the US group, the beneficial effect of abciximab compared with tirofiban could be masked by other factors such as the number of participating low-volume operators, lesion type, procedural difference, and racial difference between US and non-US patients. The results of the 6-month follow-up of the TARGET study (Aug 3, p 355)1Moliterno DJ Yakubov SJ DiBatiste PM et al.Outcomes at 6 months for the direct comparison of tirofiban and abciximab during percutaneous coronary revascularisation with stent placement: the TARGET follow-up study.Lancet. 2002; 360: 355-360Summary Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (91) Google Scholar show no difference in events between the tirofiban and abciximab groups, whereas the 1-month results showed a significant advantage in favour of abciximab.2Topol EJ Moliterno DJ Herrmann HC et al.Comparison of two platelet glycoprotein Ilb/IIIa inhibitors, tirofiban and abciximab, for the prevention of ischemic events with percutaneous coronary revascularization.N Engl J Med. 2001; 344: 1888-1894Crossref PubMed Scopus (706) Google Scholar However, David Moliterno and colleagues do not elaborate on the difference in events between US and non-US patients, such as described in figure 3.1Moliterno DJ Yakubov SJ DiBatiste PM et al.Outcomes at 6 months for the direct comparison of tirofiban and abciximab during percutaneous coronary revascularisation with stent placement: the TARGET follow-up study.Lancet. 2002; 360: 355-360Summary Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (91) Google Scholar More detailed information, available online,36 month results of TARGET (slideshow, slides 35, 36).http://www.clinicaltrialresults.orgGoogle Scholar shows a difference in events between the tirofiban and abciximab groups in non-US patients (11·6% vs 8·4%, respectively) but not in US patients (15·6% vs 15·7%, respectively). Moreover, in the non-US group, there is a significant difference in myocardial infarction between tirofiban and abciximab after 6 months (7·6% vs 3·6%, respectively; p=0·01). Additionally, the relative number of events in the US is almost twice the amount found in the non-US abciximab group. We suggest that, in the US group, the beneficial effect of abciximab compared with tirofiban could be masked by other factors such as the number of participating low-volume operators, lesion type, procedural difference, and racial difference between US and non-US patients. TARGET follow-up studyAuthors' reply Full-Text PDF