Exact(19)
Thrombocytopenia was the strongest independent predictor of being hospitalized for a bleeding event (HR = 3.34, 95% CI 2.81 3.97).
There was also a trend for mmIMT >1.07 mm as an independent predictor of an atherosclerotic event (HR 2.76, 95% CI 0.90-8.46, P = 0.077).
3. HR (hazard ratio) > 1 indicates increased risk of the occurrence of an event; HR < 1 means decreased risk of the occurrence of an event.
In the intent-to-treat analysis, exenatide initiators were less likely to have a CVD event (HR 0.86; 0.81–0.92; P < 0.001) compared with non-exenatide initiators.
In a propensity score stratified analysis, exenatide-treated patients were less likely to have a CVD event (HR 0.80; 0.74–0.86; P < 0.001) compared with non exenatide-treated patienon exenatide-treated
When QUICKI was not added into model 5, severe fatty liver did predict the risk for future risk for CVD event (HR 1.76, CI 1.21 to 2.56, p<0.001; table 1).
Similar(41)
Zoccali et al. reported that ADMA is an independent predictor of cardiovascular events (HR: 1.17, 1.04 1.33, P = 0.008) and mortality (HR 1.26, 95% Cl 1.11 1.41, P = 0.0001) in patients receiving chronic hemodialysis [ 155].
Cardiovascular events were also associated with a previous cardiovascular events (HR 4.3, 95% CI 1.2-10.3) and log urinary albumin/creatinine ratio (HR 1.58, 95% CI 1.0-2.48).
While quality of life, toxicity and cost are often accepted as important secondary outcomes, the common assumption in most cancer RCTs seems to be that the new treatment should be adopted as the new standard for all patients if statistical assessment of relevant time-to-event HR is significantly better than the standard control treatment.
In this study, fenofibrate treatment reduced the total cardiovascular events (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.80-0.99) [ 55].
All cause death (472 vs 477 events, Table 1), death after recurrence (245 vs 269 events, HR 0.90; P = 0.2), and deaths without recurrence (227 vs 208 events, HR 1.05; P = 0.6) were not significantly different in the HR+ population.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com