ArticleCardiology research2026
Comparative Efficacy and Safety of P2Y12 Inhibitors in Patients With Diabetes Mellitus and Coronary Artery Disease: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Article in Cardiology research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) and coronary artery disease (CAD) are at high risk of thrombotic events and exhibit reduced responsiveness to conventional antiplatelet therapy. While newer P2Y12 inhibitors such as ticagrelor and prasugrel provide more potent platelet inhibition, the optimal therapeutic strategy in this population remains uncertain. Methods: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Electronic databases were searched through April 2026 to identify RCTs comparing clopidogrel, prasugrel, ticagrelor, and placebo in patients with DM and CAD receiving background aspirin therapy. Random-effects models were used to estimate pooled risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The primary efficacy outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), while safety outcomes included major bleeding. Results: Seventeen RCTs, including 40,919 patients, were identified, with 15 trials included in the quantitative synthesis. Compared with placebo, prasugrel and ticagrelor were associated with significant reductions in MACEs, whereas clopidogrel showed no significant benefit. No significant differences were observed in cardiovascular or all-cause mortality across treatment strategies. Prasugrel was associated with a lower risk of myocardial infarction, while ticagrelor was associated with a lower risk of stroke. Both agents increased major bleeding versus placebo, and ticagrelor was also associated with a higher risk of dyspnea. Ranking analysis suggested that prasugrel was the most effective strategy for ischemic outcomes, whereas placebo was the safest strategy overall. Conclusions: In patients with DM and CAD, prasugrel and ticagrelor provide superior protection against ischemic events compared with clopidogrel but are associated with an increased bleeding risk compared with placebo. Prasugrel appears to offer the greatest overall efficacy, while ticagrelor shows a distinct benefit in stroke prevention. These findings support individualized antiplatelet strategies that balance ischemic and bleeding risks in this high-risk population.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.