Age and Computed Tomography and Invasive Coronary Angiography in Stable Chest Pain: A Prespecified Secondary Analysis of the DISCHARGE Randomized Clinical Trial
Primary result · MACE: age × randomisation group interaction (age continuous)Result — go to the resultHazard ratio 1.02 95% CI 0.98–1.07Authors' conclusion
Age did not modify the effect of randomization group on the primary outcome of MACE but did modify the effect on major procedure-related complications.
Study context
- Population
- Patients referred for invasive coronary angiography (ICA) with stable chest pain and intermediate probability of obstructive CAD3,523 (99%) followed up
- Participants
- 3,561 patients
- Comparison
- Computed tomography (CT)-first vs direct-to-ICA strategy, by age
- Primary endpoint
- MACE (CV death, nonfatal MI or stroke), modification by age
- Follow-up
- Median 3.5 years
Methodological detailsassessor-blinded, multicentre (26 European centres), prespecified age analysis, Conducted October 2015 to April 2019; analysed July 2022 to January 2023
- Assessor-blinded
- Multicentre (26 European centres)
- Prespecified age analysis
- Conducted October 2015 to April 2019; analysed July 2022 to January 2023
Primary result
As reported in the abstract
MACE: age × randomisation group interaction (age continuous) · median 3.5 years
Hazard ratio
1.02
95% CI 0.98–1.07
P = 0.31 for interaction
CTvs ICA
HR 1.02 (95% CI 0.98–1.07); P for interaction = 0.31
Safety
| Outcome | OR (95% CI) | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Major procedure-related complications: age × randomisation group interactionLower in younger patients | 1.15 (1.05–1.27) | P for interaction = 0.005 | |
| 0.512Odds ratio (log scale) |
Original publication
Age and Computed Tomography and Invasive Coronary Angiography in Stable Chest Pain: A Prespecified Secondary Analysis of the DISCHARGE Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Cardiol. Published 1 April 2024. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →