PT - JOURNAL ARTICLE AU - Chenyang Zhang AU - Guosheng Yin TI - Paclitaxel-Coated or Uncoated Devices: Significant Differences in Patient Populations and Mortality Led to Study Incomparability AID - 10.1101/2021.01.29.21250732 DP - 2021 Jan 01 TA - medRxiv PG - 2021.01.29.21250732 4099 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/02/01/2021.01.29.21250732.short 4100 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/02/01/2021.01.29.21250732.full AB - The SWEDEPAD trial reported an unplanned interim analysis to show no difference in the mortality rate between the paclitaxel-coated and uncoated groups (Nordanstig et al., 2020), which contradicts the long-term risk of paclitaxel-coated devices claimed by a meta-analysis (Katsanos et al., 2018). However, there existed significant differences in mortality rates between the SWEDEPAD trial and the trials included in the meta-analysis, which were caused by significant differences in the patient populations. As a result, the SWEDEPAD trial and meta-analysis results are not directly comparable. An updated meta-analysis including the SWEDPEPAD trial and all studies in the meta-analysis (Katsanos et al., 2018) shows marginal differences in mortality rates between the paclitaxel-coated and control groups at two years with Bayesian relative risk (RR) 1.39 (95% credible interval (CrI) [1.01, 2.39]) and frequentist RR 1.16 (95% confidence interval (CI) [0.99, 1.36]) and differences in mortality rates during the entire follow-up period with Bayesian RR 1.29 (95% CrI [1.01, 1.72]) and frequentist RR 1.13 (95% CI [0.99, 1.28]) under random-effects models. Given the relatively short follow-up thus far in the SWEDEPAD trial (with a mean follow-up of 2.49 years) and the paclitaxel-coated risk being long-term (e.g., 4 or 5 years), the interim results on the risk of paclitaxel-coated devices reported by the SWEDEPAD trial warrant further investigation.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementNoneAuthor DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:NoneAll necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesThe data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, G Yin, upon reasonable request.