Background —The significance of thrombocytopenia in patients experiencing an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) has not been examined systematically. We evaluated this condition in a large non–ST-elevation ACS clinical trial, with particular interest paid to its correlation with clinical outcomes. Methods and Results —Patients presenting without persistent ST elevation during an ACS were randomized to receive a double-blind infusion of the platelet glycoprotein (GP) IIb/IIIa inhibitor eptifibatide or placebo in addition to other standard therapies including heparin and aspirin. The primary end point was death/nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI) at 30 days, whereas bleeding and stroke were the main safety outcomes. Thrombocytopenia (nadir platelet count <100×10 ⁹ /L or <50% of baseline) occurred in 7.0% of enrolled patients. The time to onset was a median of 4 days in both treatment arms. Patients with thrombocytopenia were older, weighed less, were more likely nonwhite, and had more cardiac risk factors. These patients experienced significantly more bleeding events: they were more than twice as likely to experience moderate/severe bleeding after adjustment for confounders. Univariably, ischemic events (stroke, MI, and death) occurred significantly ( P <0.001) more frequently in patients with thrombocytopenia; multivariable regression modeling preserved this association with death/nonfatal MI at 30 days. Neither the use of heparin or eptifibatide was found to independently increase thrombocytopenic risk. Conclusions —Although causality between thrombocytopenia and adverse clinical events could not be established definitively, thrombocytopenia was highly correlated with both bleeding and ischemic events, and the presence of this condition identified a more-at-risk patient population.

Purpose: The optimal chemotherapy regimen to use with radiotherapy in stage III non–small-cell lung cancer is unknown. Here, we compare the outcome of patents treated within the Veterans Health Administration with either etoposide-cisplatin (EP) or carboplatin-paclitaxel (CP). Methods: We identified patients treated with EP and CP with concurrent radiotherapy from 2001 to 2010. Survival rates were compared using Cox proportional hazards regression models with adjustments for confounding provided by propensity score methods and an instrumental variables analysis. Comorbidities and treatment complications were identified through administrative data. Results: A total of 1,842 patients were included; EP was used in 27% (n = 499). Treatment with EP was not associated with a survival advantage in a Cox proportional hazards model (hazard ratio [HR], 0.97; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.10), a propensity score matched cohort (HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.91 to 1.24), or a propensity score adjusted model (HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.10). In an instrumental variables analysis, there was no survival advantage for patients treated in centers where EP was used more than 50% of the time as compared with centers where EP was used in less than 10% of the patients (HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.90 to 1.26). Patients treated with EP, compared with patients treated with CP, had more hospitalizations (2.4 v 1.7 hospitalizations, respectively; P < .001), outpatient visits (17.6 v 12.6 visits, respectively; P < .001), infectious complications (47.3% v 39.4%, respectively; P = .0022), acute kidney disease/dehydration (30.5% v 21.2%, respectively; P < .001), and mucositis/esophagitis (18.6% v 14.4%, respectively; P = .0246). Conclusion: After accounting for prognostic variables, patients treated with EP versus CP had similar overall survival, but EP was associated with increased morbidity.