Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19288047›Full record

Trial reportJournal of neurology2009

The safety and efficacy of clopidogrel versus ticlopidine in Japanese stroke patients: combined results of two Phase III, multicenter, randomized clinical trials.

Shinichiro Uchiyama, Yasuo Fukuuchi, Takenori Yamaguchi

Abstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIIMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of neurology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Antiplatelet Therapy in Cerebral Small Vessel Disease.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2019
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Shinichiro UchiyamaDepartment of Neurology, Tokyo Women's Medical University School of Medicine, 8-1 Kawada-cho, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 162-8666, Japan. suchiyam@nij.twmu.ac.jp
Yasuo Fukuuchi
Takenori Yamaguchi
Ashikaga Red Cross Hospital · JPNational Cerebral and Cardiovascular Center · JPTokyo Women's Medical University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Two Phase III studies comparing the safety and efficacy of clopidogrel with ticlopidine as antiplatelet agents for the secondary prevention of vascular events in patients with prior stroke were performed in Japan. Both studies were randomized, double-blind, double-dummy comparative trials with the primary objective of comparing the clinical safety of treatment with either clopidogrel or ticlopidine for up to 12 months. The secondary objective was to assess the incidence of a combined efficacy endpoint of cerebral infarction, myocardial infarction, and vascular death. Patients with prior stroke were recruited during July 1996-February 1998 and September 2001-November 2003 at centers across Japan. The results of the two studies were combined in this analysis. There were 1,869 patients in the safety population (clopidogrel, 941; ticlopidine, 928). Significantly, fewer patients experienced a safety event in the clopidogrel group than in the ticlopidine group (p < 0.001; hazard ratio, 0.610; 95% confidence interval 0.529, 0.703). Almost twice as many patients in the ticlopidine group (25.6%) experienced hepatic dysfunction than in the clopidogrel group (13.4%). There were 1,862 patients evaluable for efficacy (clopidogrel, 939; ticlopidine, 923). There was no significant difference in the incidence of the combined efficacy endpoint between clopidogrel (2.6% of patients) and ticlopidine (2.5%). Clopidogrel was better tolerated than ticlopidine. There was no difference in the efficacy of the two agents with regard to the secondary prevention of vascular events in patients with prior stroke. This was the first combined analysis of direct comparison of clopidogrel with ticlopidine in the clinical setting.

Indexed as

AgedBrain InfarctionClopidogrelDouble-Blind MethodFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansIncidenceJapanLiverMaleMiddle AgedMyocardial InfarctionPlatelet Aggregation InhibitorsProportional Hazards ModelsStrokeClopidogrelPlatelet Aggregation InhibitorsTiclopidine

Identifiers

PMID19288047
OpenAlexW2033853582

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.