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.
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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- The bleeding costs of intensive vs. less intensive antithrombotic strategies: a meta-regression analysis.European heart journal. Quality of care & clinical outcomes · 2026Pooled it
- European stroke organisation (ESO) guideline on cerebral small vessel disease, part 2, lacunar ischaemic stroke.European stroke journal · 2024Guideline
- Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Nine Anti-Platelet Therapies for Patients with Ischemic Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack: a Mixed Treatment Comparisons.Molecular neurobiology · 2017Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Antiplatelet regimens after ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack: a systematic review and updated network meta-analysis.Annals of translational medicine · 2022Article
- Antithrombotic Therapy for Secondary Prevention in Patients with Non-Cardioembolic Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack: A Systematic Review.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Antiplatelet regimens for Asian patients with ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Annals of translational medicine · 2021Article
- Efficacy of aspirin, clopidogrel, and ticlopidine in stroke prevention: A population-based case-cohort study in Taiwan.PloS one · 2020Article
- Antiplatelet Therapy in Cerebral Small Vessel Disease.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2019Review
- Clopidogrel Pharmacokinetics in Malaysian Population Groups: The Impact of Inter-Ethnic Variability.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2018Article
- South Korean geriatrics on Beers Criteria medications at risk of adverse drug events.PloS one · 2018Article
- P2Y12 receptor: platelet thrombus formation and medical interventions.International journal of hematology · 2012Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.