ArticleKorean circulation journal2012
A comparison of two brands of clopidogrel in patients with drug-eluting stent implantation.
Article in Korean circulation journal, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Can Generic Medications Be a Safe and Effective Alternative to Brand-Name Drugs for Cardiovascular Disease Treatment? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Pooled it
- The clinical safety of generic and brand clopidogrel in patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy: a randomized controlled trial.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesAlthough generic clopidogrel is widely used, clinical efficacy and safety between generic and original clopidogrel had not been well evaluated. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes of 2 oral formulations of clopidogrel 75 mg tablets in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) undergoing drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation. SUBJECTS AND
methodsBetween July 2006 and February 2009, 428 patients that underwent implantation with DES for CAD and completed >1 year of clinical follow-up were enrolled in this study. Patients were divided into the following 2 groups based on treatment formulation, Platless® (test formulation, n=211) or Plavix® (reference formulation, n=217). The incidence of 1-year major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular event (MACCE) and stent thrombosis (ST) were retrospectively reviewed.
resultsThe baseline demographic and procedural characteristics were not significantly different between two treatment groups. The incidence of 1-year MACCEs was 8.5% {19/211, 2 deaths, 4 myocardial infarctions (MIs), 2 strokes, and 11 target vessel revascularizations (TVRs)} in Platless® group vs. 7.4% (16/217, 4 deaths, 1 MI, 2 strokes, and 9 TVRs) in Plavix® group (p=0.66). The incidence of 1-year ST was 0.5% (1 definite and subacute ST) in Platless® group vs. 0% in Plavix® group (p=0.49).
conclusionIn this study, the 2 tablet preparations of clopidogrel showed similar rates of MACCEs, but additional prospective randomized studies with pharmacodynamics and platelet reactivity are needed to conclude whether generic clopidgrel may replace original clopidogrel.
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.