4.8 Article

Aspirin and extended-release dipyridamole versus clopidogrel for recurrent stroke

期刊

NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE
卷 359, 期 12, 页码 1238-1251

出版社

MASSACHUSETTS MEDICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa0805002

关键词

-

资金

  1. Boehringer Ingelheim
  2. GlaxoSmithKline
  3. Sanofi-Aventis
  4. Abbott
  5. AstraZeneca
  6. Bayer Vital
  7. Bristol-Myers Squibb
  8. D-Pharm
  9. Fresenius
  10. Janssen Cilag
  11. Merck Sharp Dohme
  12. Novartis
  13. Novo Nordisk
  14. Paion
  15. Parke-Davis
  16. Pfizer
  17. Sankyo
  18. Servier
  19. Solvay
  20. Thrombogenics
  21. Wyeth
  22. Yamaguchi
  23. NMT Medical
  24. Parexel International
  25. Forest Research Institute
  26. Daiichi-Sankyo
  27. Bayer
  28. TAP Pharmaceutical Products
  29. Myriad
  30. Takeda
  31. Daiichi Sankyo
  32. Merck
  33. Brainsgate
  34. diaDexus
  35. Forest Laboratories
  36. Gilead
  37. Korea Health Promotion Institute [A060171, A080602] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Recurrent stroke is a frequent, disabling event after ischemic stroke. This study compared the efficacy and safety of two antiplatelet regimens - aspirin plus extended-release dipyridamole (ASA-ERDP) versus clopidogrel. Methods: In this double-blind, 2-by-2 factorial trial, we randomly assigned patients to receive 25 mg of aspirin plus 200 mg of extended-release dipyridamole twice daily or to receive 75 mg of clopidogrel daily. The primary outcome was first recurrence of stroke. The secondary outcome was a composite of stroke, myocardial infarction, or death from vascular causes. Sequential statistical testing of noninferiority (margin of 1.075), followed by superiority testing, was planned. Results: A total of 20,332 patients were followed for a mean of 2.5 years. Recurrent stroke occurred in 916 patients (9.0%) receiving ASA-ERDP and in 898 patients (8.8%) receiving clopidogrel (hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.92 to 1.11). The secondary outcome occurred in 1333 patients (13.1%) in each group (hazard ratio for ASA-ERDP, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.92 to 1.07). There were more major hemorrhagic events among ASA-ERDP recipients (419 [4.1%]) than among clopidogrel recipients (365 [3.6%]) (hazard ratio, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.32), including intracranial hemorrhage (hazard ratio, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.11 to 1.83). The net risk of recurrent stroke or major hemorrhagic event was similar in the two groups (1194 ASA-ERDP recipients [11.7%], vs. 1156 clopidogrel recipients [11.4%]; hazard ratio, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.95 to 1.11). Conclusions: The trial did not meet the predefined criteria for noninferiority but showed similar rates of recurrent stroke with ASA-ERDP and with clopidogrel. There is no evidence that either of the two treatments was superior to the other in the prevention of recurrent stroke. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00153062.).

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据