No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

In this multicenter trial 169 patients with chronic intermittent claudication due to obstructive peripheral vascular disease were randomized in a double-blind fashion into two parallel groups receiving either 250 mg ticlopidine or placebo, twice daily. At entry, the two groups (83 ticlopidine, 86 placebo) were well matched for the major clinical features apart from an excess of women in the ticlopidine group. At six months, 167 patients were alive, 2 having died of malignant disease (1 from each group). At this stage, 39 patients from the ticlopidine group and 29 from the placebo group (p = 0.04) had increased their walking distance by more than 50% of baseline values. For the groups as a whole pain-free and total walking distance were greater in the ticlopidine group than in the placebo group (194 vs 124 meters, p = 0.03 and 236 vs 170 meters, p = 0.04, respectively). Two patients from the ticlopidine group vs 9 patients from the placebo group (p = 0.03) developed significant cardiovascular events during the study. These results indicate that ticlopidine has a beneficial effect both in the treatment of the symptoms and the prevention of vascular complications in patients with intermittent claudication.

Ticlopidine is a new platelet aggregation inhibitor. The effect of this drug was studied on 55 subjects, healthy volunteers and hospitalized patients. The action requires 24 to 48 hr to appear, and lasts more than 3 days. A dose-effect relationship was studied with oral daily doses ranging from 250 to 1,000 mg during 1 wk; it showed a 50% inhibition on adenosine diphosphate (ADP)-induced aggregation at 2 muM concentration on an oral daily dose of 450 mg. No action was found on collagen-induced aggregation, and a mild effect was observed on platelet adhesiveness. Clinical tolerance was assessed in patients given ticlopidine in oral doses up to 500 mg/day during several weeks, showing no overt side effects and no change in the safety parameters.

The Canadian American Ticlopidine Study is a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, multicenter study to assess the efficacy and safety of ticlopidine hydrochloride in patients who have suffered a thromboembolic stroke no less than 1 week and no more than 4 months before entry into the study. The primary assessment of efficacy will be based on the cluster of outcome events recurrent stroke, myocardial infarction, or vascular death. Twenty-five clinical centers, 12 in Canada and 13 in the United States, entered a total of 1,072 patients during a 3-year recruitment period; these patients were randomly allocated to receive either 250 mg ticlopidine or identical-appearing placebo tablets twice daily for up to 3 years. Patient recruitment was completed in December 1986. Patients were followed for a maximum of 3 years or until the close of the study in December 1987; at that time an average follow-up of 25 months had been achieved. We summarize the protocol and organization of the study and document the methods of execution and analysis, with corresponding criteria, before disclosure of the treatment code to any of the study investigators. We also provide a clinical description of the patients at entry into the study.

This trial was performed on 24 healthy volunteers in order to study the possible interactions between aspirin and ticlopidine. The results confirm the inhibitory activity of aspirin on collagen-induced aggregation and that of ticlopidine on ADP-induced aggregation. If aspirin does not modify the inhibitory effect of ticlopidine on ADP-induced aggregation, ticlopidine on the other hand potentiates the effect of aspirin on collagen-induced aggregation.

An international conference of clinicians, clinical investigators and biostatisticians discussed meta-analysis in relation to clinical trials, i.e. the combination of data from separate studies for the purpose of obtaining information that cannot be derived from the individual studies. Meta-analysis can be a helpful tool for generating hypotheses for future trials, for studying the consistency of trials of the same or similar goals, and for generating more precise estimates of effect. There are still a number of unresolved questions about the methodology and interpretation of meta-analysis. Better and more uniform reporting of primary studies would increase the usefulness of meta-analysis.