Ticlopidine versus aspirin after myocardial infarction (STAMI) trial. Aspirin and ticlopidine for prevention of recurrent stroke in black patients: a randomized trial. A randomized trial comparing ticlopidine hydrochloride with aspirin for the prevention of stroke in high-risk patients. Ticlopidine Aspirin Stroke Study Group.
We sought to compare the efficacy of aspirin and ticlopidine in survivors of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) treated with thrombolysis.
                The role of ticlopidine in secondary prevention after AMI has not yet been explored.
                Of 4,696 patients with AMI treated with thrombolysis who were screened, 261 died in the hospital (5.6%) and 1,470 were enrolled in this randomized, double-blind, multicenter trial and allocated to treatment with either aspirin (160 mg/day) or ticlopidine (500 mg/day). The most frequent reasons for exclusion were refusal to give informed consent, planned myocardial revascularization, risk of noncompliance with study procedures, need for anticoagulant therapy and contraindications to the study treatments. The primary end point was the first occurrence of any of the following events during the six-month follow-up: fatal and nonfatal AMI, fatal and nonfatal stroke, angina with objective evidence of myocardial ischemia, vascular death or death due to any other cause.
                The primary end point was recorded in 59 (8.0%) of the 736 aspirin-treated and 59 (8.0%) of the 734 ticlopidine-treated patients (p = 0.966). Vascular death was the first event in five patients taking aspirin and in six patients taking ticlopidine (0.7% vs. 0.8%; p = NS); nonfatal AMI in 18 and 8 (2.4% vs. 1.1%; p = 0.049); nonfatal stroke in 3 and 4 (0.4% vs. 0.5%; p = NS); and angina in 33 and 40 (4.5% vs. 5.4%; p = NS), respectively. The frequency of adverse reactions was not significantly different between the two groups.
                No difference was found between the ticlopidine and aspirin groups in the rate of the primary combined end point of death, recurrent AMI, stroke and angina. Blacks are disproportionately affected by stroke, and they are about 2 times more likely than most other individuals in the United States to die of or experience stroke.
                To determine the efficacy and safety of aspirin and ticlopidine to prevent recurrent stroke in black patients.
                Randomized, double-blind, investigator-initiated, multicenter trial of 1809 black men and women who recently had a noncardioembolic ischemic stroke and who were recruited between December 1992 and October 2001 from 62 academic and community hospitals in the United States and followed up for up to 2 years.
                A total of 902 patients received 500 mg/d of ticlopidine and 907 received 650 mg/d of aspirin.
                Recurrent stroke, myocardial infarction, or vascular death was the composite primary end point (according to intention-to-treat analysis). The secondary outcome was fatal or nonfatal stroke.
                The blinded phase of the study was halted after about 6.5 years when futility analyses revealed a less than 1% probability of ticlopidine being shown superior to aspirin in the prevention of the primary outcome end point. The primary outcome of recurrent stroke, myocardial infarction, or vascular death was reached by 133 (14.7%) of 902 patients assigned to ticlopidine and 112 (12.3%) of 907 patients assigned to aspirin (hazard ratio, 1.22; 95% confidence interval, 0.94-1.57). Kaplan-Meier curves for time to event for the primary outcome did not differ significantly (P =.12 by log-rank test). Kaplan-Meier curves for time to the secondary outcome of fatal or nonfatal stroke approached a statistically significant reduction favoring aspirin over ticlopidine (P =.08 by log-rank test). The frequency of laboratory-determined serious neutropenia was 3.4% for patients receiving ticlopdine vs 2.2% for patients receiving aspirin (P =.12) and 0.3% vs 0.2% for thrombocytopenia, respectively (P =.69). One ticlopidine-treated patient developed thrombocytopenia, which was thought to be a case of possible thrombotic thrombocytopenia purpura, and recovered after therapy with plasmapheresis.
                During a 2-year follow-up, we found no statistically significant difference between ticlopidine and aspirin in the prevention of recurrent stroke, myocardial infarction, or vascular death. However, there was a nonsignificant trend for reduction of fatal or nonfatal stroke among those in the aspirin group. Based on these data and the risk of serious adverse events with ticlopidine, we regard aspirin as a better treatment for aspirin-tolerant black patients with noncardioembolic ischemic stroke. We report the results of the Ticlopidine Aspirin Stroke Study, a blinded trial at 56 North American centers that compared the effects of ticlopidine hydrochloride (500 mg daily) with those of aspirin (1300 mg daily) on the risk of stroke or death. The medications were randomly assigned to 3069 patients with recent transient or mild persistent focal cerebral or retinal ischemia. Follow-up lasted for two to six years. The three-year event rate for nonfatal stroke or death from any cause was 17 percent for ticlopidine and 19 percent for aspirin--a 12 percent risk reduction (95 percent confidence interval, -2 to 26 percent) with ticlopidine (P = 0.048 for cumulative Kaplan-Meier estimates). The rates of fatal and nonfatal stroke at three years were 10 percent for ticlopidine and 13 percent for aspirin--a 21 percent risk reduction (95 percent confidence interval, 4 to 38 percent) with ticlopidine (P = 0.024 for cumulative Kaplan-Meier estimates). Ticlopidine was more effective than aspirin in both sexes. The adverse effects of aspirin included diarrhea (10 percent), rash (5.5 percent), peptic ulceration (3 percent), gastritis (2 percent), and gastrointestinal bleeding (1 percent). With ticlopidine, diarrhea (20 percent), skin rash (14 percent), and severe but reversible neutropenia (less than 1 percent) were noted. The mean increase in total cholesterol level was 9 percent with ticlopidine and 2 percent with aspirin (P less than 0.01). The ratios of high-density lipoprotein and low-density lipoprotein to total cholesterol were similar in both treatment groups. We conclude that ticlopidine was somewhat more effective than aspirin in preventing strokes in this population, although the risks of side effects were greater.
The thienopyridine derivatives are at least as effective as aspirin in preventing serious vascular events in patients at high risk, and possibly somewhat more so. However, the size of any additional benefit is uncertain and could be negligible. Clopidogrel has a more favourable adverse effects profile than ticlopidine and so is the thienopyridine of choice. It should be used as an alternative to aspirin in patients genuinely intolerant of or allergic to aspirin.