You will be provided with the titles and abstracts of a collection of medical RCT reports studying a clinical question -- for instance, the efficacy of an intervention on some medical outcome. Please write a few sentences synthesizing the findings of these reports, which could serve as a conclusion section for a systematic review article. Your response should not include any other text. The RCT reports are below.



Title 1:
Clopidogrel and aspirin versus aspirin alone for the prevention of atherothrombotic events.
Abstract 1:
Dual antiplatelet therapy with clopidogrel plus low-dose aspirin has not been studied in a broad population of patients at high risk for atherothrombotic events.
                We randomly assigned 15,603 patients with either clinically evident cardiovascular disease or multiple risk factors to receive clopidogrel (75 mg per day) plus low-dose aspirin (75 to 162 mg per day) or placebo plus low-dose aspirin and followed them for a median of 28 months. The primary efficacy end point was a composite of myocardial infarction, stroke, or death from cardiovascular causes.
                The rate of the primary efficacy end point was 6.8 percent with clopidogrel plus aspirin and 7.3 percent with placebo plus aspirin (relative risk, 0.93; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.83 to 1.05; P=0.22). The respective rate of the principal secondary efficacy end point, which included hospitalizations for ischemic events, was 16.7 percent and 17.9 percent (relative risk, 0.92; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.86 to 0.995; P=0.04), and the rate of severe bleeding was 1.7 percent and 1.3 percent (relative risk, 1.25; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.97 to 1.61 percent; P=0.09). The rate of the primary end point among patients with multiple risk factors was 6.6 percent with clopidogrel and 5.5 percent with placebo (relative risk, 1.2; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.91 to 1.59; P=0.20) and the rate of death from cardiovascular causes also was higher with clopidogrel (3.9 percent vs. 2.2 percent, P=0.01). In the subgroup with clinically evident atherothrombosis, the rate was 6.9 percent with clopidogrel and 7.9 percent with placebo (relative risk, 0.88; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.77 to 0.998; P=0.046).
                In this trial, there was a suggestion of benefit with clopidogrel treatment in patients with symptomatic atherothrombosis and a suggestion of harm in patients with multiple risk factors. Overall, clopidogrel plus aspirin was not significantly more effective than aspirin alone in reducing the rate of myocardial infarction, stroke, or death from cardiovascular causes. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00050817.).
                Copyright 2006 Massachusetts Medical Society.


Title 2:
A randomized trial comparing ticlopidine hydrochloride with aspirin for the prevention of stroke in high-risk patients. Ticlopidine Aspirin Stroke Study Group.
Abstract 2:
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.


Title 3:
Aspirin and ticlopidine for prevention of recurrent stroke in black patients: a randomized trial.
Abstract 3:
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.


Title 4:
Aspirin and extended-release dipyridamole versus clopidogrel for recurrent stroke.
Abstract 4:
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.
                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.
                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).
                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.)
                2008 Massachusetts Medical Society
The available evidence for ADP receptor antagonists in patients with diabetes mellitus is limited and most trials do not report outcomes for patients with diabetes separately. Therefore, recommendations for the use of ADP receptor antagonists for the prevention of CVD in patients with diabetes are based on available evidence from trials including patients with and without diabetes. Trials with diabetes patients and subgroup analyses of patients with diabetes in trials with combined populations are needed to provide a more robust evidence base to guide clinical management in patients with diabetes.