Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 254

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Persantine-aspirin reinfarction study. Part II. Secondary coronary prevention with persantine and aspirin

Open access
Klimt, Christian R., Knatterud, Genell L., Stamler, Jeremiah, Meier, Paul·1986·Journal of the American College of Cardiology

Abstract

In the Persantine-Aspirin Reinfarction Study, Part II (PARIS II), 3,128 persons who had recovered from myocardial infarction, suffered from 4 weeks to 4 months previously, were randomized into two groups: dipyridamole (Persantine) plus aspirin (n = 1,563) and placebo (n = 1,565). The average length of follow-up was 23.4 months. Prespecified primary end points were coronary incidence (definite nonfatal myocardial infarction plus death due to recent or acute cardiac event), coronary mortality (death due to recent or acute cardiac event) and total mortality, each at 1 year of patient follow-up and at the end of the study. Coronary incidence in the Persantine plus aspirin group was significantly lower than in the placebo group, both at 1 year (30% reduction) and at the end of the study (24% reduction). The statistically significant differences in coronary incidence, at 1 year and at the end of the study, in favor of the combination treatment remained after adjustment for multiple baseline variables and adjustment for multiple testing (three end points for two time periods). Although there were reductions for other end points, these differences were not statistically significant. Coronary mortality was 20% lower in the Persantine plus aspirin group compared with the placebo group at 1 year, and 6% lower overall. Total mortality in the treated group compared with the placebo group was 11% lower at 1 year and 3% lower overall. The reduced rates of coronary incidence largely reflected lower rates of definite nonfatal myocardial infarction in the Persantine plus aspirin group. Several subgroups were defined a priori and at the end of the study. The beneficial effect of Persantine plus aspirin compared with placebo for coronary incidence tended to be greater for the following groups of patients: those who had a non-Q wave infarct; those who were not taking digitalis; those who were receiving beta-receptor blocking drugs at baseline; those who were in New York Heart Association functional class I; those who had had only one myocardial infarction; or those who were enrolled in the study early, that is within 85 days of the qualifying myocardial infarction.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0735-1097(86)80489-2

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 254

Metadata

Authors
Klimt, C. R., Knatterud, G. L., Stamler, J., & Meier, P.
Venue
Journal of the American College of Cardiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1986-02
Volume
7
Issue
2
Pages
251-269
ISSN
0735-1097 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2035208169
Cited by
254
References
1
FWCI
18.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Persantine-aspirin reinfarction study. Part II. Secondary coronary prevention with persantine and aspirin. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0735-1097(86)80489-2
The paper
Klimt, C. R., Knatterud, G. L., Stamler, J., & Meier, P. (1986). Persantine-aspirin reinfarction study. Part II. Secondary coronary prevention with persantine and aspirin. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0735-1097(86)80489-2

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.