The DOI matches its Crossref record.
One-Year Clinical Results With the Slow-Release, Polymer-Based, Paclitaxel-Eluting TAXUS Stent: The TAXUS-IV Trial
Open accessAbstract
Background— The safety and efficacy of the slow-release, polymer-based, paclitaxel-eluting stent after implantation in a broad cross section of de novo coronary lesions at 1 year are unknown. Methods and Results— In the TAXUS-IV trial, 1314 patients with single de novo coronary lesions 10 to 28 mm in length, with reference-vessel diameter 2.5 to 3.75 mm, coverable by a single study stent, were prospectively randomized to the slow-release, polymer-based, paclitaxel-eluting TAXUS stent or an identical-appearing bare-metal EXPRESS stent. By actuarial analysis, the TAXUS stent compared with the bare-metal stent reduced the 12-month rates of target-lesion revascularization by 73% (4.4% versus 15.1%, P <0.0001), target-vessel revascularization by 62% (7.1% versus 17.1%, P <0.0001), target-vessel failure by 52% (10.0% versus 19.4%, P <0.0001), and composite major adverse cardiac events by 49% (10.8% versus 20.0%, P <0.0001). The 1-year rates of cardiac death (1.4% versus 1.3%), myocardial infarction (3.5% versus 4.7%), and subacute thrombosis (0.6% versus 0.8%) were similar between the paclitaxel-eluting and control stents, respectively. Between 9 and 12 months, there were significantly fewer myocardial infarctions (0% versus 1.1%, P =0.007), target-vessel revascularizations (2.4% versus 5.8%, P =0.002), and major adverse cardiac events (2.4% versus 6.3%, P =0.0009) in the paclitaxel-eluting stent than in the control stent group, respectively. Conclusions— The relative efficacy reported at 9 months for the polymer-based, paclitaxel-eluting TAXUS stent compared with the EXPRESS stent is preserved and continues to increase at 1 year, with no safety concerns apparent.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
Abdel-Wahab, M., Richardt, G., Joachim Büttner, H., Toelg, R., Geist, V., Meinertz, T., Schofer, J., King, L., Neumann, F.-J., & Khattab, A. A. (2013) · JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions · doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2012.07.017 · Cited by 533
Jagur‐Grodzinski, J. (2006) · Polymers for Advanced Technologies · doi:10.1002/pat.729 · Cited by 394
Metadata
- Authors
- Stone, G. W., Ellis, S. G., Cox, D. A., Hermiller, J., O’Shaughnessy, C., Mann, J. T., Turco, M., Caputo, R., Bergin, P., Greenberg, J., Popma, J. J., & Russell, M. E.
- Venue
- Circulation
- Published
- 2004-04-27
- Volume
- 109
- Issue
- 16
- Pages
- 1942-1947
- ISSN
- 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
- 1524-4539
- OpenAlex
- W2165806143
- Cited by
- 759
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 87.54
- 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: One-Year Clinical Results With the Slow-Release, Polymer-Based, Paclitaxel-Eluting TAXUS Stent: The TAXUS-IV Trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/01.cir.0000127110.49192.72
- The paper
- Stone, G. W., Ellis, S. G., Cox, D. A., Hermiller, J., O’Shaughnessy, C., Mann, J. T., Turco, M., Caputo, R., Bergin, P., Greenberg, J., Popma, J. J., & Russell, M. E. (2004). One-Year Clinical Results With the Slow-Release, Polymer-Based, Paclitaxel-Eluting TAXUS Stent: The TAXUS-IV Trial. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.0000127110.49192.72
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.