12.01.2013 Views

Clinical Study Report - Calidad de Información CFR

Clinical Study Report - Calidad de Información CFR

Clinical Study Report - Calidad de Información CFR

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Figure 10.1:1 Disposition of subjects<br />

N=1<br />

PCI failure<br />

N=31<br />

Patients ISU301 treated<br />

N=30<br />

Completed<br />

N=76(ISU301)<br />

PP<br />

DISPOSITION OF PATIENTS<br />

N=51<br />

Completed<br />

N=124<br />

Patients screened<br />

N=52<br />

ISU301<br />

treated<br />

N=53<br />

ISU301<br />

N=1<br />

Withdrawal<br />

N=52) N=1<br />

N=8, Major violation<br />

1) N=23) 10.2. Protocol <strong>de</strong>viations<br />

N=93<br />

Patients randomized<br />

N=1<br />

Withdrawal<br />

(SF but RDZ)<br />

N=40<br />

ReoPro<br />

N=40<br />

Completed<br />

N=36(ReoPro)<br />

PP<br />

N=4, Major violation 4)<br />

Protocol <strong>de</strong>viations were reviewed at a blind meeting (08-Feb-2006) after database lock(08-<br />

Feb-2006). Details of protocol <strong>de</strong>viations related to the efficacy endpoint were recor<strong>de</strong>d in the<br />

minutes of “Protocol Deviation Meeting” (See Appendix 16.2.2).<br />

There were 12 subject with major protocol <strong>de</strong>viation, one 1) was for CABG treatment after PCI<br />

failure, Five Clotinab patients 2) who completed the trial were consi<strong>de</strong>red to be major protocol<br />

<strong>de</strong>viations; of the five, 4 patients did not clear ‘exclusion criteria No.17’ , and 1 patient ma<strong>de</strong><br />

the study-completion return visit on Day10. rather than on Day 30. Two 3) patients dropped out<br />

of the study: 1 subject withdrew the consent on Day 2, 1 randomized subject was dropped out<br />

who should have been a screening-failure. Four ReoPro ® patients 4) were consi<strong>de</strong>red major<br />

protocol violations; 3 subjects did not clear ‘exclusion criteria No.17’, and 1 subject was given a<br />

<strong>de</strong>viant amount of the drug because of an acci<strong>de</strong>ntal disconnection of IV line during IP<br />

administration. Details are shown in Figure 10.1:1 and Table 10.2:1.<br />

CSR_Clotinab_II 44<br />

Ver. 1.0_Eng

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!