with sirolimus-and probucol-eluting stents versus zotarolimus-eluting stents. The trial was designed to demonstrate noninferiority of the sirolimus-and probucol-eluting stents. The primary end point was the combined incidence of cardiac death, target-vessel-related myocardial infarction, or target-lesion revascularization at 1-year follow-up. Follow-up angiography was scheduled at 6 to 8 months. The sirolimus-and probucol-eluting stent was noninferior to the zotarolimus-eluting stent in terms of occurrence of the primary end point (13.1% versus 13.5%, respectively, P noninferiority ϭ0.006; hazard ratioϭ0.97, 95% confidence interval, 0.78 to 1.19; P superiority ϭ0.74). The incidence of definite/probable stent thrombosis was low in both groups (1.1% versus 1.2%, respectively; hazard ratioϭ0.91 [95% confidence interval, 0.45 to 1.84], Pϭ0.80). With regard to angiographic efficacy, there were no differences between the sirolimus-and probucol-eluting stent and the zotarolimus-eluting stent in terms of either in-segment binary angiographic restenosis (13.3% versus 13.4% respectively; Pϭ0.95) or in-stent late luminal loss (0.31Ϯ0.58 mm versus 0.29Ϯ0.56 mm, respectively; Pϭ0.46). Conclusion-In this large-scale study powered for clinical end points, a polymer-free sirolimus-and probucol-eluting stent was noninferior to a new generation durable polymer-based zotarolimus-eluting stent out to 12 months. Clinical Trial Registration-http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier NCT 00598533. (Circulation. 2011;124:624-632.)