Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Trials to Ascertain Fatal Gastrointestinal Bleeding Events Attributable to Preventive Low-Dose Aspirin: No Evidence of Increased Risk

Self-administration of aspirin for acute chest pain-Does it prevent premature cardiovascular mortality?

Aspirin as a class I guideline recommended medical treatment for acute coronary syndrome has been established for decades [1]. As early intake of aspirin is crucial, self-administration of aspirin in acute chest pain might be beneficial when weighing up the potential harm including a slightly elevated bleeding risk in patients with chest pain of another origin than myocardial infarction against the benefit in patients with coronary ischemia.

Benefit and Harm of Aspirin on Mortality From Gastrointestinal Cancers Vs Bleeding in Helicobacter pylori-Eradicated Patients

BACKGROUND & AIMS

We investigated the benefit-risk profile of aspirin on mortality reduction from chemoprevention of gastrointestinal (GI) cancer vs excess mortality from bleeding among Helicobacter pylori-eradicated patients, and its interaction with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs).

METHODS

H pylori-eradicated patients (between 2003 and 2016), identified from a territory-wide database, were observed from the date of H pylori therapy until death or the end of the study (July 2020). Primary exposure was aspirin use as time-varying variable. The primary outcome was GI cancer-related (gastrointestinal, hepatobiliary, or pancreatic cancer) death and the secondary outcome was bleeding-related (gastrointestinal bleeding or intracranial bleeding) death. The adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) of outcomes was calculated by multivariable Cox model after adjusting for age, sex, comorbidities, and concomitant medications. The benefit-risk profile was expressed as the adjusted absolute risk difference of cancer-related deaths and bleeding-related deaths between aspirin users and nonusers.

RESULTS

A total of 87,967 subjects were followed up for a median of 10.1 years, with 1294 (1.5%) GI cancer-related deaths and 304 (0.3%) bleeding-related deaths. Aspirin was associated with lower GI cancer-related mortality (aHR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.42-0.61), but higher bleeding-related mortality (aHR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.11-2.08). Among PPI users, the aHR of bleeding-related mortality with aspirin was 1.06 (95% CI, 0.70-1.63). For the whole cohort, the adjusted absolute risk difference between aspirin users and nonusers was 7 (95% CI, 5-8) fewer cancer-related and 1 (95% CI, 0.3-3) more bleeding-related death per 10,000 person-years. Among concomitant PPI-aspirin use, there were 9 (95% CI, 8-10) fewer cancer-related deaths per 10,000 person-years without an increase in bleeding-related deaths.

CONCLUSIONS

GI cancer mortality benefit from aspirin outweighs bleeding-related mortality in H pylori-eradicated subjects, which is enhanced further by PPI use.

Risk of Hemorrhoidal Bleeding in Patients Treated with Direct Oral Anticoagulants (DOACs)

(1) Background: Lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB) accounts for 20% of all gastrointestinal bleeds. LGBI originates in the colon, rectum, and anus, mainly in patients who are receiving antiaggregant or anticoagulant treatment. The major causes are diverticular disease, colitis, hemorrhoids, and angiodysplasia. The literature studies underline that Direct Oral Anticoagulants (DOACs) are effective in reducing the risk of thromboembolic events but are associated with a higher risk of lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB), particularly lower hemorrhoid bleeding. (2) Methods: The aim of our review is to revise the risk of hemorrhoid bleeding, pathophysiology, and management in patients taking DOACs in light of the most modern evidence. (3) Conclusions: central to the management of hemorrhoid bleeding in patients receiving DOAC therapy is the consideration of a tailored approach that respects the delicate equilibrium between the need for thromboembolic prophylaxis and the potential for bleeding complications. Cessation of anticoagulation, if clinically feasible, constitutes a fundamental cornerstone in the control of hemorrhage. This pause in therapy aims to mitigate the exacerbation of bleeding risk while offering a window for the implementation of local measures to manage hemorrhoid bleeding.

Aspirin and cancer treatment: systematic reviews and meta-analyses of evidence: for and against

Aspirin as a possible treatment of cancer has been of increasing interest for over 50 years, but the balance of the risks and benefits remains a point of contention. We summarise the valid published evidence 'for' and 'against' the use of aspirin as a cancer treatment and we present what we believe are relevant ethical implications. Reasons for aspirin include the benefits of aspirin taken by patients with cancer upon relevant biological cancer mechanisms. These explain the observed reductions in metastatic cancer and vascular complications in cancer patients. Meta-analyses of 118 observational studies of mortality in cancer patients give evidence consistent with reductions of about 20% in mortality associated with aspirin use. Reasons against aspirin use include increased risk of a gastrointestinal bleed though there appears to be no valid evidence that aspirin is responsible for fatal gastrointestinal bleeding. Few trials have been reported and there are inconsistencies in the results. In conclusion, given the relative safety and the favourable effects of aspirin, its use in cancer seems justified, and ethical implications of this imply that cancer patients should be informed of the present evidence and encouraged to raise the topic with their healthcare team.

Adjunctive use of omega-3 fatty acids in combination with low-dose aspirin in periodontitis: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Periodontitis is one of the most common dental diseases with a range of treatment approaches, including pathogenetically reasonable use of various host immune modulators. One such approach is the use of omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) in combination with low-dose aspirin. This systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to compare the standard treatment alone and adjunctive use of omega-3 PUFAs in combination with low-dose aspirin with or without standard treatment in patients with periodontitis. A systematic review of the literature was performed using MEDLINE/PubMed, Cochrane Central and Google Scholar databases. Selection criteria included the following: randomized controlled trials in subjects with periodontitis in the age group above 18 years old, with follow-up periods ranging from 6 weeks to 6 months. The meta-analysis was performed using standard methodological procedures according to Cochrane recommendations, including assessment of risk-of-bias and level of evidence (GRADE). Meta-analysis was performed for such clinical outcomes as plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI), probing depth (PD), clinical attachment loss (CAL), bleeding on probing (BOP) and bleeding index (BI) based on data from seven randomized clinical trials conducted between 2010 and 2020. It was shown that adjunctive use of omega-3 PUFAs in combination with low-dose aspirin results in significant clinical improvement in PD, CAL and GI during both short and prolonged follow-up periods. The use of omega-3 PUFAs and low-dose aspirin in periodontitis patients may be promising as an adjunct therapy, however, due to a limited number of patients and significant heterogeneity, further studies need to be conducted.

The Impact of Antithrombotic Therapy in Patients with De-compensated Heart Failure and Iron

Abstract: The iron deficient anaemia is a common medical condition in patients with heart failure receiving antithrombotic therapy. Especially during the COVID19 pandemic period the rate of bleeding complications associated with the antithrombotic therapy tend to be higher, as the patient’s referral to medical services is lower and the interaction doctor-patient is limited. In our retrospective observational study we included 300 consecutive patients with decompensated heat failure associating iron deficient anaemia. For defining the medical conditions we used the ESC guidelines terminology and diagnostic criteria. We assessed the association between the iron deficient anaemia and different antithrombotic therapies, recommended in concordance to ESC Guidelines. We found that aspirin 75mg/day was statistical significant associated with iron deficient anaemia (p 0.012) and anaemia severity (p 0.002), this association being assessed by Chi square and Pearson tests. Also, neither clopidogrel, ticagrelor, VKA or non-VKA were associated to the presence of anaemia. By assessing the mortality rate associated to anaemia severity, the severe anaemia was associated to higher mortality rate, meanwhile no antithrombotic therapy was associated with higher readmission or mortality rate (p<0.001). In conclusion, aspirin was the only antithrombotic therapy associated with the presence of anaemia and anaemia severity, while only severe anaemia was associated with statistic significant increase of patient’s mortality, with nonstatistical result regarding the readmission rate. This finding is concordant to the necessity of a permanent evaluation of the antithrombotic therapy in heart failure patients. Keywords: antithrombotic therapy, decompensated heart failure, iron deficient anaemia, COVID 19 pan-demic, mortality rate

Implications of the heterogeneity between guideline recommendations for the use of low dose aspirin in primary prevention of cardiovascular disease

The most recent primary cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention clinical guidelines used in Europe, Italy, the USA, China, and South Korea differ in aspects of their approach to CVD risk assessment and reduction. Low dose aspirin use is recommended in certain high-risk patients by most but not all the countries. Assessment of traditional risk factors and which prediction models are commonly used differ between countries. The assessments and tools may not, however, identify all patients at high risk but without manifest CVD. The use of coronary artery calcium (CAC) score to guide decisions regarding primary prevention aspirin therapy is recommended only by the US primary prevention guidelines and the 2021 European Society of Cardiology guidelines. A more consistent and comprehensive global approach to CVD risk estimation in individual patients could help to personalize primary CVD prevention. Wider detection of subclinical atherosclerosis, together with structured assessment and effective mitigation of bleeding risk, may appropriately target patients likely to gain net benefit from low dose aspirin therapy.

Aspirin and cancer: biological mechanisms and clinical outcomes

Evidence on aspirin and cancer comes from two main sources: (1) the effect of aspirin upon biological mechanisms in cancer, and (2) clinical studies of patients with cancer, some of whom take aspirin. A series of systematic literature searches identified published reports relevant to these two sources. The effects of aspirin upon biological mechanisms involved in cancer initiation and growth appear to generate reasonable expectations of effects upon the progress and mortality of cancer. Clinical evidence on aspirin appears overall to be favourable to the use of aspirin, but evidence from randomized trials is limited, and inconsistent. The main body of evidence comes from meta-analyses of observational studies of patients with a wide range of cancers, about 25% of whom were taking aspirin. Heterogeneity is large but, overall, aspirin is associated with increases in survival and reductions in metastatic spread and vascular complications of different cancers. It is important that evaluations of aspirin used as an adjunct cancer treatment are based upon all the available relevant evidence, and there appears to be a marked harmony between the effects of aspirin upon biological mechanisms and upon the clinical progress of cancer.

Aspirin Use to Prevent Cardiovascular Disease and Colorectal Cancer: Updated Modeling Study for the US Preventive Services Task Force

IMPORTANCE

The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) is updating its 2016 recommendation on the use of aspirin for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and colorectal cancer (CRC).

OBJECTIVE

To provide updated model-based estimates of the net balance in benefits and harms from routine use of low-dose aspirin for primary prevention.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Microsimulation modeling was used to estimate long-term benefits and harms for hypothetical US cohorts of men and women aged 40 to 79 years with up to 20% 10-year risk for an atherosclerotic CVD event and without prior history of CVD or elevated bleeding risks.

EXPOSURES

Low-dose (≤100 mg/d) aspirin for lifetime use, unless contraindicated by a bleeding event, and with stopping ages in 5-year intervals from age 65 to 85 years.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Primary outcomes were lifetime net benefits measured in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and life-years. Benefits included reduced nonfatal myocardial infarction and ischemic stroke. Harms included increased nonfatal major gastrointestinal bleeding and intracranial hemorrhage. Reduced CRC incidence was considered in sensitivity analysis.

RESULTS

Estimated lifetime net QALYs were positive for both men and women at 5% or greater 10-year CVD risk when starting between ages 40 and 59 years and at 10% or greater 10-year CVD risk when starting between ages 60 and 69 years. These estimates ranged from 2.3 (95% CI, -2.7 to 7.4) to 66.2 (95% CI, 58.2 to 74.1) QALYs per 1000 persons. Lifetime net life-years were positive for men at 5% or greater and women at 10% or greater 10-year CVD risk starting aspirin at ages 40 to 49 years and for men at 7.5% or greater and women at 15% or greater 10-year CVD risk at ages 50 to 59 years. These estimates ranged from 0.4 (95% CI, -6.1 to 6.9) to 52.4 (95% CI, 43.9 to 60.9) life-years per 1000 persons. Lifetime net life-years were negative in most cases for persons starting aspirin between ages 60 and 79 years, as were lifetime net QALYs for persons aged 70 to 79 years. Stopping aspirin between ages 65 and 85 years generally showed little advantage compared with lifetime use. Sensitivity analyses showed lifetime net benefits may be higher if aspirin reduced CRC incidence or CVD mortality and lower if aspirin increased fatal major gastrointestinal bleeding or reduced quality of life with routine use.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This microsimulation study suggested that several population groups may benefit from taking aspirin for the primary prevention of CVD, primarily in persons starting at younger ages with higher 10-year CVD risk.

Aspirin to target arterial events in chronic kidney disease (ATTACK): study protocol for a multicentre, prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded endpoint, parallel group trial of low-dose aspirin vs. standard care for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in people with chronic kidney disease

BACKGROUND

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a very common long-term condition and powerful risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD). Low-dose aspirin is of proven benefit in the secondary prevention of myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke in people with pre-existing CVD. However, in people without CVD, the rates of MI and stroke are much lower, and the benefits of aspirin in the primary prevention of CVD are largely balanced by an increased risk of bleeding. People with CKD are at greatly increased risk of CVD and so the absolute benefits of aspirin are likely to be greater than in lower-risk groups, even if the relative benefits are the same. Post hoc evidence suggests the relative benefits may be greater in the CKD population but the risk of bleeding may also be higher. A definitive study of aspirin for primary prevention in this high-risk group, recommended by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in 2014, has never been conducted. The question has global significance given the rising burden of CKD worldwide and the low cost of aspirin.

METHODS

ATTACK is a pragmatic multicentre, prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded endpoint adjudication superiority trial of aspirin 75 mg daily vs. standard care for the primary prevention of CVD in 25,210 people aged 18 years and over with CKD recruited from UK Primary Care. Participants aged 18 years and over with CKD (GFR category G1-G4) will be identified in Primary Care and followed up using routinely collected data and annual questionnaires for an average of 5 years. The primary outcome is the time to first major vascular event (composite of non-fatal MI, non-fatal stroke and cardiovascular death [excluding confirmed intracranial haemorrhage and other fatal cardiovascular haemorrhage]). Deaths from other causes (including fatal bleeding) will be treated as competing events. The study will continue until 1827 major vascular events have occurred. The principal safety outcome is major intracranial and extracranial bleeding; this is hypothesised to be increased in those randomised to take aspirin. The key consideration is then whether and to what extent the benefits of aspirin from the expected reduction in CVD events exceed the risks of major bleeding.

DISCUSSION

This will be the first definitive trial of aspirin for primary CVD prevention in CKD patients. The research will be of great interest to clinicians, guideline groups and policy-makers, in the UK and globally, particularly given the high and rising prevalence of CKD that is driven by population ageing and epidemics of obesity and diabetes. The low cost of aspirin means that a positive result would be of relevance to low- and middle-income countries and the impact in the developed world less diluted by any inequalities in health care access.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN: ISRCTN40920200 . EudraCT: 2018-000644-26 .

CLINICALTRIALS

gov: NCT03796156.

Safety and effectiveness of low-dose aspirin for the prevention of gastrointestinal cancer in adults without atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: a population-based cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the association between low-dose aspirin and the incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC), gastric cancer (GC), oesophageal cancer (EC) and gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) in adults without established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.

DESIGN

Cohort study with propensity score matching of new-users of aspirin to non-users.

SETTING

Clinical Data Analysis and Reporting System database, Hong Kong.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults ≥40 years with a prescription start date of either low-dose aspirin (75-300 mg/daily) or paracetamol (non-aspirin users) between 1 January 2004 to 31 December 2008 without a history of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was the first diagnosis of gastrointestinal cancer (either CRC, GC or EC) and the secondary outcome was GIB. Individuals were followed from index date of prescription until the earliest occurrence of an outcome of interest, an incident diagnosis of any type of cancer besides the outcome, death or until 31 December 2017. A competing risk survival analysis was used to estimate HRs and 95% CIs with death as the competing risk.

RESULTS

After matching, 49 679 aspirin and non-aspirin users were included. The median (IQR) follow-up was 10.0 (6.4) years. HRs for low-dose aspirin compared with non-aspirin users were 0.83 for CRC (95% CI, 0.76 to 0.91), 0.77 for GC (95% CI, 0.65 to 0.92) and 0.88 for EC (95% CI, 0.67 to 1.16). Patients prescribed low-dose aspirin had an increased risk of GIB (HR 1.15, 95% CI, 1.11 to 1.20), except for patients prescribed proton pump inhibitors or histamine H2-receptor antagonists (HR 1.03, 95% CI, 0.96 to 1.10).

CONCLUSION

In this cohort study of Chinese adults, patients prescribed low-dose aspirin had reduced risks of CRC and GC and an increased risk of GIB. Among the subgroup of patients prescribed gastroprotective agents at baseline, however, the association with GIB was attenuated.

Beneficial Prognostic Effects of Aspirin in Patients Receiving Sorafenib for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Tale of Multiple Confounders

Case-control observational studies suggested that aspirin might prevent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in high-risk patients, even if randomized clinical trials are lacking. Information regarding aspirin in subjects who already developed HCC, especially in its advanced stage, are scarce. While aspirin might be a low-cost option to improve the prognosis, multiple confounders and safety concerns are to be considered. In our retrospective analyses of a prospective dataset (n = 699), after assessing the factors associated with aspirin prescription, we applied an inverse probability treatment weight analysis to address the prescription bias. Analyses of post-sorafenib survival were also performed to reduce the influence of subsequent medications. Among the study population, 133 (19%) patients were receiving aspirin at the time of sorafenib prescription. Aspirin users had a higher platelet count and a lower prevalence of esophageal varices, macrovascular invasion, and Child-Pugh B status. The benefit of aspirin was confirmed in terms of overall survival (HR 0.702, 95% CI 0.543-0.908), progression-free survival, disease control rate (58.6 vs. 49.5%, p < 0.001), and post-sorafenib survival even after weighting. Minor bleeding events were more frequent in the aspirin group. Aspirin use was associated with better outcomes, even after the correction for confounders. While safety concerns arguably remain a problem, prospective trials for patients at low risk of bleeding are warranted.

Postdiagnosis Aspirin Use Associated With Decreased Biliary Tract Cancer-Specific Mortality in a Large Nationwide Cohort

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Biliary tract cancer (BTC) is rare and has limited treatment options. We aimed to examine aspirin use on cancer-specific survival in various BTC subtypes, including gallbladder cancer, ampulla of Vater cancer, and cholangiocarcinoma.

APPROACH AND RESULTS

Nationwide prospective cohort of newly diagnosed BTC between 2007 and 2015 were included and followed until December 31, 2017. Three nationwide databases, namely the Cancer Registration, National Health Insurance, and Death Certification System, were used for computerized data linkage. Aspirin use was defined as one or more prescriptions, and the maximum defined daily dose was used to evaluate the dose-response relationship. Cox's proportional hazards models were applied for estimating HRs and 95% CIs. Analyses accounted for competing risk of cardiovascular deaths, and landmark analyses to avoid immortal time bias were performed. In total, 2,519 of patients with BTC were exposed to aspirin after their diagnosis (15.7%). After a mean follow-up of 1.59 years, the 5-year survival rate was 27.4%. The multivariate-adjusted HR for postdiagnosis aspirin users, as compared with nonusers, was 0.55 (95% CI: 0.51 to 0.58) for BTC-specific death. Adjusted HRs for BTC-specific death were 0.53 (95% CI: 0.48 to 0.59) and 0.42 (95% CI: 0.31 to 0.58) for ≤ 1 and > 1 maximum defined daily dose, respectively, and showed a dose-response trend (P < 0.001; nonusers as a reference). Cancer-specific mortality was lower with postdiagnosis aspirin use in patients with all major BTC subtypes.

CONCLUSIONS

The nationwide study revealed that postdiagnosis aspirin use was associated with improved BTC-specific mortality of various subtypes. The findings suggest that additional randomized trials are required to investigate aspirin's efficacy in BTC.

The efficacy and safety of acid suppressants for gastrointestinal bleeding prophylaxis in cardiac care unit patients

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Concerns regarding adverse events associated with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and histamine-2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs) for gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) prophylaxis in the intensive care unit have increased in recent years. Few studies have focused on acid suppressant use in the cardiac care unit (CCU) setting exclusively. We performed a cohort study to determine the efficacy and safety of acid suppressants for GIB prophylaxis in CCU patients.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included adults who were admitted directly to the CCU for more than 2 days from January 1, 2014, to April 30, 2019. The Crusade score was calculated to evaluate the risk of GIB. The primary outcomes were clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding (CIGIB), hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP), and in-hospital mortality.

RESULTS

Of the 3318 patients enrolled, 2284 (68.8%) patients received PPIs, 515 (15.5%) received H2RAs, and 519 (15.7%) received no acid suppressants. After adjusting for potential confounders, utilization of PPIs (2.69, 95% confidence interval [0.62-11.73]) and H2RAs (1.41, 95% confidence interval [0.19-10.36]) were not associated with a lower risk of CIGIB than the control. Sensitivity analyses revealed that PPI use was an independent risk factor for in-hospital mortality in patients over 75 years old, with an adjusted odds ratio of 4.08 (1.14-14.63). PPIs increased the risk of HAP in patients over 75 years old and in those with heart failure, with adjusted odds ratios of 2.38 (1.06-5.34) and 2.88 (1.34-7.28), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Proton pump inhibitors and H2RAs for GIB prophylaxis in CCU patients were not associated with a lower risk of CIGIB than the controls. PPI therapy is associated with increased risks of HAP and in-hospital mortality in patients over 75 years old. PPIs may increase the risk of HAP in patients with heart failure.

Aspirin and cancer survival: a systematic review and meta-analyses of 118 observational studies of aspirin and 18 cancers

BACKGROUND

Despite the accumulation of research papers on aspirin and cancer, there is doubt as to whether or not aspirin is an acceptable and effective adjunct treatment of cancer. The results of several randomised trials are awaited, and these should give clear evidence on three common cancers: colon, breast and prostate. The biological effects of aspirin appear likely however to be of relevance to cancer generally, and to metastatic spread, rather than just to one or a few cancers, and there is already a lot of evidence, mainly from observational studies, on the association between aspirin and survival in a wide range of cancers.

AIMS

In order to test the hypothesis that aspirin taking is associated with an increase in the survival of patients with cancer, we conducted a series of systematic literature searches to identify clinical studies of patients with cancer, some of whom took aspirin after having received a diagnosis of cancer.

RESULTS

Three literature searches identified 118 published observational studies in patients with 18 different cancers. Eighty-one studies report on aspirin and cancer mortality and 63 studies report on all-cause mortality. Within a total of about a quarter of a million patients with cancer who reported taking aspirin, representing 20%-25% of the total cohort, we found aspirin to be associated with a reduction of about 20% in cancer deaths (pooled hazard ratio (HR): 0.79; 95% confidence intervals: 0.73, 0.84 in 70 reports and a pooled odds ratio (OR): 0.67; 0.45, 1.00 in 11 reports) with similar reductions in all-cause mortality (HR: 0.80; 0.74, 0.86 in 56 studies and OR: 0.57; 0.36, 0.89 in seven studies). The relative safety of aspirin taking was examined in the studies and the corresponding author of every paper was written to asking for additional information on bleeding. As expected, the frequency of bleeding increased in the patients taking aspirin, but fatal bleeding was rare and no author reported a significant excess in fatal bleeds associated with aspirin. No author mentioned cerebral bleeding in the patients they had followed.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a considerable body of evidence suggestive of about a 20% reduction in mortality in patients with cancer who take aspirin, and the benefit appears not to be restricted to one or a few cancers. Aspirin, therefore, appears to deserve serious consideration as an adjuvant treatment of cancer, and patients with cancer, and their carers, have a right to be informed of the available evidence.

Major GI bleeding in older persons using aspirin: incidence and risk factors in the ASPREE randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

There is a lack of robust data on significant gastrointestinal bleeding in older people using aspirin. We calculated the incidence, risk factors and absolute risk using data from a large randomised, controlled trial.

DESIGN

Data were extracted from an aspirin versus placebo primary prevention trial conducted throughout 2010-2017 ('ASPirin in Reducing Events in the Elderly (ASPREE)', n=19 114) in community-dwelling persons aged ≥70 years. Clinical characteristics were collected at baseline and annually. The endpoint was major GI bleeding that resulted in transfusion, hospitalisation, surgery or death, adjudicated independently by two physicians blinded to trial arm.

RESULTS

Over a median follow-up of 4.7 years (88 389 person years), there were 137 upper GI bleeds (89 in aspirin arm and 48 in placebo arm, HR 1.87, 95% CI 1.32 to 2.66, p<0.01) and 127 lower GI bleeds (73 in aspirin and 54 in placebo arm, HR 1.36, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.94, p=0.08) reflecting a 60% increase in bleeding overall. There were two fatal bleeds in the placebo arm. Multivariable analyses indicated age, smoking, hypertension, chronic kidney disease and obesity increased bleeding risk. The absolute 5-year risk of bleeding was 0.25% (95% CI 0.16% to 0.37%) for a 70 year old not on aspirin and up to 5.03% (2.56% to 8.73%) for an 80 year old taking aspirin with additional risk factors.

CONCLUSION

Aspirin increases overall GI bleeding risk by 60%; however, the 5-year absolute risk of serious bleeding is modest in younger, well individuals. These data may assist patients and their clinicians to make informed decisions about prophylactic use of aspirin.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ASPREE. NCT01038583.

Chemopreventive Agents After Pancreatic Resection for Ductal Adenocarcinoma: Legend or Scientific Evidence?

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is currently the fourth leading cause of cancer-related death in the USA. A wealth of evidence has demonstrated the chemopreventive activity of aspirin, statins, and metformin against PDAC. The aim of this study is to investigate the effect of aspirin, statins, and metformin on disease-free survival (DFS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) in a large population of PDAC patients undergoing pancreatic resection.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All patients who underwent pancreatic resections between January 2015 and September 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. The potentially "chemopreventive agents" considered for the analysis were aspirin, statins, and metformin. Drug use was defined in case of regular assumption at least 6 months before diagnosis and regularly after surgery along the follow-up period.

RESULTS

A total of 430 patients were enrolled in this study, with median DFS and DSS of 21 months (IQR 13-30) months and 34 (IQR 26-52) months, respectively. On multivariable analysis, use of aspirin was associated with better DFS (HR: 0.62; p = 0.038). Metformin was associated with better DFS, without reaching statistical significance (p = 0.083). Use of statins did not influence DFS in the studied population. Aspirin, metformin, and statins were not associated with better DSS on multivariable analysis. Factors influencing DSS were pT3/pT4, N1, N2, no adjuvant treatment, G3, and ASA score > 3.

CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest that chronic use of aspirin is associated with increased DFS but not with better DSS after surgical resection in patients with PDAC.

Aspirin in Primary Prevention: What Changed? A Critical Appraisal of Current Evidence

Aspirin has been the mainstay of both secondary and primary prevention of cardiovascular disease for half a century. In 2018, 3 trials showed a modest reduction in cardiovascular outcomes that appeared counterbalanced by the risk of clinically significant bleeding. The latest ACC/AHA primary prevention guidelines downgraded their recommendation for aspirin use in primary prevention to that of physician preference. Despite the consistent and robust evidence previously supporting the use of aspirin in cardiovascular disease prevention, little discussion has been given to mechanisms or analytic explanations for this revision of recommendations. In this review, we explore 3 possible mechanisms that may have contributed to the alteration of our perception of aspirin's role in primary prevention. These include changes in the population potentially using aspirin in primary prevention, changes in cardiovascular disease and its presentation, and changes in aspirin itself. Here we present a translational look at knowledge gaps that should be addressed to better guide contemporary aspirin use in primary prevention. In conclusion, based on these considerations, the current recommendations might be improved by recalibration of the cardiovascular risk threshold above which aspirin should be recommended for primary prevention, including the incorporation of newer risk assessment modalities such as calcium scoring. A second enhancement would be developing a bleeding risk calculator to support clinicians' assessment of risk vs benefit. The use of enteric-coated aspirin vs noncoated aspirin should also be reassessed.

Efficacy of Aspirin in the Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Diseases and Cancer in the Elderly: A Population-Based Cohort Study in Korea

INTRODUCTION

Aspirin is widely used to prevent cardiovascular diseases (CVDs). However, the balance of its benefits and risks in the primary prevention of CVDs and cancer is unclear, especially in elderly Asians. The present study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of aspirin in the primary prevention of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), bleeding risk, and cancer in elderly Koreans with cardiovascular (CV) risk factors.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used data from the Korean National Health Insurance Service-Senior cohort database (2002-2015). Patients aged 60-90 years with hypertension, type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), or dyslipidemia were identified. Aspirin users were compared with non-users using propensity score matching at a 1:3 ratio. The primary outcome was MACCE, a composite of CV mortality, myocardial infarction, and ischemic stroke. The secondary outcomes were the components of MACCE, all-cause mortality, angina pectoris, heart failure, the incidence and mortality of cancer, and the risks of hemorrhagic stroke and gastrointestinal bleeding. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using a Cox proportional hazard model.

RESULTS

A total of 3366 aspirin users and 10,089 non-users were finally included in the study. During a mean follow-up of 7.8 years, the incidence of MACCE was 15.2% in aspirin users and 22.4% in non-users. The risk of MACCE was significantly lower in aspirin users than in non-users (HR 0.76; 95% CI 0.69-0.85), and this risk was significantly reduced in patients using aspirin over 5 years (HR 0.52; 95% CI 0.46-0.60). Aspirin use was associated with a 21% reduction in the risk of primary cancer (HR 0.79; 95% CI 0.70-0.88) and cancer-related mortality (HR 0.72; 95% CI 0.61-0.84). No significant differences in bleeding risks were observed between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Aspirin reduced the risks of MACCE and cancer without increasing the bleeding risk in elderly Koreans with hypertension, T2DM, or dyslipidemia. Moreover, the benefits of the long-term use of aspirin in reducing the risks of MACCE were demonstrated. However, the decision of using aspirin for primary prevention must be carefully made on an individual basis, while estimating the benefit-risk balance of aspirin.

Incidences, temporal trends and risks of hospitalisation for gastrointestinal bleeding in new or chronic low-dose aspirin users after treatment for Helicobacter pylori: a territory-wide cohort study

OBJECTIVE

The risk of GI bleeding (GIB) in aspirin users after Helicobacter pylori (HP) eradication remains poorly defined. We characterised the incidences and temporal trends of hospitalisations for all GIB in aspirin users after HP eradication therapy.

DESIGN

Based on a territory-wide health database, we identified all patients who had received the first course of clarithromycin-based triple therapy between 2003 and 2012. Patients were divided into three cohorts according to aspirin use: new users (commenced after HP eradication), chronic users (commenced before and resumed after HP eradication) and non-users. The primary outcome was to determine the risk of hospitalisation for GIB.

RESULTS

We included 6985 new aspirin users, 5545 chronic users and 48 908 non-users. The age-adjusted and sex-adjusted incidence of hospitalisation for all GIB in new, chronic and non-users was 10.4, 7.2 and 4.6 per 1000 person-years, respectively. Upper and lower GIB accounted for 34.7% and 45.3% of all bleeding, respectively. Compared with chronic users, new users had a higher risk of GIB (HR with propensity score matching: 1.89; 95% CI 1.29 to 2.70). Landmark analysis showed that the increased risk in new aspirin users was only observed in the first 6 months for all GIB (HR 2.10, 95% CI 1.41 to 3.13) and upper GIB (HR 2.52, 95% CI 1.38 to 4.60), but not for lower GIB.

CONCLUSION

New aspirin users had a higher risk of GIB than chronic aspirin users, particularly during the initial 6 months. Lower GIB is more frequent than upper GIB in aspirin users who had HP eradicated.

Pros and Cons of Aspirin Prophylaxis for Prevention of Cardiovascular Events in Kidney Transplantation and Review of Evidence

Kidney transplant recipients have traditional and nontraditional risk factors which can lead to coronary artery disease and sudden death with a functional graft loss. Aspirin has been used traditionally for prevention of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular accidents. It has beneficial effects in secondary prevention of cardiovascular events in general population. Its use for primary prophylaxis is still disputed. Bleeding and theoretical risk of nephrotoxicity are the major concerns about its use. The data on aspirin in kidney transplant population is sparse. This review will focus on various pros and cons of aspirin use for prevention of cardiovascular events in kidney transplant recipients and a way forward.

Changing epidemiology and etiology of upper and lower gastrointestinal bleeding

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) develops in the oesophagus, stomach or duodenum and has an incidence of 47/100,000. Lower GIB (LGIB) develops in the small bowel, colon or anorectum and has an incidence of 33/100,000. Where the incidence of UGIB has fallen, driven by helicobacter pylori eradication and the use of proton pump inhibitors, the incidence of LGIB may be increasing. Interventions such as early endoscopy, risk assessment and national guidelines have improved clinical outcomes but have had limited impact on the economic burden of GIB. Previously LGIB was thought to be less severe than UGIB, but contemporary data suggest that patients with LGIB tend to have a longer length of hospital stay and may be at higher risk of death or re-bleeding.

Incidence of Upper and Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding in New Users of Low-Dose Aspirin

BACKGROUND & AIMS

There are few data on the incidence of upper and lower gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB and LGIB) from observational studies of low-dose aspirin users. We aimed to estimate incidence rates of UGIB and LGIB in a large cohort of new users of low-dose aspirin in the United Kingdom, with subanalyses of hospitalization status and fatalities.

METHODS

We performed a population-based study of 199,079 new users of low-dose aspirin (median age, 64.0 years) identified from the Health Improvement Network primary care database (2000-2012). Individuals were followed for a median 5.4 years (maximum, 14 years) to identify new cases of UGIB and LGIB. Following multistep validation, we calculated overall and age- and sex-specific incidence rates; we performed subanalyses for health care use and death within 30 days of GIB. We also estimated rates within a matched (1:1) cohort of nonusers of low-dose aspirin at the start of the follow-up period.

RESULTS

The low-dose aspirin users had 1115 UGIB events and 1936 LGIB events; most subjects with UGIB events (58.9%) were hospitalized, whereas most subjects with LGIB events were referred to secondary care (72.8%). Crude incidence rates of GIB per 1000 person-years were 0.97 for subjects with UGIB (95% CI, 0.91-1.02) and 1.68 for subjects with LGIB (95% CI, 1.60-1.75). Incidence rates per 1000 person-years for patients hospitalized for GIB were 0.57 for UGIB (95% CI, 0.53-0.61) and 0.45 for LGIB (95% CI, 0.42-0.49); for referred (but not hospitalized) cases, these values were 0.39 for UGIB (95% CI, 0.36-0.43) and 1.22 for LGIB (1.16-1.29). Incidence rates per 1000 person-years were 0.06 for fatal UGIB (95% CI, 0.04-0.07), 0.01 for fatal LGIB (95% CI, 0.01-0.02), 0.91 for nonfatal UGIB (95% CI, 0.86-0.97), and 1.66 for nonfatal LGIB (95% CI, 1.59-1.74). Among nonusers of low-dose aspirin, incidence rates per 1000 person-years were 0.67 (95% CI, 0.63-0.75) for UGIB and 0.76 (95% CI, 0.72-0.82) for LGIB.

CONCLUSION

In a population-based study of low-dose aspirin users, the incidence of LGIB was higher than the incidence of UGIB. However, incidence rates of hospitalized GI bleeds and 30-day mortality rates were lower for LGIB than for UGIB. These estimates are valuable for benefit-risk assessments of low-dose aspirin for cardiovascular and colorectal cancer prevention.

Low-dose aspirin and risk of upper/lower gastrointestinal bleeding by bleed severity: a cohort study with nested case-control analysis using primary care electronic health records from the United Kingdom

Introduction: Risks of low-dose aspirin-associated upper and lower gastrointestinal bleeds (UGIB/LGIB) may vary by severity and presence of cardiovascular disease (CVD). No study has quantified these risks for UGIB and LGIB in the same real-world study population. Patients and methods: Using UK primary care data, 199,049 new users of low-dose aspirin (75-300 mg/day) and 1:1 matched non-users were followed to identify incident UGIB (N = 1843)/LGIB (N = 2763) cases. Nested case-control analyses compared current low-dose aspirin vs. non-use on UGIB/LGIB risk. Results: Adjusted incidence rate ratios (ORs; 95% CIs) were 1.62 (1.42-1.86) for non-fatal UGIB, 1.63 (1.47-1.81) for non-fatal LGIB, 0.77 (0.51-1.16) for fatal UGIB, 1.29 (0.50-3.36) for fatal LGIB. For hospitalizations, adjusted ORs (95% CIs) were 1.55 (1.32-1.81) for UGIB and 1.89 (1.58-2.27) for LGIB; for referred only cases, they were 1.52 (1.26-1.84) for UGIB and 1.54 (1.37-1.73) for LGIB. In primary CVD prevention, adjusted ORs (95% CI) were 1.62 (1.38-1.90) for UGIB and 1.60 (1.42-1.81) for LGIB; in secondary CVD prevention, they were 1.16 (0.89-1.50) for UGIB and 1.67 (1.34-2.09) for LGIB. Conclusion: Low-dose aspirin was associated with increased risks of non-fatal but not fatal UGIB/LGIB. Key message Low-dose aspirin is associated with an increased risks of non-fatal UGIB/LGIB but not fatal UGIB/LGIB.

K. J, Lanas A. Systematic review update of observational studies further supports aspirin role in cancer treatment: Time to share evidence and decision-making with patients?

BACKGROUND

Evidence is growing that low-dose aspirin used as an adjuvant treatment of cancer is associated with an increased survival and a reduction in metastatic spread. We therefore extended up to August 2017 an earlier systematic search and meta-analyses of published studies of low-dose aspirin taken by patients with a diagnosis of cancer.

METHODS

Searches were completed in Medline and Embase to August 2017 using a pre-defined search strategy to identify reports of relevant studies. References in all the selected papers were scanned. Two reviewers independently applied pre-determined eligibility criteria and extracted data on cause-specific cancer deaths, overall mortality and the occurrence of metastatic spread. Meta-analyses were then conducted for different cancers and heterogeneity and publication bias assessed. Sensitivity analyses and attempts to reduce heterogeneity were conducted.

RESULTS

Analyses of 29 studies reported since an earlier review up to April 2015 are presented in this report, and these are then pooled with the 42 studies in our earlier publication. Overall meta-analyses of the 71 studies are presented, based on a total of over 120 thousand patients taking aspirin. Ten of the studies also give evidence on the incidence of metastatic cancer spread. There are now twenty-nine observational studies describing colorectal cancer (CRC) and post-diagnostic aspirin. Pooling the estimates of reduction by aspirin which are reported as hazard ratios (HR), gives an overall HR for aspirin and CRC mortality 0.72 (95% CI 0.64-0.80). Fourteen observational studies have reported on aspirin and breast cancer mortality and pooling those that report the association with aspirin as a hazard ratio gives HR 0.69 (0.53-0.90). Sixteen studies report on aspirin and prostate cancer mortality and a pooled estimate yields an HR of 0.87 (95% CI 0.73-1.05). Data from 12 reports relating to other cancers are also listed. Ten studies give evidence of a reduction in metastatic spread; four give a pooled HR 0.31 (95% CI 0.18, 0.54) and five studies which reported odds ratio of metastatic spread give OR 0.79 (0.66 to 0.95).

CONCLUSION

Being almost entirely from observational studies, the evidence of benefit from aspirin is limited. There is heterogeneity between studies and the results are subject to important biases, only some of which can be identified. Nevertheless, the evidence would seem to merit wide discussion regarding whether or not it is adequate to justify the recommendation of low-dose therapeutic aspirin, and if it is, for which cancers?

Mortality among patients due to adverse drug reactions that lead to hospitalization: a meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to estimate the prevalence of mortality among patients due to adverse drug reactions that lead to hospitalisation (fatal ADRAd), to explore the heterogeneity in its estimation through subgroup analysis of study characteristics, and to identify system-organ classes involved and causative drugs for fatal ADRAd.

METHODS

We identified prospective ADRAd-related studies via screening of the PubMed and Google Scholar databases with appropriate key terms. We estimated the prevalence of fatal ADRAd using a double arcsine method and explored heterogeneity using the following study characteristics: age groups, wards, study region, ADR definitions, ADR identification methods, study duration and sample size. We examined patterns of fatal ADRAd and causative drugs.

RESULTS

Among 312 full-text articles assessed, 49 studies satisfied the selection criteria and were included in the analysis. The mean prevalence of fatal ADRAd was 0.20% (95% CI: 0.13-0.27%; I2 = 93%). The age groups and study wards were the important heterogeneity modifiers. The mean fatal ADRAd prevalence varied from 0.01% in paediatric patients to 0.44% in the elderly. Subgroup analysis showed a higher prevalence of fatal ADRAd in intensive care units, emergency departments, multispecialty wards and whole hospitals. Computer-based monitoring systems in combination with other methods detected higher mortality. Intracranial haemorrhage, renal failure and gastrointestinal bleeding accounted for more than 50% of fatal ADRAdcases. Warfarin, aspirin, renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors and digoxin accounted for 60% of fatal ADRAd.

CONCLUSIONS

ADRAd is an important cause of mortality. Strategies targeting the safer use of warfarin, aspirin, RAS inhibitors and digoxin could reduce the large number of fatal ADRAdcases.

Degradable Polymers and Nanoparticles Built from Salicylic Acid

As more evidence emerges supporting the possibility that nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, especially aspirin (acetyl salicylic acid), might have a role in the prevention and management of certain types of cancer, there have been several attempts to fabricate salicylic acid-based polymers that can be employed in the targeted therapy of tumors. The primary disadvantage so far has been in use of nontherapeutic polymeric backbones that constitute the majority of the therapeutic particle's size. The focus of this research is the creation of a biodegradable polymer consisting only of salicylic acid, and its use as the main building block in targeted nanotherapeutics that would consequently provide both high local dose and sustained release of the active moiety. This work demonstrates the synthesis and degradation of polysalicylates, and modulation of their size and hydrolytic stability through the formation of nanostructures.

Lack of Bioequivalence Among Low-dose, Enteric-coated Aspirin Preparations

Low-dose aspirin (75 mg or 81 mg) is considered to be the lowest effective dose for cardiovascular protection; however, the use of enteric preparations has created a source of variability in bioavailability. As part of regulatory requirements, we carried out bioequivalence tests for two 75 mg enteric-coated aspirin preparations (Caprin and Protek) using Nu-Seals 75 mg aspirin as the comparator. The primary endpoint was serum thromboxane levels after 14 days of treatment. Protek failed to meet bioequivalence, as it was significantly less effective than Nu-Seals. In contrast, Caprin was not bioequivalent with Nu-Seals but as it was more effective it was granted approval. However, 75 mg plain aspirin was found to be more effective than Nu-Seals at inhibiting serum thromboxane production. Thus, there is significant variation in the ability of low-dose aspirin preparations to inhibit serum thromboxane production.

Aspirin Prevention of Colorectal Cancer: Focus on NF-κB Signalling and the Nucleolus

Overwhelming evidence indicates that aspirin and related non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) have anti-tumour activity and the potential to prevent cancer, particularly colorectal cancer. However, the mechanisms underlying this effect remain hypothetical. Dysregulation of the nuclear factor-kappaB (NF-κB) transcription factor is a common event in many cancer types which contributes to tumour initiation and progression by driving expression of pro-proliferative/anti-apoptotic genes. In this review, we will focus on the current knowledge regarding NSAID effects on the NF-κB signalling pathway in pre-cancerous and cancerous lesions, and the evidence that these effects contribute to the anti-tumour activity of the agents. The nuclear organelle, the nucleolus, is emerging as a central regulator of transcription factor activity and cell growth and death. Nucleolar function is dysregulated in the majority of cancers which promotes cancer growth through direct and indirect mechanisms. Hence, this organelle is emerging as a promising target for novel therapeutic agents. Here, we will also discuss evidence for crosstalk between the NF-κB pathway and nucleoli, the role that this cross-talk has in the anti-tumour effects of NSAIDs and ways forward to exploit this crosstalk for therapeutic purpose.

Aspirin and omeprazole for secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease in patients at risk for aspirin-associated gastric ulcers

INTRODUCTION

Cardiovascular disease is the most important cause of morbidity and mortality in the world and low-dose aspirin is considered the cornerstone of the cardiovascular disease prevention. However, low-dose aspirin use is associated with gastrointestinal adverse effects in the whole gastrointestinal tract. In this setting, co-therapy with a proton pump inhibitor is the most accepted strategy to reduce aspirin related upper gastrointestinal damage. In addition, some adverse effects have been described with proton pump inhibitors long term use. Areas covered: Low-dose aspirin related beneficial and adverse effects in cardiovascular system and gastrointestinal tract are reviewed. In addition, this manuscript summarizes current data on upper gastrointestinal damage prevention and adverse events with proton pump inhibition. Finally, we discuss the benefit/risk ratio of proton pump inhibitor use in patients at risk of gastrointestinal damage taking low-dose aspirin. Expert commentary: Nowadays, with the current available evidence, the combination of low-dose aspirin with proton pump inhibitor is the most effective therapy for cardiovascular prevention in patients at high gastrointestinal risk. However, further studies are needed to discover new effective strategies with less related adverse events.