Rationale, design, and baseline data of the Japanese Primary Prevention Project (JPPP)-a randomized, open-label, controlled trial of aspirin versus no aspirin in patients with multiple risk factors for vascular events

Benefits and Risks Associated With Aspirin Use in Patients With Diabetes for the Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Events and Mortality: A Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE

A meta-analysis was conducted to assess the benefits and risks of aspirin for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality events in adults with diabetes.

METHODS

An extensive and systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE (via PubMed), Cinahl (via Ebsco), Scopus, and Web of Sciences from 1988 to December 2020. A detailed literature search was conducted using aspirin, cardiovascular disease (CVD), diabetes, and efficacy to identify trials of patients with diabetes who received aspirin for primary prevention of CVD. Demographic details with the primary outcome of events and bleeding outcomes were analyzed. The Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool was used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to calculate the pooled odds ratio for outcomes of cardiovascular events, death, and adverse events.

FINDINGS

A total of 8 studies were included with 32,024 patients with diabetes; 16,001 allocated to aspirin, and 16,023 allocated to the control group. There was no difference between aspirin and control groups with respect to all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, or bleeding events. However, MACE was significantly lower in the aspirin group.

IMPLICATIONS

Although aspirin has no significant risk on primary endpoints of cardiovascular events and bleeding outcomes in patients with diabetes compared to control, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) were significantly lower in the aspirin group. Further research on the use of aspirin alone or in combination with other antiplatelet drugs is required in patients with diabetes to supplement currently available research.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

identifier [XU#/IRB/2020/1005].

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.

Aspirin for Stroke Prevention in Elderly Patients With Vascular Risk Factors: Japanese Primary Prevention Project

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The effect of aspirin in primary prevention of stroke is controversial among clinical trials conducted in Western countries, and no data are available for Asian populations with a high risk of intracranial hemorrhage. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of aspirin on the risk of stroke and intracranial hemorrhage in the Japanese Primary Prevention Project (JPPP).

METHODS

A total of 14 464 patients (age, 60-85 years) with hypertension, dyslipidemia, and diabetes mellitus participated and were randomized into 2 treatment groups: 100 mg of aspirin or no aspirin. The median follow-up period was 5.02 years.

RESULTS

The cumulative rate of fatal or nonfatal stroke was similar for the aspirin (2.068%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.750-2.443) and no aspirin (2.299%; 95% CI, 1.963-2.692) groups at 5 years; the estimated hazard ratio was 0.927 (95% CI, 0.741-1.160; P=0.509). Aspirin nonsignificantly reduced the risk of ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack (hazard ratio, 0.783; 95% CI, 0.606-1.012; P=0.061) and nonsignificantly increased the risk of intracranial hemorrhage (hazard ratio, 1.463; 95% CI; 0.956-2.237; P=0.078). A Cox regression adjusted by the risk factors for all stroke, which were age >70 years, smoking, and diabetes mellitus, supported the above result.

CONCLUSIONS

Aspirin did not show any net benefit for the primary prevention of stroke in elderly Japanese patients with risk factors for stroke, whereas age >70 years, smoking, and diabetes mellitus were risk factors for stroke regardless of aspirin treatment.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00225849.

Aspirin therapy in primary cardiovascular disease prevention: a position paper of the European Society of Cardiology working group on thrombosis

Although the use of oral anticoagulants (vitamin K antagonists) has been abandoned in primary cardiovascular prevention due to lack of a favorable benefit-to-risk ratio, the indications for aspirin use in this setting continue to be a source of major debate, with major international guidelines providing conflicting recommendations. Here, we review the evidence in favor and against aspirin therapy in primary prevention based on the evidence accumulated so far, including recent data linking aspirin with cancer protection. While awaiting the results of several ongoing studies, we argue for a pragmatic approach to using low-dose aspirin in primary cardiovascular prevention and suggest its use in patients at high cardiovascular risk, defined as ≥2 major cardiovascular events (death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) projected per 100 person-years, who are not at increased risk of bleeding.

Variability in the responsiveness to low-dose aspirin: pharmacological and disease-related mechanisms

The main pharmacological aspects of pharmacodynamics (PD) and pharmacokinetics (PK) of aspirin as antiplatelet agent were unravelled between the late sixties and the eighties, and low-dose aspirin given once daily has been shown to be a mainstay in the current treatment and prevention of cardiovascular disorders. Nevertheless, several PD and PK aspects of aspirin in selected clinical conditions have recently emerged and deserve future clinical attention. In 1994, the term "aspirin resistance" was used for the first time, but, until now, no consensus exists on definition, standardized assay, underlying mechanisms, clinical impact, and possible efficacy of alternative therapeutic interventions. At variance with an undefined aspirin-resistant status, in the last 5 years, the concept of variability in response to aspirin due to specific pathophysiological mechanisms and based on PK and/or PD of the drug has emerged. This growing evidence highlights the existence and possible clinical relevance of an interindividual variability of pharmacological aspirin response and calls for new, large studies to test new low-dose aspirin-based regimens which may ameliorate platelet acetylation, reduce variability in drug responsiveness, and improve clinical efficacy on selected populations.

Aspirin for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in diabetes mellitus

Aspirin is effective for the prevention of cardiovascular events in patients with a history of vascular disease, as so-called secondary prevention. In general populations with no history of previous myocardial infarction or stroke, aspirin also seems useful for primary prevention of cardiovascular events, although the absolute benefits are smaller than those seen in patients with previous cardiovascular disease. Patients with diabetes mellitus are at an increased risk of cardiovascular events, but new trials have raised questions about the benefit of aspirin for primary prevention in patients with this disorder. This Review comprehensively examines the basic pharmacology of aspirin and provides an overview of the randomized, controlled trials of aspirin therapy that have included patients with diabetes mellitus. On the basis of currently available evidence from primary prevention trials, aspirin is estimated to reduce the relative risk of myocardial infarction and stroke by about 10% in patients with diabetes mellitus; however, aspirin also increases the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding. As such, low-dose aspirin therapy (75-162 mg) is reasonable for patients with diabetes mellitus and a 10-year risk of cardiovascular events >10%. Results from upcoming large trials will help clarify the effects of aspirin with greater precision, including whether the benefits differ between men and women.

Aspirin for vascular dementia

BACKGROUND

For patients with a diagnosis of vascular dementia there is evidence that aspirin is widely prescribed - in one study, completed by geriatricians and psychiatrists in the UK, 80% of patients with cognitive impairment (with vascular risk factors) were prescribed aspirin. However, a number of queries remain unanswered: Is there convincing evidence that aspirin benefits patients with vascular dementia? Does aspirin affect cognition or improve prognosis? In addition, does the risk of cerebral or gastric haemorrhage outweigh any benefit?

OBJECTIVES

To assess the evidence of effectiveness of the use of aspirin for vascular dementia.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Computerized databases were searched independently by two reviewers. In addition, relevant websites were searched and some journals were handsearched. Specialists in the field were approached for unpublished material and any publications found were searched for additional references. The most recent search for trials was carried out in February 2000.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomized controlled trials investigating the effect of aspirin for vascular dementia are included. Inclusion/exclusion of studies comprised systematic assessment of the quality of study design and the risk of bias.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted independently by both reviewers, using a previously tested data extraction form and, where required, authors were contacted for data not provided in the papers. The aim is to evaluate data recorded via tools assessing cognitive and behavioural changes along with mortality, morbidity and institutionalization data.

MAIN RESULTS

No trials are eligible for inclusion in this review.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence that aspirin is effective in treating patients with a diagnosis of vascular dementia. Further research is needed to assess the effect of aspirin on cognition, and on other outcomes such as behaviour, and quality of life. At present there is no evidence relating to other queries about the use of aspirin for dementia (these are described in the Background section of this review). The most recent search for references to relevant research was carried out in February 2000, but no new evidence was found.