Effects of Aspirin for Primary Prevention in Persons with Diabetes Mellitus

Cardiovascular risk reduction in type 2 diabetes: What the non-specialist needs to know about current guidelines

In the US, approximately 11% of the population have diagnosed diabetes and nearly 40% have prediabetes. In addition, chronic kidney disease (CKD) affects 14% of the US population including up to 40% of those with diabetes. Cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains the leading cause of death worldwide where it affects approximately half of adults. The presence of CKD or diabetes doubles the risk of cardiovascular events. When both CKD and diabetes occur in the same patient the risks are further increased. The clinical problems of hypertension, hyperglycemia, and hyperlipidemia are all closely related with obesity, metabolic syndrome, Type 2 diabetes, CKD, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, heart failure and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis. The increasing frequency of obesity has driven increases in all of these medical comorbidities. These conditions frequently cluster together in the same patient exacerbating the risk of morbidity and mortality. They are also associated with cognitive dysfunction/dementia, pulmonary diseases, cancers, gastrointestinal diseases, immune system abnormalities, and inflammatory disorders. Only 6.8% of adults in US meet all targets for cardiovascular risk management with significant disparities based on race and ethnicity. Given the complexity of these multisystem problems in people with diabetes and obesity, it would seem reasonable to attempt to diagnose and treat many of the comorbidities earlier in the course of disease rather than wait for substantial end organ dysfunction to occur. The American Diabetes Association (ADA) has recently published a consensus statement recommending early screening for the diagnosis of heart failure, CKD and diabetes, recognizing both the frequency and gravity of this combination. Likewise, there are recommendations in the guidelines to facilitate screening for microalbuminuria, blood pressure, glycemic control and lipids earlier in patients at risk rather than wait and treat as a secondary prevention program. Thus, the general principle is to facilitate earlier recognition and diagnosis and provide treatment before downstream target organ complications occur. This review will focus on CVD and risk management based on newest recommendations and standards of care in people with diabetes by the ADA. The main considerations in the treatment of people with diabetes are glycemic control, blood pressure, lipids, and the use of medications with proven cardiorenal disease progression capability to prevent or delay.

Considerations in Antiplatelet Therapy in Women Undergoing Treatment of Acute Coronary Syndrome or Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Antiplatelet therapy is integral to reduce the risk of future ischemic events following acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI); this aim must be balanced by limiting the risk of bleeding. Women with ACS or undergoing PCI have distinct platelet physiology, vascular anatomy, and clinical profiles that can influence the selection of an appropriate regimen. There are procedural techniques that can enhance safety in women. The poor inclusion of women in ACS and PCI trials limits our understanding of the ideal antiplatelet regimen in women, and future studies must find ways to increase the participation of female patients.

DCRM 2.0: Multispecialty practice recommendations for the management of diabetes, cardiorenal, and metabolic diseases

The spectrum of cardiorenal and metabolic diseases comprises many disorders, including obesity, type 2 diabetes (T2D), chronic kidney disease (CKD), atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), heart failure (HF), dyslipidemias, hypertension, and associated comorbidities such as pulmonary diseases and metabolism dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease and metabolism dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (MASLD and MASH, respectively, formerly known as nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis [NAFLD and NASH]). Because cardiorenal and metabolic diseases share pathophysiologic pathways, two or more are often present in the same individual. Findings from recent outcome trials have demonstrated benefits of various treatments across a range of conditions, suggesting a need for practice recommendations that will guide clinicians to better manage complex conditions involving diabetes, cardiorenal, and/or metabolic (DCRM) diseases. To meet this need, we formed an international volunteer task force comprising leading cardiologists, nephrologists, endocrinologists, and primary care physicians to develop the DCRM 2.0 Practice Recommendations, an updated and expanded revision of a previously published multispecialty consensus on the comprehensive management of persons living with DCRM. The recommendations are presented as 22 separate graphics covering the essentials of management to improve general health, control cardiorenal risk factors, and manage cardiorenal and metabolic comorbidities, leading to improved patient outcomes.

Long-Term Effects of Low-Dose Aspirin on Gastrointestinal Symptoms and Bleeding Complications in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

BACKGROUND

Low-dose aspirin for primary prevention is determined by the balance of risks of cardiovascular events and adverse effects. We assessed the long-term gastrointestinal symptoms or bleeding with low-dose aspirin in diabetic patients.

METHODS

The Japanese Primary Prevention of Atherosclerosis with Aspirin for Diabetes (JPAD) trial was a randomized clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of low-dose aspirin in patients with type 2 diabetes. As a post hoc analysis, we investigated the incidence of upper gastrointestinal symptoms or bleeding in aspirin (100 mg enteric-coated aspirin or 81 mg buffered aspirin daily) and no-aspirin groups within and beyond 3 years.

RESULTS

Of 2535 patients (mean age 65 years, 55% male) followed for a median of 11.2 years, 1258 were included in the aspirin group (951 enteric-coated, 208 buffered, 99 unknown) and 1277 were included in the no-aspirin group. The cumulative incidence of upper gastrointestinal symptoms or bleeding was higher in the aspirin group than the no-aspirin group (8.8% vs. 5.7% at 18 years; p < 0.0001). The increased risk in the aspirin group was prominent within 3 years, and the hazard ratio (HR) [95% confidence interval (CI)] of the aspirin group was 7.10 [3.21-15.7], but attenuated beyond 3 years (HR 1.20 [0.76-1.89]). In 1159 patients in the aspirin group, the cumulative incidence was lower in the enteric-coated than in the buffered aspirin groups (2.9% vs. 7.3%; p = 0.003) within 3 years, and the adjusted HR of enteric-coated aspirin was 0.38 [0.20-0.72] compared with the buffered aspirin group.

CONCLUSION

The upper gastrointestinal symptoms or bleeding of low-dose aspirin within 3 years, and the aspirin formulations, were relevant for decision making of initiation and continuation of low-dose aspirin for primary prevention.

Polymer nanotherapeutics with the controlled release of acetylsalicylic acid and its derivatives inhibiting cyclooxygenase isoforms and reducing the production of pro-inflammatory mediators

The effective treatment of inflammatory diseases, particularly their chronic forms, is a key task of modern medicine. Herein, we report the synthesis and evaluation of biocompatible polymer conjugates based on N-2-(hydroxypropyl)methacrylamide copolymers enabling the controlled release of acetylsalicylic acid (ASA)-based anti-inflammatory drugs under specific stimuli. All polymer nanotherapeutics were proposed as water-soluble drug delivery systems with a hydrodynamic size below 10 nm ensuring suitability for the parenteral application and preventing opsonization by the reticuloendothelial system. The nanotherapeutics bearing an ester-bound ASA exhibited long-term release of the ASA/salicylic acid mixture, while the nanotherapeutics carrying salicylic acid hydrazide (SAH) ensured the selective release of SAH in the acidic inflammatory environment thanks to the pH-sensitive hydrazone bond between the polymer carrier and SAH. The ASA- and SAH-containing nanotherapeutics inhibited both cyclooxygenase isoforms and/or the production of pro-inflammatory mediators. Thanks to their favorable design, they can preferentially accumulate in the inflamed tissue, resulting in reduced side effects and lower dosage, and thus more effective and safer treatment.

[Summary of the 2023 European Society of Cardiology clinical guidelines on the management of cardiovascular disease in patients with diabetes mellitus]

The prevalence of cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) is well known. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), almost 18 million people die from CVDs worldwide every year, accounting for 31% of all causes of death [1]. CVDs often develop concomitantly with diabetes mellitus (DM), with approximately 20% of cardiovascular deaths attributed to elevated blood glucose levels [2]. Notably, CVDs are the leading cause of death among patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM). Based on data from the Federal Register of Diabetes 2022 in Russia, chronic heart failure was the direct cause of death in 24.2% of T2DM cases, followed by acute heart failure (13.1%), cerebrovascular events (10.0%), and myocardial infarction (3.7%) [3].The pathophysiological interplay between atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and DM has led to a situation where cardiologists are increasingly involved in the treatment of patients with DM, while endocrinologists are encountering a growing number of patients with CVDs. This association has become so apparent that in a recent article published in the European Journal of Cardiology, Yu. Braunwald speculated about the emergence of a new subspecialty - diabetocardiology [4]. Unfortunately, experts predict that the global number of diabetic patients will reach 783 million [5].Recent data on the CV benefits of certain hypoglycemic drugs (primarily, certain SGLT2 inhibitors, several GLP-1 receptor agonists, and a novel non-steroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist finerenone) prove the need for a unified interdisciplinary approach to managing CVDs and DM.Given the importance of integrated and coordinated efforts in managing patients with CVD and DM, the Task Force of the -European Society of Cardiology (ESC) updated, formulated, and published clinical guidelines on the treatment of CVD in diabetic patients in 2023 [6]. This article provides a concise overview of the key provisions outlined in the guidelines.

Prophylactic Effect of Aspirin and Other Medicine on Cerebral Infarction for Patients with Cardiovascular Diseases Risk Factors: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis

Stroke, as a type of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and cerebrovascular disease, has the risk of causing death or disability in patients. Aspirin, as an antipyretic and analgesic drug, can also treat or prevent CVDs. Previous studies have had conflicting results on the preventive effect of aspirin on cerebral infarction for patients with CVD risk factors. This review was carried out through a meticulous search of the Web of Science and PubMed databases. Articles were included or excluded based on predefined criteria. In terms of heterogeneity, a fixed effect model was utilized when I2 was less than 50%. Conversely, if the studies were deemed clinically comparable, a random effect model was implemented. The findings suggest that medical intervention significantly mitigates the risk of cerebral infarction in patients predisposed to CVDs [odds ratio (OR), 0.85; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.74-0.98; P = 0.03]. Interestingly, the preventive efficacy of medication appears to be higher in men (OR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.72-0.94; P = 0.004) than in women (OR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.69-1.01; P = 0.06). However, in terms of stroke prevention, no significant difference was observed between the use of aspirin (OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.76-1.06; P = 0.19) and other medications (OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.31-1.38; P = 0.26).

Factor affecting severe atherothrombotic cerebral infarction in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: Large-scale claim database analysis of Japan

AIMS

This study aimed to investigate the factors associated with the exacerbation of the severity of atherothrombotic brain infarction at discharge in patients with type 2 diabetes using a large-scale claims database.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective cross-sectional study utilized the Medical Data Vision administrative claims database, a nationwide database in Japan using acute care hospital data, and the Diagnosis Procedure Combination system. Diagnosis Procedure Combination data collected between April 1, 2008, and December 31, 2022, were extracted. Patients with type 2 diabetes were included. Severe atherothrombotic brain infarction was defined as a modified Rankin scale score of ≥3.

RESULTS

Severe atherothrombotic brain infarction occurred in 43,916/99,864 (44.0%) patients with type 2 diabetes. The odds ratio for severe atherothrombotic brain infarction increased significantly per 10 year increments in age (odds ratio: 1.69, 95% confidence interval: 1.66-1.71). A body mass index of <25 kg/m2, with a body mass index of ≥25 kg/m2 as reference, also increased the risk for severe atherothrombotic brain infarction (odds ratio: 1.11, 95% confidence interval: 1.08-1.15). The odds ratios in insulin and dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor use were significantly higher than 1. In particular, statin use (odds ratio: 0.85, 95% confidence interval: 0.83-0.88), fibrate use (odds ratio: 0.68, 95% confidence interval: 0.59-0.78), aspirin use (odds ratio: 0.78, 95% confidence interval: 0.75-0.80), and P2Y12 inhibitor use (odds ratio: 0.88, 95% confidence interval: 0.85-0.91) were associated with a lower odds ratio for severe atherothrombotic brain infarction.

CONCLUSIONS

The active management of lipid levels using statins and fibrates may be beneficial in preventing the exacerbation of atherothrombotic brain infarction in type 2 diabetes patients.

Agreement Between Mega-Trials and Smaller Trials: A Systematic Review and Meta-Research Analysis

Importance

Mega-trials can provide large-scale evidence on important questions.

Objective

To explore how the results of mega-trials compare with the meta-analysis results of trials with smaller sample sizes.

Data Sources

ClinicalTrials.gov was searched for mega-trials until January 2023. PubMed was searched until June 2023 for meta-analyses incorporating the results of the eligible mega-trials.

Study Selection

Mega-trials were eligible if they were noncluster nonvaccine randomized clinical trials, had a sample size over 10 000, and had a peer-reviewed meta-analysis publication presenting results for the primary outcome of the mega-trials and/or all-cause mortality.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

For each selected meta-analysis, we extracted results of smaller trials and mega-trials included in the summary effect estimate and combined them separately using random effects. These estimates were used to calculate the ratio of odds ratios (ROR) between mega-trials and smaller trials in each meta-analysis. Next, the RORs were combined using random effects. Risk of bias was extracted for each trial included in our analyses (or when not available, assessed only for mega-trials). Data analysis was conducted from January to June 2024.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The main outcomes were the summary ROR for the primary outcome and all-cause mortality between mega-trials and smaller trials. Sensitivity analyses were performed with respect to the year of publication, masking, weight, type of intervention, and specialty.

Results

Of 120 mega-trials identified, 41 showed a significant result for the primary outcome and 22 showed a significant result for all-cause mortality. In 35 comparisons of primary outcomes (including 85 point estimates from 69 unique mega-trials and 272 point estimates from smaller trials) and 26 comparisons of all-cause mortality (including 70 point estimates from 65 unique mega-trials and 267 point estimates from smaller trials), no difference existed between the outcomes of the mega-trials and smaller trials for primary outcome (ROR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.97-1.04) nor for all-cause mortality (ROR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.97-1.04). For the primary outcomes, smaller trials published before the mega-trials had more favorable results than the mega-trials (ROR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.01-1.10) and subsequent smaller trials published after the mega-trials (ROR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.04-1.18).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this meta-research analysis, meta-analyses of smaller studies showed overall comparable results with mega-trials, but smaller trials published before the mega-trials gave more favorable results than mega-trials. These findings suggest that mega-trials need to be performed more often given the relative low number of mega-trials found, their low significant rates, and the fact that smaller trials published prior to mega-trial report more beneficial results than mega-trials and subsequent smaller trials.

Antiplatelet agent for the prevention of late hepatic vascular complications in living donor-dominant liver transplant population

BACKGROUND

Evidence for the long-term use of antiplatelet drugs to prevent hepatic vascular complications (HVC) is scarce in liver transplantation (LT).

METHODS

From national claim data, LT recipients (about 80 % of living donor LT [LDLT]) without graft loss, HVC, or cardiovascular events within 1 year, were classified into those who took antiplatelets for ≥1 year (n = 1744) and for <1 year (n = 1975). Outcomes were compared after the 1-postoperative year index time point.

RESULTS

During a mean follow up of 4.5 years, the risk of graft loss was similar between the groups (aHR 1.16, P = 0.23). However, ≥1-year antiplatelet therapy was associated with a higher risk of graft loss after 3 years (aHR 2.19, P < 0.01). HVC (aHR 0.94, P = 0.87) and major adverse cardiac events (aHR 1.20, P = 0.46) did not correlate with antiplatelet therapy for both groups. In contrast, ≥1-year antiplatelet therapy showed a significantly higher risk of severe bleeding compared to <1-year antiplatelet therapy (aHR 2.24, P < 0.01). This trend was similar in the LDLT subgroup. In our cohort, antiplatelet therapy for ≥1 year did not improve graft survival or HVC; however, it increased the risk of severe bleeding.

CONCLUSION

We recommend against antiplatelet therapy for more than 1 year in clinically stable LT recipients.

Efficacy of Aspirin for primary prevention among adults with high-risk type 2 diabetes in the ACCORD trial

AIM

To assess the efficacy of aspirin use for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) with incident atherosclerotic CVD and mortality in high-risk type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

In this post hoc analysis, we included participants in the ACCORD trial without CVD at baseline. The association between aspirin use and the primary outcome (a composite of nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke or cardiovascular [CV] death) and all-cause mortality was evaluated using Cox proportional hazard analysis adjusting for demographics, CV risk factors and comorbidities.

RESULTS

Eligible participants (n = 6330) were aged 62.8 ± 5.9 years at baseline, 43.8% of the participants were female, and 3026 (47.8%) used aspirin. Over a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 4.9 (4.1-5.7) years, the number (%) of primary outcome and all-cause mortality events in those who used aspirin (vs. those who did not), was 196 (6.5) versus 229 (6.9) and 146 (4.8) versus 147 (4.5), respectively. The adjusted hazard ratios (95% confidence interval) associated with aspirin use for the primary outcome and all-cause mortality were 0.94 (0.77-1.14) and 1.08 (0.85-1.36), respectively.

CONCLUSION

In high-risk individuals with type 2 diabetes, the use of aspirin for primary prevention was not associated with a decreased risk of incident CVD or all-cause mortality.

Aspirin Dosing for Secondary Prevention of Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease in Male and Female Patients: A Secondary Analysis of the ADAPTABLE Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) remains the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the US. Although aspirin is recommended for secondary prevention of ASCVD, there was no difference in safety and effectiveness of aspirin dosed daily at 81 mg or 325 mg in the ADAPTABLE (Aspirin Dosing: A Patient-Centric Trial Assessing Benefits and Long-Term Effectiveness) randomized clinical trial. However, it is unknown whether differences by sex exist in the safety and effectiveness of the different aspirin doses.

Objective

To evaluate sex-specific differences in the safety and effectiveness of 2 aspirin doses in the ADAPTAPLE trial.

Design, Setting, and Participants

The ADAPTABLE study was an open-label, pragmatic, randomized clinical trial that randomly assigned participants with chronic, stable ASCVD to 81 mg vs 325 mg of aspirin daily. Using Cox proportional-hazard models, male and female participants were compared for outcomes. In addition, it was assessed whether sex was an effect modifier in the association between aspirin dose and outcomes. The ADAPTABLE trial was conducted at 40 medical centers and 1 health plan. Eligible patients were 18 years and older and had established ASCVD. Study data were analyzed from December 2021 to March 2024.

Interventions

Patients received 81 mg or 325 mg of aspirin daily for the secondary prevention of ASCVD.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary effectiveness outcomes included all-cause death and hospitalization for myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke. The primary safety outcome was hospitalization for major bleeding requiring transfusion.

Results

A total of 15 076 patients (median [IQR] age, 67.6 [60.7-73.6] years; 10 352 male [68.7%]) were followed up for a median (IQR) of 26.2 (19.0-34.9) months. Overall, 4724 (31.3%) were female, and 2307 of the female participants (48.8%) received aspirin 81 mg. Compared with males, female participants were younger (median [IQR] age, 66.3 [59.4-72.6] years vs 68.2 (61.4-73.9) years, less likely to self-report White race (3426 [72.5%] vs 8564 [82.7%]), more likely to smoke (564 [12.9%] vs 818 [8.4%]), and more likely to have a history of peripheral arterial disease (1179 [25.7%] vs 2314 [23.0%]). The primary effectiveness outcome of all-cause death and hospitalization for MI or stroke occurred in 379 female participants (8.1%) and 780 male participants (7.1%). There was no significant interaction by sex for the primary effectiveness end point between the 2 aspirin doses (female adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.01; 95% CI, 0.82-1.26 and male aHR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.91-1.23; P interaction term for sex = .74). During the trial, female participants had fewer revascularization procedures (237 [5.0%] vs 680 [6.6%]; aHR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.68-0.92; P = .002) but had a higher risk of hospitalization for stroke (aHR, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.27-2.33; P < .001). Among female participants, there was a slightly higher rate of bleeding in the 81-mg aspirin cohort compared with the 325-mg cohort (20 [0.83%] vs 13 [0.52%]; aHR, 2.21; 95% CI, 1.04-4.70; P interaction term for sex = .07). There were no significant differences between female and male participants regarding aspirin dose adherence.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this secondary analysis of the ADAPTABLE trial, there were no significant sex-specific differences in the effectiveness and safety of 2 aspirin doses for secondary prevention of ASCVD events.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02697916.

Design, recruitment and baseline characteristics of the LENS trial

BACKGROUND

Findings from cardiovascular outcome trials suggest that treatment with fenofibrate may reduce the progression of diabetic retinopathy. However, no dedicated large-scale randomised trials have yet investigated this hypothesis.

METHODS

LENS is a streamlined randomised double-masked placebo-controlled trial, based in Scotland, assessing whether treatment with fenofibrate (145 mg tablet daily or, in the context of impaired renal function, on alternate days) in people with early retinopathy reduces progression to referable diabetic retinopathy (defined in NHS Scotland's Diabetic Eye Screening grading scheme as referable background or proliferative retinopathy, or referable maculopathy in either eye) or treatment with retinal laser, intravitreal injections or vitrectomy. Adults with diabetes mellitus and non-referable retinopathy (mild background retinopathy in both eyes or observable background retinopathy in one/both eyes at the most recent NHS retinal screening assessment; or observable maculopathy in one/both eyes in the previous 3 years) were eligible. Potential participants were identified from routinely collected healthcare data and followed up using regular contact from the research team and linkage to national electronic morbidity, mortality, biochemistry and retinal screening records. Study treatment was mailed to participants.

RESULTS

Between 18 September 2018 and 27 July 2021, 1151 participants were randomised. Their mean age was 61 (SD 12) years, 312 (27%) were female and 305 (26%) had type 1 diabetes. 96% had bilateral mild background retinopathy and 10% had observable maculopathy.

CONCLUSIONS

LENS will provide a robust evaluation of the efficacy of treating people at risk of progression of diabetic retinopathy with fenofibrate. Results are anticipated in mid-2024.

TRIAL REGISTRATIONS

NCT03439345; ISRCTN15073006; EuDRACT 2016-002656-24.

The role of aspirin in the prevention of pancreatic cancer: A nested case-control study in the UK Biobank

BACKGROUND

Aspirin and other non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) usage has been associated with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) prevention, though epidemiological data have not reliably demonstrated this. The aim of this study is to identify if aspirin and other NSAIDs are effective in the primary prevention of PDAC in a large UK prospective cohort.

METHODS

A nested case-control study was conducted using the UK Biobank cohort. Incident PDAC cases (n = 1129 of whom 239 (21.2 %) were using aspirin) were age and sex-matched with cancer-free controls (n = 8822 of whom 1752 (19.9 %) were using aspirin). Conditional logistic regression models were used to generate odds ratios (ORs) and 95 % confidence intervals (CI) for risk of PDAC with and without regular use of aspirin, non-aspirin NSAIDs and all NSAIDs respectively. Exploratory analyses were carried out assessing interactions with diabetes mellitus (DM) as a condition with increased pancreatic cancer risk.

RESULTS

Regular aspirin use at initial recruitment was independently associated with a decreased risk of PDAC (OR [95 % CI] = 0.80 [0.68-0.95] P = 0.01). Regular non-aspirin NSAID use was not associated with a risk reduction of PDAC (OR [95 % CI] = 1.01 [0.84-1.23] P = 0.88). Exploratory analyses showed that in those with DM; regular aspirin use reduced risk of PDAC (OR [95 % CI] = 0.60 [0.42-0.85] P = 0.004) compared to non-use.

DISCUSSION

Regular aspirin use is associated with a reduction in risk of PDAC. The reduced risk is more apparent in participants with DM.

Pharmacodynamic Comparison of Two Aspirin Formulations in the Caribbean: The ARC Study

INTRODUCTION

This prospective, single-arm, crossover pharmacodynamic study assessed the effect of Bayer® low-dose enteric-coated aspirin 81 mg tablets (LD EC-ASA) (Bayer AG, Leverkusen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany) compared to Vazalore® low-dose phospholipid-aspirin liquid-filled 81 mg capsules (LD PL-ASA) (PLx Pharma Inc., Sparta, NJ, USA) on platelet reactivity with respect to aspirin reaction units (ARU).

METHODS

Forty-seven healthy volunteers were recruited. Platelet function was evaluated with the VerifyNow™ ARU assay (Werfen, Bedford, MA, USA) and assessed post-initiation of Bayer® LD EC-ASA daily for 14 days, with a washout period of 28 days, followed by Vazalore® LD PL-ASA daily for 14 days, again followed by ARU testing.

RESULTS

Participants on LD EC-ASA had a mean ARU score of 426, with 19.1% of participants having an ARU > 550; patients on LD PL-ASA derived a mean ARU score of 435, with 14.9% achieving an ARU > 550. There were no significant differences in aspirin resistance (ARU > 550) according to the formulation (Bayer® LD EC-ASA vs. Vazalore® LD PL-ASA) used. Aspirin resistance was independent of ethnicity regardless of the formulation used. In addition, there were no significant associations between body surface area (BSA) and Bayer® LD EC-ASA ARU value (p value 0.788) or Vazalore® LD PL-ASA ARU value (p value 0.477). No patients experienced any serious adverse events or treatment-emergent adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

There were no significant differences in aspirin resistance between Bayer® LD EC-ASA and Vazalore® LD PL-ASA. This dedicated pharmacodynamic study could potentially be informative and applicable for Trinidadian patients on dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). Further studies are required to confirm these exploratory findings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT06228820, prospectively registered 1/18/2024.

Rationale and Design of SCOT-HEART 2 Trial: CT Angiography for the Prevention of Myocardial Infarction

Coronary artery disease continues to be the leading cause of death globally. Identifying patients who are at risk of coronary artery disease remains a public health priority. At present, the focus of cardiovascular disease prevention relies heavily on probabilistic risk scoring despite no randomized controlled trials demonstrating their efficacy. The concept of using imaging to guide preventative therapy is not new, but has previously focused on indirect measures such as carotid intima-media thickening or coronary artery calcification. In recent trials, patients found to have coronary artery disease on computed tomography (CT) coronary angiography were more likely to be started on preventative therapy and had lower rates of cardiac events. This led to the design of the SCOT-HEART 2 (Scottish Computed Tomography of the Heart 2) trial, which aims to determine whether screening with the use of CT coronary angiography is more clinically effective than cardiovascular risk scoring to guide the use of primary preventative therapies and reduce the risk of myocardial infarction.

Thrombotic events associated with immune checkpoint inhibitors and novel antithrombotic strategies to mitigate bleeding risk

Although immunotherapy is expanding treatment options for cancer patients, the prognosis of advanced cancer remains poor, and these patients must contend with both cancers and cancer-related thrombotic events. In particular, immune checkpoint inhibitors are associated with an increased risk of atherosclerotic thrombotic events. Given the fundamental role of platelets in atherothrombosis, co-administration of antiplatelet agents is always indicated. Platelets are also involved in all steps of cancer progression. Classical antithrombotic drugs can cause inevitable hemorrhagic side effects due to blocking integrin β3 bidirectional signaling, which regulates simultaneously thrombosis and hemostasis. Meanwhile, many promising new targets are emerging with minimal bleeding risk and desirable anti-tumor effects. This review will focus on the issue of thrombosis during immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment and the role of platelet activation in cancer progression as well as explore the mechanisms by which novel antiplatelet therapies may exert both antithrombotic and antitumor effects without excessive bleeding risk.

Geriatric Pharmacotherapy Case Series: Clotting and Gender-Affirming Care

Background A transfeminine patient is a 79-year-old with past medical history significant for type 2 diabetes mellitus, hypertension, gender dysphoria, chronic kidney disease, dyslipidemia, total left hip replacement, and recent provoked deep venous thromboembolism (DVT). She was seen by a pharmacist in a primary care clinic after her discharge from a skilled nursing facility. The patient was experiencing symptoms of gender dysphoria after discontinuation of her estradiol in setting of her DVT. Assessment Her renal function was calculated to ensure she was on appropriate dosing of her medications. Because her DVT was provoked, providers determined she would require only 3 months of anticoagulation. Her laboratory test results showed a subtherapeutic estradiol level and her estradiol was restarted. Additionally, aspirin was being prescribed for primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and was discontinued. Outcome She has significant improvement in her gender dysphoria symptoms with resuming her estradiol and now has a therapeutic estradiol level. She is tolerating her direct oral coagulant well and reports good quality of life. Conclusion When reviewing medications for patients it is important to take several factors into account, including dose, appropriate indication, and patient preference. Pharmacists play a key role, through collaboration with providers, in assessing these medication-specific factors. Estradiol was stopped in this patient because of her DVT, but given her DVT was provoked after a recent surgery, it was unlikely that estradiol was the cause of her clot. Weighing the risks and benefits for any patient is important when determining what medications are appropriate to continue. Additionally, calculating renal function appropriately in a gender-non-conforming patients ensures appropriate and safe dosing.

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.

Association of inflammatory markers with incident heart failure or cancer in the HUNT3 and Health ABC population studies

AIMS

To investigate the relationship between chronic low-grade inflammation, as measured by high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) levels, and incident heart failure (HF) or cancer.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We assessed the relationship between baseline hsCRP concentrations and subsequent HF or cancer in two community-based cohorts, the Trøndelag Health Study (HUNT3) and the Health, Aging and Body Composition (ABC) study. In the latter, the analysis was replicated with interleukin (IL)-1, IL-6, or tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-α instead of hsCRP. In HUNT3, hsCRP was measured in 47 163 subjects (mean age 52.3 ± 15.8 years). During a median follow-up of 12.1 years, 2034 (4.3%) individuals developed HF and 5024 (10.7%) cancer, with 442 (0.9%) being diagnosed with both. After adjusting for age, male sex, diabetes, obesity, previous or current smoking, and comorbidities, elevated baseline hsCRP was associated with a higher risk of HF or cancer [hazard ratio (HR) 1.09; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.07-1.10]. In the Health ABC study, hsCRP levels were assessed in 2803 participants, who had a mean age of 72.6 ± 2.9 years and a higher burden of comorbidities than in HUNT3. During a median follow-up of 8.2 years, HF and cancer were diagnosed in 346 (12.3%) and 776 (27.7%) subjects, respectively, with 77 (2.7%) having both conditions. After adjusting for the same variables used for the HUNT3 cohort, hsCRP remained significantly associated with incident HF or cancer (HR 1.11; 95% CI, 1.05-1.18), as were IL-1 (HR 1.15; 1.07-1.24), IL-6 (HR 1.09; 1.02-1.17), and TNF-α (HR 1.15; 1.07-1.24).

CONCLUSION

A state of chronic, low-grade inflammation captured by an increase in hsCRP levels is associated with an increased risk of developing HF or cancer, with potential implications for clinical trials with anti-inflammatory therapies.

Aspirin: latest evidence and developments

Aspirin is a foundation drug of the pharmaceutical industry originally derived as an analgesic/anti-inflammatory agent but serendipitously discovered to have use as a prophylactic drug for major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Its modern-day utility in this latter role relies on its efficacy/safety balance in a contemporary population where, at least in high-income countries, age-standardised incident rates for MACE are falling, and where there are now competing therapeutic agents. Its future may be determined by its potential role as a chemoprophylactic or adjunct agent for cancer or other disease states. It therefore will continue to be the subject of further clinical research.

Preventing diabetes complications

The key aim of diabetes management is to prevent complications, which are a major cause of morbidity and mortality. At an individual level, people with diabetes are less likely than they were several decades ago to experience classical macrovascular and microvascular complications as a result of improvements in modifiable cardiovascular risk factors and preventive healthcare. However, a significant burden of diabetes complications persists at a population level because of the increasing incidence of diabetes, as well as longer lifetime exposure to diabetes because of younger diagnosis and increased life expectancy. Trials have shown that the most effective strategy for preventing complications of diabetes is a multifactorial approach focussing simultaneously on the management of diet, exercise, glucose levels, blood pressure and lipids. In addition to the cornerstone strategies of addressing diet, exercise and lifestyle measures, the introduction of newer glucose-lowering agents, including sodium-glucose transport protein 2 inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 agonists, have brought about a paradigm shift in preventing the onset and progression of complications of type 2 diabetes, particularly cardiovascular and renal disease. The improvement in rates of classical complications of diabetes over time has been accompanied by a growing awareness of non-traditional complications, including non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. These emerging complications may not respond to a glycaemic-centred approach alone and highlight the importance of foundational strategies centred on lifestyle measures and supported by pharmaceutical therapy to achieve weight loss and reduce metabolic risk in patients living with diabetes.

Aspirin in Primary Prevention: Looking for Those Who Enjoy It

Based on a wealth of evidence, aspirin is one of the cornerstones of secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease. However, despite several studies showing efficacy also in primary prevention, an unopposed excess risk of bleeding leading to a very thin safety margin is evident in subjects without a clear acute cardiovascular event. Overall, the variability in recommendations from different scientific societies for aspirin use in primary prevention is a classic example of failure of simple risk stratification models based on competing risks (atherothrombosis vs. bleeding), perceived to be opposed but intertwined at the pathophysiological level. Notably, cardiovascular risk is dynamic in nature and cannot be accurately captured by scores, which do not always consider risk enhancers. Furthermore, the widespread use of other potent medications in primary prevention, such as lipid-lowering and anti-hypertensive drugs, might be reducing the benefit of aspirin in recent trials. Some authors, drawing from specific pathophysiological data, have suggested that specific subgroups might benefit more from aspirin. This includes patients with diabetes and those with obesity; sex-based differences are considered as well. Moreover, molecular analysis of platelet reactivity has been proposed. A beneficial effect of aspirin has also been demonstrated for the prevention of cancer, especially colorectal. This review explores evidence and controversies concerning the use of aspirin in primary prevention, considering new perspectives in order to provide a comprehensive individualized approach.

Evaluating Aspirin's Efficacy for Primary Prevention in Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Disease: Insights from a Nationwide Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of aspirin for the primary prevention of cerebro-cardiovascular diseases in Koreans remains unclear. Therefore, we evaluated the preventive effects of low-dose aspirin (equal or less than 100 mg) on cerebro-cardiovascular events.

METHOD

We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the National Sample Cohort dataset. From the 1,106,580 individuals eligible in 2004, we selected 200 individuals (47% male and 22.5% aged 65 or older) who consistently received low-dose aspirin from 2004 to 2013 for inclusion in the aspirin cohort. Participants for the control cohort, who did not use aspirin, were selected through propensity score matching based on variables.

RESULT

We compared the incidences of endpoints (acute myocardial infarction, cerebral infarction, gastrointestinal hemorrhage, and cerebral hemorrhage) between the aspirin group and the non-aspirin group over the 9-year follow-up period. There was no significant difference in the incidence rates of acute myocardial infarction, cerebral infarction, gastrointestinal hemorrhage, or cerebral hemorrhage between the aspirin and non-aspirin groups. Low-dose aspirin for primary prevention in Koreans did not reduce myocardial or cerebral infarctions and did not increase the risk of gastrointestinal or cerebral hemorrhage.

CONCLUSION

Therefore, we suggest that aspirin for primary prevention should be used cautiously and tailored to the individual's baseline cardiovascular risk.

Low-dose aspirin for the prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease

During the past 30 years, several developments have occurred in the antiplatelet field, including the role of aspirin in primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. There have been several attempts to develop antiplatelet drugs more effective and safer than aspirin and a shift in emphasis from efficacy to safety, advocating aspirin-free antiplatelet regimens after percutaneous coronary intervention. Evidence supporting a chemopreventive effect of low-dose aspirin against colorectal (and other digestive tract) cancer has also strengthened. The aim of this article is to revisit the role of aspirin in the prevention of atherothrombosis across the cardiovascular risk continuum, in view of developments in the antiplatelet field. The review will offer a clinical perspective on aspirin's mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics. This will be followed by a detailed discussion of its clinical efficacy and safety.

The Janus of a disease: Diabetes and metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease

Metabolic Dysfunction-Associated Fatty Liver Disease and Diabetes Mellitus are two prevalent metabolic disorders that often coexist and synergistically contribute to the progression of each other. Several pathophysiological pathways are involved in the association, including insulin resistance, inflammation, and lipotoxicity, providing a foundation for understanding the complex interrelationships between these conditions. The presence of MASLD has a significant impact on diabetes risk and the development of microvascular and macrovascular complications, and diabetes significantly contributes to an increased risk of liver fibrosis progression in MASLD and the development of hepatocellular carcinoma. Moreover, both pathologies have a synergistic effect on cardiovascular events and mortality. Therapeutic interventions targeting MASLD and diabetes are discussed, considering lifestyle modifications, pharmacological agents, and emerging treatment modalities. The review also addresses the challenges in managing these comorbidities, such as the need for personalized approaches and the potential impact on cardiovascular health. The insights gleaned from this analysis can inform clinicians, researchers, and policymakers in developing integrated strategies for preventing, diagnosing, and managing these metabolic disorders.

The pharmacology of antiplatelet agents for primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention of ischemic stroke

INTRODUCTION

Ischemic etiology accounts for two thirds of all strokes in which platelet activation and aggregation play a major role. A variety of antiplatelet therapies have been tested for primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention, with certain patient subtypes benefiting more than others from a specific regimen.

AREAS COVERED

This review aims at synthetizing current evidence on pharmacology of antiplatelet agents approved for primary, secondary, and tertiary stroke prevention and their application among possible patient subtypes that may benefit more from their administration.

EXPERT OPINION

Management of ischemic stroke has largely evolved over the past decades. A better understanding of stroke pathophysiology has allowed to identify patients who can benefit most from antiplatelet therapies, with varying degrees of benefit depending on whether these agents are being used for primary, secondary, or tertiary prevention. Importantly, the antiplatelet treatment regimens currently available have expanded and no longer limited to aspirin but include other drugs such as P2Y12 and phosphodiesterase inhibitors, also used in combination, as well as precision medicine approaches using genetic testing aiming at optimizing the safety and efficacy in this population.

Pemafibrate and other triglyceride-lowering therapies to reduce risk of cardiovascular and metabolic disease

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Although high triglycerides are consistently associated with elevated risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD), therapies that reduce triglyceride levels have inconsistently translated into reduced CVD risk.

RECENT FINDINGS

To date, three clinical trials have tested triglyceride-lowering therapies in patients with hypertriglyceridemia (HTG) and elevated risk of incident/recurrent CVD. In REDUCE-IT (Reduction of Cardiovascular Events with Icosapent Ethyl-Intervention Trial), assignment to IPE, a highly purified eicosapentanoic acid (EPA), resulted in a 25% reduction in nonfatal myocardial infarction), nonfatal stroke, cardiovascular death, coronary revascularization and hospitalization for unstable angina. By contrast, the combination of EPA and docosahexanoic acid (DHA) carboxylic fatty acids used in the STRENGTH trial (Statin Residual Risk With Epanova in High Cardiovascular Risk Patients With Hypertriglyceridemia) failed to reduce CVD risk. Most recently, PROMINENT (Pemafibrate to Reduce Cardiovascular Outcomes by Reducing Triglycerides in Patients with Diabetes) also failed to demonstrate reduction in CVD events despite use of a potent triglyceride-lowering, fibric-acid derivative. However, improvement in HTG-associated metabolic complications (e.g. nonalcoholic fatty liver disease) was observed with pemafibrate as well as with another potent triglyceride-lowering therapy (i.e. pegozafermin). Moreover, trials are underway evaluating whether the most fatal metabolic complication of HTG, pancreatitis, may be reduced with highly potent triglyceride-lowering therapies (e.g. apolipoprotein C3 inhibitors).

SUMMARY

Taken together, HTG is associated with increased risk of CVD and attendant adverse metabolic sequalae. To this end, a potentially promising and evidence-based landscape is emerging for treating a clinical phenotype that in the past has been insufficiently addressed.

ASCEND-Eye: Effects of Aspirin on Diabetic Retinopathy

PURPOSE

Preclinical studies support a protective role for aspirin in early diabetic retinopathy (DR), but the findings from randomized trials are limited. We present randomized evidence for the efficacy and safety of aspirin on DR outcomes.

DESIGN

A substudy of the A Study of Cardiovascular Events in Diabetes (ASCEND) double-masked, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of 100 mg aspirin daily for the primary prevention of serious cardiovascular events in people with diabetes.

PARTICIPANTS

Fifteen thousand four hundred eighty United Kingdom adults at least 40 years of age with diabetes.

METHODS

Linkage to electronic National Health Service Diabetic Eye Screening Programme records in England and Wales and confirmation of participant-reported eye events via medical record review were carried out. Log-rank methods were used for intention-to-treat analyses of time until the first primary efficacy and safety outcomes.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary efficacy end point was the first record of referable disease after randomization, a composite of referable retinopathy or referable maculopathy based on the grading criteria defined by the United Kingdom National Screening Committee. The primary safety outcome was the first sight-threatening eye bleed, defined as clinically significant bleeding in the eye that resulted in unresolved visual loss or required an urgent intervention such as laser photocoagulation, vitreoretinal surgery, intraocular injection, or a combination thereof.

RESULTS

Linkage data were obtained for 7360 participants (48% of those randomized in ASCEND). During the mean follow-up of 6.5 years, 539 participants (14.6%) experienced a referable disease event in the aspirin group, compared with 522 participants (14.2%) in the placebo group (rate ratio, 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.91-1.16; P = 0.64). No statistically significant between-group difference was found in the proportions of sight-threatening eye bleed events (57 participants [0.7%] and 64 participants [0.8%], respectively; rate ratio, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.62-1.27).

DISCUSSION

These data exclude any clinically meaningful benefits of aspirin for DR, but give reassurance regarding the ophthalmologic safety of aspirin.

FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S)

Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.

Pharmacotherapy for Coronary Artery Disease and Acute Coronary Syndrome in the Aging Population

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide a comprehensive summary of relevant studies and evidence concerning the utilization of different pharmacotherapeutic and revascularization strategies in managing coronary artery disease and acute coronary syndrome specifically in the older adult population.

RECENT FINDINGS

Approximately 30% to 40% of hospitalized patients with acute coronary syndrome are older adults, among whom the majority of cardiovascular-related deaths occur. When compared to younger patients, these individuals generally experience inferior clinical outcomes. Most clinical trials assessing the efficacy and safety of various therapeutics have primarily enrolled patients under the age of 75, in addition to excluding those with geriatric complexities. In this review, we emphasize the need for a personalized and comprehensive approach to pharmacotherapy for coronary heart disease and acute coronary syndrome in older adults, considering concomitant geriatric syndromes and age-related factors to optimize treatment outcomes while minimizing potential risks and complications. In the realm of clinical practice, cardiovascular and geriatric risks are closely intertwined, with both being significant factors in determining treatments aimed at reducing negative outcomes and attaining health conditions most valued by older adults.

Low-Dose Aspirin and Prevention of Colorectal Cancer: Evidence From a Nationwide Registry-Based Cohort in Norway

INTRODUCTION

To examine the association between low-dose aspirin use and risk of colorectal cancer (CRC).

METHODS

In this nationwide cohort study, we identified individuals aged 50 years or older residing for 6 months or more in Norway in 2004-2018 and obtained data from national registers on drug prescriptions, cancer occurrence, and sociodemographic factors. Multivariable Cox regression models were used to estimate the association between low-dose aspirin use and CRC risk. In addition, we calculated the number of CRC potentially averted by low-dose aspirin use.

RESULTS

We included 2,186,390 individuals. During the median follow-up of 10.9 years, 579,196 (26.5%) used low-dose aspirin, and 38,577 (1.8%) were diagnosed with CRC. Current use of aspirin vs never use was associated with lower CRC risk (hazard ratio [HR] 0.87, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84-0.90). The association was more pronounced for metastatic CRC (HR 0.79; 95% CI 0.74-0.84) than regionally advanced (HR 0.89; 95% CI 0.85-0.92) and localized CRC (HR 0.93; 95% CI 0.87-1.00; P heterogeneity = 0.001). A significant trend was found between duration of current use and CRC risk: HR 0.91 (95% CI 0.86-0.95) for <3 years, HR 0.85 (0.80-0.91) for ≥3 and <5 years, and HR 0.84 (0.80-0.88) for ≥5 years of use vs never use ( P trend < 0.001). For past use, HR were 0.89 (95% CI 0.84-0.94) for <3 years, 0.90 (0.83-0.99) for ≥3 and <5 years, and 0.98 (0.91-1.06) for ≥5 years since last use vs never use ( P -trend < 0.001). We estimated that aspirin use averted 1,073 cases of CRC (95% CI 818-1,338) in the study period.

DISCUSSION

In this nationwide cohort, use of low-dose aspirin was associated with a lower risk of CRC.

Carotid Ultrasound-Based Plaque Score for the Allocation of Aspirin for the Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease Events: The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis and the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Study

BACKGROUND

Coronary artery calcium testing using noncontrast cardiac computed tomography is a guideline-indicated test to help refine eligibility for aspirin in primary prevention. However, access to cardiac computed tomography remains limited, with carotid ultrasound used much more often internationally. We sought to update the role of aspirin allocation in primary prevention as a function of subclinical carotid atherosclerosis.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The study included 11 379 participants from the MESA (Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis) and ARIC (Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities) studies. A harmonized carotid plaque score (range, 0-6) was derived using the number of anatomic sites with plaque from the left and right common, bifurcation, and internal carotid artery on ultrasound. The 5-year number needed to treat and number needed to harm as a function of the carotid plaque score were calculated by applying a 12% relative risk reduction in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) events and 42% relative increase in major bleeding events related to aspirin use, respectively. The mean age was 57 years, 57% were women, 23% were Black, and the median 10-year ASCVD risk was 12.8%. The 5-year incidence rates (per 1000 person-years) were 5.5 (4.9-6.2) for ASCVD and 1.8 (1.5-2.2) for major bleeding events. The overall 5-year number needed to treat with aspirin was 306 but was 2-fold lower for individuals with carotid plaque versus those without carotid plaque (212 versus 448). The 5-year number needed to treat was less than the 5-year number needed to harm when the carotid plaque score was ≥2 for individuals with ASCVD risk 5% to 20%, whereas the presence of any carotid plaque demarcated a favorable risk-benefit for individuals with ASCVD risk >20%.

CONCLUSIONS

Quantification of subclinical carotid atherosclerosis can help improve the allocation of aspirin therapy.

When cardiovascular medicines should be discontinued

An integral component of the practice of medicine is focused on the initiation of medications, based on clinical practice guidelines and underlying trial evidence, which usually test the addition of novel medications intended for life-long use in short-term clinical trials. Much less attention is given to the question of medication discontinuation, especially after a lengthy period of treatment, during which patients age gets older and diseases may either progress or new diseases may emerge. Given the paucity of data, clinical practice guidelines offer little to no guidance on when and how to deprescribe cardiovascular medications. Such decisions are often left to the discretion of clinicians, who, together with their patients, express concern of potential adverse effects of medication discontinuation. Even in the absence of adverse effects, the continuation of medications without any proven effect may cause harm due to drug-drug interactions, the emergence of polypharmacy, and additional preventable spending to already strained health systems. Herein, several cardiovascular medications or medication classes are discussed that in the opinion of this author group should generally be discontinued, either for the prevention of potential harm, for a lack of benefit, or for the availability of better alternatives.

Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Aspirin for Primary Cardiovascular Prevention in Asian Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: A Population-Based and Propensity Score-Matched Study

The risk of developing cardiovascular disease is significantly higher for individuals with diabetes compared to those without. Aspirin has been widely used for primary prevention in diabetic patients. However, evidence is limited in the Asian population. We aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of aspirin versus placebo for primary cardiovascular prevention in the Asian population with type 2 diabetes. In this study, we performed propensity score matching with non-aspirin users from January 2006 to December 2015 (n = 37,095 in each group after matching, PSM). We analyzed the incidence risk of all-cause mortality, composite cardiovascular events, and hospitalized major bleeding. The propensity score-matched (PSM) cohort of patients who received aspirin within one year of diabetes diagnosis was compared with the non-aspirin diabetic (DM) cohort. Baseline characteristics were balanced between the two groups. The median follow-up duration was 78 months. Aspirin users exhibited a slightly but significantly lower rate of all-cause mortality (HR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.87 to 0.96). However, they also had a significantly higher composite cardiovascular risk (HR: 1.34; 95% CI: 1.28-1.40), including non-fatal acute myocardial infarction (HR: 1.33; 95% CI: 1.18 to 1.50), non-fatal ischemic stroke (HR: 1.38; 95% CI: 1.30 to 1.45), heart failure (HR: 1.18; 95% CI: 1.09 to 1.27), and coronary revascularization (HR: 1.94; 95% CI: 1.73 to 2.17). Aspirin users also faced a significantly higher risk of hospitalized major bleeding (HR: 1.08; 95% CI: 1.03 to 1.14). The presence of one or more additional risk factors did not influence the effectiveness and safety outcomes of aspirin, according to stratified analysis. In conclusion, in this real-world Asian diabetic population, aspirin was associated with a significantly lower mortality risk but also with higher risks of cardiovascular events and hospitalized bleeding. Aspirin may not play a role in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in such patients, regardless of additional risk factors.

Pharmacist-Led Deprescribing of Aspirin in Older People in an Outpatient Setting

Background In 2019, the American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association updated their joint guidelines stating low-dose aspirin should not be used on a routine basis for primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) among people older than 70 years of age because of increased bleeding risk.1 In addition to these updated guidelines, a statement released by the US Preventive Services Task Force in April 2022 recommends against the initiation of low-dose aspirin for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in people 60 years of age or older.² Despite these updated recommendations, aspirin continues to be a common medication older patients take, providing an opportunity for a clinical pharmacist deprescribing intervention. Objective To identify the role of a pharmacist-led aspirin deprescribing intervention within a safety-net health system in the outpatient setting. Methods This project included patients 70 years of age and older who had aspirin listed as an active medication without documented ASCVD. This project assessed aspirin deprescribing rates, time spent on pharmacist outreach, and reasons for patient and/or provider refusal to discontinue aspirin. Results One hundred thirty-one eligible patients were contacted. Of those, 78 (60%) patients discontinued aspirin after speaking with the pharmacist, and 8 patients discontinued aspirin after a clinical pharmacist recommendation to the patient's primary care provider (PCP). The median time spent on outreach was approximately eight minutes. Of the 6 patients who consented to the project but declined to discontinue aspirin therapy based on pharmacist intervention, 5 preferred to discuss the issue with their PCP, while 1 patient was told by an outside provider to take aspirin. Conclusion Results indicate the successful impact a clinical pharmacist may have in deprescribing aspirin in a high-risk population. These data may also suggest that an active and intentional approach to deprescribing is likely to be more effective than a written recommendation to providers.

Aspirin Use in Older People Highlights the Need for Improved Inclusion of Older People in Clinical Trials

The articles in the June issue serve not only to inform senior care pharmacists on the importance of evidence-based approaches to reduce unnecessary aspirin use, but they also underscore the urgent need for the large and rapid increase in older adult representation in clinical trials and clinical research in general. A striking analysis performed in the United States that examined the trial populations used for Medicare coverage determinations found that while the average age of a Medicare enrollee was 70.8 years old (74.7 years old for older Medicare participants), the average age of the clinical trial population patients used in technology assessments for Medicare coverage determinations was 60.1 years. Hence, the US Medicare system, one of the largest national health care purchasers for older patients in the world, has relied on non-representative data to inform medical coverage decisions.

Unexplained Residual Risk In Type 2 Diabetes: How Big Is The Problem?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

What is new? Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of mortality in type 2 diabetes (T2D) individuals. Of the major risk factors for CVD, less than 10% of T2D people meet the American Diabetes Association/American Heart Association recommended goals of therapy. The present review examines how much of the absolute cardiovascular (CV) risk in type 2 diabetes patients can be explained by major CV intervention trials.

RECENT FINDINGS

Multiple long-term cardiovascular (CV) intervention trials have examined the effect of specific target-directed therapies on the MACE endpoint. Only one prospective study, STENO-2, has employed a multifactorial intervention comparing intensified versus conventional treatment of modifiable risk factors in T2D patients, and demonstrated a 20% absolute CV risk reduction. If the absolute CV risk reduction in these trials is added to that in the only prospective multifactorial intervention trial (STENO-2), the unexplained CV risk is 44.1%. What are the clinical implications? Potential explanations for the unaccounted-for reduction in absolute CV risk in type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients are discussed.

HYPOTHESIS

failure to take into account synergistic interactions between major cardiovascular risk factors is responsible for the unexplained CV risk in T2D patients. Simultaneous treatment of all major CV risk factors to recommended AHA/ADA guideline goals is required to achieve the maximum reduction in CV risk.

Differential Impact In Vivo of Pf4-ΔCre-Mediated and Gp1ba-ΔCre-Mediated Depletion of Cyclooxygenase-1 in Platelets in Mice

BACKGROUND

Low-dose aspirin is widely used for the secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease. The beneficial effects of low-dose aspirin are attributable to its inhibition of platelet Cox (cyclooxygenase)-1-derived thromboxane A2. Until recently, the use of the Pf4 (platelet factor 4) Cre has been the only genetic approach to generating megakaryocyte/platelet ablation of Cox-1 in mice. However, Pf4-ΔCre displays ectopic expression outside the megakaryocyte/platelet lineage, especially during inflammation. The use of the Gp1ba (glycoprotein 1bα) Cre promises a more specific, targeted approach.

METHODS

To evaluate the role of Cox-1 in platelets, we crossed Pf4-ΔCre or Gp1ba-ΔCre mice with Cox-1flox/flox mice to generate platelet Cox-1-/- mice on normolipidemic and hyperlipidemic (Ldlr-/-; low-density lipoprotein receptor) backgrounds.

RESULTS

Ex vivo platelet aggregation induced by arachidonic acid or adenosine diphosphate in platelet-rich plasma was inhibited to a similar extent in Pf4-ΔCre Cox-1-/-/Ldlr-/- and Gp1ba-ΔCre Cox-1-/-/Ldlr-/- mice. In a mouse model of tail injury, Pf4-ΔCre-mediated and Gp1ba-ΔCre-mediated deletions of Cox-1 were similarly efficient in suppressing platelet prostanoid biosynthesis. Experimental thrombogenesis and attendant blood loss were similar in both models. However, the impact on atherogenesis was divergent, being accelerated in the Pf4-ΔCre mice while restrained in the Gp1ba-ΔCres. In the former, accelerated atherogenesis was associated with greater suppression of PGI2 biosynthesis, a reduction in the lipopolysaccharide-evoked capacity to produce PGE2 (prostaglandin E) and PGD2 (prostanglandin D), activation of the inflammasome, elevated plasma levels of IL-1β (interleukin), reduced plasma levels of HDL-C (high-density lipoprotein receptor-cholesterol), and a reduction in the capacity for reverse cholesterol transport. By contrast, in the latter, plasma HDL-C and α-tocopherol were elevated, and MIP-1α (macrophage inflammatory protein-1α) and MCP-1 (monocyte chemoattractant protein 1) were reduced.

CONCLUSIONS

Both approaches to Cox-1 deletion similarly restrain thrombogenesis, but a differential impact on Cox-1-dependent prostanoid formation by the vasculature may contribute to an inflammatory phenotype and accelerated atherogenesis in Pf4-ΔCre mice.

Needs-based considerations for the role of low-dose aspirin along the CV risk continuum

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains the leading cause of death worldwide. The risk of a cardiovascular (CV) event is not static and increases along a continuum, making identification and management complex. Aspirin has been the cornerstone of antiplatelet therapy in CV risk reduction and remains the only antiplatelet agent with current guideline recommendations throughout the CV risk continuum. In light of recent trials, the role of aspirin in CVD prevention in asymptomatic patients has been downgraded in clinical guidelines. However, a substantial proportion of asymptomatic patients have underlying conditions, such as advanced subclinical atherosclerosis that are associated with high CV risk. Advanced subclinical atherosclerosis has not been extensively investigated in patients in clinical trials but in the absence of significant bleeding risks, patients with subclinical atherosclerosis may particularly benefit from preventive aspirin therapy. Recent studies and clinical guidelines support the need for a personalized treatment approach for these patients, balancing their risk of future CV events against their relative bleeding risk. In this commentary, we first discussed various tools and strategies currently available for assessing CV and bleeding risks; we then provided two hypothetical cases to outline how these tools can be implemented for optimal management of patients with no prior CV events who, nonetheless, are susceptible to CVD. The first case details a young and apparently healthy patient with underlying advanced subclinical atherosclerosis; whereas the second case describes a patient with recently diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus who is at higher risk of CVD than their non-diabetic counterparts. For both cases, we considered patient clinical characteristics, CV and bleeding risks, as well as other risk factors to evaluate the appropriate treatment strategy and determine whether patients would obtain a net clinical benefit from low-dose aspirin therapy. These cases can serve as examples to guide clinical decision-making on the use of low-dose aspirin for primary CVD prevention and improve CVD management via a personalized approach.

Type 2 Diabetes

Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is a prevalent disease that increases risk for vascular, renal, and neurologic complications. Prevention and treatment of T2D and its complications are paramount. Many advancements in T2D care have emerged over the past 5 years, including increased understanding of the importance of early intensive glycemic control, mental health, social determinants of health, healthy eating patterns, continuous glucose monitoring, and the benefits of some drugs for preventing cardiorenal disease. This review summarizes the evidence supporting T2D prevention and treatment, focusing on aspects that are commonly in the purview of primary care physicians.

US population qualifying for aspirin use for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease

Objective

Aspirin has been used for primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) for decades, but this indication has become controversial with recent trial data. The 2022 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) provided a recommendation to consider aspirin use for primary prevention in adults 40-59 years with a 10-year ASCVD risk ≥10 % and not at increased risk of bleeding, yet population estimates for the impact of this recommendation are unknown. The objective of this study is to determine the prevalence and demographics of the US population who meet eligibility criteria for aspirin under the new 2022 USPSTF guidelines.

Methods

This is a serial cross-sectional study using data from the 2011-March 2020 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) database. Individuals aged 40-59 years without a self-reported history of ASCVD were included. 10-year estimated ASCVD risk ≥10 % as calculated by the Pooled Cohort Equations (PCE) and increased bleeding risk determined using variables adapted from USPSTF guidelines were further applied as inclusion and exclusion criteria, respectively. The weighted frequencies of US adults aged 40-59 years qualifying for primary prevention aspirin, subgrouped by gender, age, and race/ethnicity, were calculated.

Results

Among 72,840,734 US individuals aged 40-59 years, 7.2 million (10 %) are eligible for consideration of primary prevention aspirin by PCE criteria. Of these, approximately 30 % would be potentially excluded based on increased bleeding risks, resulting in a net eligible cohort of 5 million. This represents 7 % of US adults aged 40-59 years and only 2.6 % of adults ≥18 years. Men, age 50-59 years, and Black race have higher proportions meeting aspirin use eligibility.

Conclusions

The overall prevalence of US individuals who qualify for aspirin for primary prevention under the 2022 USPSTF guidelines is modest, with larger proportional eligibility among men, older age, and Black individuals.

Implementation of a Pharmacist-Driven Aspirin Deprescribing Protocol Among Older Veterans in a Primary Care Setting

Background Recent cardiovascular guideline updates recommend against the use of aspirin for primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) in older people. However, aspirin use remains common in this population. Objective To implement and evaluate the benefit of a pharmacist-driven aspirin deprescribing protocol compared with primary care provider (PCP) education-only in a primary care setting. Methods This prospective, cohort project targeted deprescribing for patients prescribed aspirin for primary prevention of ASCVD. Patients were included if they received primary care services at the Milwaukee Veterans Health Administration Medical Center (VHA) and were 70 years of age or older. Criteria for exclusion were aspirin obtained outside the VHA system, aspirin prescribed for a non-ASCVD-related condition, and/or a history of ASCVD. Active deprescribing by pharmacists and PCP education took place in the intervention group with PCP education only in the standard-of-care group. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who had aspirin deprescribed in each group. Secondary outcomes included patient acceptability of the intervention and barriers to implementation. Results A total of 520 patients were prescribed aspirin in the intervention group versus 417 in the education-only group. Sixty-five patients met intervention criteria and were contacted for aspirin deprescribing. The pharmacist-led active deprescribing group led to a higher rate of aspirin deprescriptions versus the education-only group (54% vs 18%; P = 0.0001) for patients who met criteria. Conclusion A pharmacist-led aspirin deprescribing protocol within a primary care setting significantly decreased the number of aspirin prescriptions compared with PCP education only.

LASSO-derived model for the prediction of bleeding in aspirin users

Aspirin is widely used for both primary and secondary prevention of panvascular diseases, such as stroke and coronary heart disease (CHD). The optimal balance between reducing panvascular disease events and the potential increase in bleeding risk remains unclear. This study aimed to develop a predictive model specifically designed to assess bleeding risk in individuals using aspirin. A total of 58,415 individuals treated with aspirin were included in this study. Detailed data regarding patient demographics, clinical characteristics, comorbidities, medical history, and laboratory test results were collected from the Affiliated Dongyang Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University. The patients were randomly divided into two groups at a ratio of 7:3. The larger group was used for model development, while the smaller group was used for internal validation. To develop the prediction model, we employed least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression followed by multivariate logistic regression. The performance of the model was assessed through metrics such as the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC), calibration curves, and decision curve analysis (DCA). The LASSO-derived model employed in this study incorporated six variables, namely, sex, operation, previous bleeding, hemoglobin, platelet count, and cerebral infarction. It demonstrated excellent performance at predicting bleeding risk among aspirin users, with a high AUC of 0.866 (95% CI 0.857-0.874) in the training dataset and 0.861 (95% CI 0.848-0.875) in the test dataset. At a cutoff value of 0.047, the model achieved moderate sensitivity (83.0%) and specificity (73.9%). The calibration curve analysis revealed that the nomogram closely approximated the ideal curve, indicating good calibration. The DCA curve demonstrated a favorable clinical net benefit associated with the nomogram model. Our developed LASSO-derived predictive model has potential as an alternative tool for predicting bleeding in clinical settings.

A Thorough Literature Review of the Potential Benefits and Drawbacks of Long-Term Aspirin Use for the Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease

This article examines the role of aspirin in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease. It highlights findings from major studies such as ASPREE (ASPirin in Reducing Events in the Elderly), ARRIVE (Aspirin to Reduce Risk of Initial Vascular Events), and ASPREE-XT (ASPirin in Reducing Events in the Elderly - eXTension) , among others. The review focuses on aspirin's role in primary prevention for specific populations including older adults, diabetics, hypertension patients, rheumatoid arthritis patients, kidney transplant recipients, and those with specific lipoprotein(a) genotypes, among other groups. We review these studies, noting aspirin's role in reducing events such as myocardial infarctions and its potential for increasing bleeding risks. The review also considers the implications for patients with kidney disease, referencing the Chronic Renal Insufficiency Cohort (CRIC) study and the International Polycap Study-3 (TIPS-3) trial. Additionally, it addresses the shifting paradigms in guidelines from the US Preventive Services Task Force and other entities, underscoring the importance of individualized aspirin use by balancing benefits against bleeding risks. The article further explores the concept of platelet reactivity, discusses strategies for improving adherence to aspirin therapy, and identifies existing research gaps, such as the phenomenon of aspirin resistance. It concludes by suggesting potential areas for future investigation to enhance understanding and application of aspirin in cardiovascular disease prevention.

Exploring the Intersection of Dementia and Myocardial Infarction: Vascular Perspectives

Emerging evidence underscores the relationship between myocardial infarction and dementia, implicating a profound influence on patient health. The bidirectional relationship between myocardial infarction and dementia is highlighted by pathophysiological changes in vasculature function, lifestyle factors, and environmental influences. Our literature review aims to explore the complex relationship between these 2 pathologies and highlight the pathways by which they mutually influence each other.

DARE-ISC model for prediction of 1-year ischaemic stroke risk in the general population and atrial fibrillation patients: a Danish nationwide cohort study

OBJECTIVES

To develop a risk assessment model (DAnish REgister Ischaemic Stroke Classifier, DARE-ISC) for predicting 1-year primary ischaemic stroke/systemic embolism (SE) in the general population. Secondly, to validate the accuracy DARE-ISC in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients where well-established models and risk scores exist.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study. DARE-ISC was developed using gradient boosting decision trees with information from 375 covariates including baseline information on relevant diagnoses, demographic characteristics, registered health-services, lifestyle-related covariates, hereditary stroke components, drug prescriptions and stress proxies.

SETTING

Danish nationwide registries.

PARTICIPANTS

All Danish individuals aged ≥18 from 2010 to 2017 (n=35 519 348 person-years). The model was trained on the 2010-2016 cohorts with validation in the 2017 cohort.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Model optimisation and validation were performed through comparison of the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and average precision scores. Additionally, the relative importance of the model covariates was derived using SHAP values.

RESULTS

DARE-ISC had an AUC (95% CI) of 0.874 (0.871 to 0.876) in the general population. In AF patients, DARE-ISC was superior to the GARFIELD-AF risk model and CHA2DS2-VASc score with AUC of 0.779 (95% CI 0.75 to 0.806), 0.704 (95% CI 0.674 to 0.732) and 0.681 (95% CI 0.652 to 0.709), respectively. Furthermore, in AF patients, DARE-ISC had an average threefold and fourfold higher ratio of correctly identified strokes compared with the GARFIELD-AF risk model and CHA2DS2-VASc score, as indicated by average precision scores of 0.119, 0.041 and 0.034, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

DARE-ISC had a very high stroke prediction accuracy in the general population and was superior to the GARFIELD-AF risk model and CHA2DS2-VASc score for predicting ischaemic stroke/SE in AF patients.

ASCEND-Eye: Effects of Omega-3 Fatty Acids on Diabetic Retinopathy

PURPOSE

Preclinical studies support a protective role for omega-3 fatty acids (FAs) on diabetic retinopathy (DR), but these observations have not been confirmed in randomized trials. We present randomized evidence for the effects of omega-3 FAs on DR outcomes.

DESIGN

A substudy of the A Study of Cardiovascular Events iN Diabetes (ASCEND) double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of 1 g omega-3 fatty acids (containing 460 mg eicosapentaenoic acid and 380 mg docosahexaenoic acid) daily for the primary prevention of serious cardiovascular events, in 15 480 UK adults at least 40 years of age, with diabetes.

PARTICIPANTS

Fifteen thousand four hundred eighty adults at least 40 years of age from the United Kingdom with diabetes from the ASCEND cohort.

METHODS

Linkage to electronic National Health Service Diabetic Eye Screening Programme records in England and Wales and confirmation of participant-reported eye events via medical record review. Log-rank and stratified log-rank methods were used for intention-to-treat analyses of time until the main outcomes of interest.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary efficacy endpoint was time to the first postrandomization recording of referable disease, a composite of referable retinopathy (R2 or R3a/s) or referable maculopathy (M1) based on the grading criteria defined by the United Kingdom National Screening Committee. Secondary and tertiary outcomes included the referable disease outcome stratified by the severity of DR at baseline, any progression in retinopathy grade, and incident diabetic maculopathy.

RESULTS

Linkage data were obtained for 7360 participants (48% of those who were randomized in ASCEND). During their mean follow-up of 6.5 years, 548 participants (14.8%) had a referable disease event in the omega-3 FAs group, compared with 513 participants (13.9%) in the placebo group (rate ratio, 1.07; 95% confidence interval, 0.95-1.20; P = 0.29). There were no statistically significant between-group differences in the proportion of events for either of the secondary or tertiary outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Representing the largest prospective test of its kind to date, these data exclude any clinically meaningful benefits of 1 g daily omega-3 FAs on DR.

FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S)

Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.

SEA 2024 Standards for Global Control of Vascular Risk

One of the objectives of the Spanish Society of Arteriosclerosis is to contribute to the knowledge, prevention and treatment of vascular diseases, which are the leading cause of death in Spain and entail a high degree of disability and health expenditure. Atherosclerosis is a multifactorial disease and its prevention requires a global approach that takes into account the associated risk factors. This document summarises the current evidence and includes recommendations for patients with established vascular disease or at high vascular risk: it reviews the symptoms and signs to evaluate, the laboratory and imaging procedures to request routinely or in special situations, and includes the estimation of vascular risk, diagnostic criteria for entities that are vascular risk factors, and general and specific recommendations for their treatment. Finally, it presents aspects that are not usually referenced in the literature, such as the organisation of a vascular risk consultation.