Cardioprotective aspirin users and their excess risk of upper gastrointestinal complications

The Aging Stomach: Clinical Implications of H. pylori Infection in Older Adults-Challenges and Strategies for Improved Management

Aging is a multifactorial biological process characterized by a decline in physiological function and increasing susceptibility to various diseases, including malignancies and gastrointestinal disorders. Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection is highly prevalent among older adults, particularly those in institutionalized settings, contributing to conditions such as atrophic gastritis, peptic ulcer disease, and gastric carcinoma. This review examines the intricate interplay between aging, gastrointestinal changes, and H. pylori pathogenesis. The age-associated decline in immune function, known as immunosenescence, exacerbates the challenges of managing H. pylori infection. Comorbidities and polypharmacy further increase the risk of adverse outcomes in older adults. Current clinical guidelines inadequately address the specific needs of the geriatric population, who are disproportionately affected by antibiotic resistance, heightened side effects, and diagnostic complexities. This review focuses on recent advancements in understanding H. pylori infection among older adults, including epidemiology, diagnostics, therapeutic strategies, and age-related gastric changes. Diagnostic approaches must consider the physiological changes that accompany aging, and treatment regimens need to be carefully tailored to balance efficacy and tolerability. Emerging strategies, such as novel eradication regimens and adjunctive probiotic therapies, show promise for improving treatment outcomes. However, significant knowledge gaps persist regarding the impact of aging on H. pylori pathogenesis and treatment efficacy. A multidisciplinary approach involving gastroenterologists, geriatricians, and other specialists is crucial to providing comprehensive care for this vulnerable population. Future research should focus on refining diagnostic and therapeutic protocols to bridge these gaps, ultimately enhancing clinical outcomes and reducing the burden of H. pylori-associated diseases in the aging population.

Age and Aspirin Dosing in Secondary Prevention of Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease

BACKGROUND

In patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, increasing age is concurrently associated with higher risks of ischemic and bleeding events. The objectives are to determine the impact of aspirin dose on clinical outcomes according to age in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In the ADAPTABLE (Aspirin Dosing: A Patient-Centric Trial Assessing Benefits and Long-Term Effectiveness) trial, patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease were randomized to daily aspirin doses of 81 mg or 325 mg. The primary effectiveness end point was death from any cause, hospitalization for myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for stroke. The primary safety end point was hospitalization for bleeding requiring transfusion. A total of 15 076 participants were randomized to aspirin 81 mg (n=7540) or 325 mg (n=7536) daily (median follow-up: 26.2 months; interquartile range: 19.0-34.9 months). Median age was 67.6 years (interquartile range: 60.7-73.6 years). Among participants aged <65 years (n=5841 [38.7%]), a primary end point occurred in 226 (7.54%) in the 81 mg group, and in 191 (6.80%) in the 325 mg group (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.23 [95% CI, 1.01-1.49]). Among participants aged ≥65 years (n=9235 [61.3%]), a primary end point occurred in 364 (7.12%) in the 81 mg group, and in 378 (7.96%) in the 325 mg group (adjusted HR, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.82-1.10]). The age-dose interaction was not significant (P=0.559). There was no significant interaction between age and the randomized aspirin dose for the secondary effectiveness and the primary safety bleeding end points (P>0.05 for all).

CONCLUSIONS

Age does not modify the impact of aspirin dosing (81 mg or 325 mg daily) on clinical end points in secondary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.

Focusing on Helicobacter pylori infection in the elderly

As a confirmed carcinogen, Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) is the main cause of inflammatory diseases of the upper digestive tract and even gastric cancer. There is a high prevalence of H. pylori infection among the elderly population, which may cause adverse clinical outcomes. Particularly noteworthy is that guidelines or expert consensus presently available on H. pylori infection overlook the management of the elderly population as a special group. A brief overview of H. pylori in the elderly is as follows. The detection of H. pylori infection can be divided into invasive and non-invasive techniques, and each technique has its advantages and shortcomings. There may be more side effects associated with eradication treatment in elderly individuals, especially for the frail population. Physical conditions and risk-benefit assessments of the elderly should be considered when selecting therapeutic strategies for H. pylori eradication. Unless there are competing factors, elderly patients should receive H. pylori eradication regimens to finally reduce the formation of gastric cancer. In this review, we summarize the latest understanding of H. pylori in the elderly population to provide effective managements and treatment measures.

Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Profile of a Novel Phospholipid Aspirin Formulation

Aspirin is one of the most widely used medicines. Although aspirin is commonly utilized for the treatment of several medical conditions, its broadest uptake is for the prevention of recurrent ischemic events in patients with atherosclerotic disease. Its mechanism of action of inhibiting platelet activation via blockade of thromboxane A2 production is unique and is not covered by any other antiplatelet agents. While plain, uncoated, immediate-release aspirin is used in acute settings to help assure rapid absorption, enteric-coated aspirin formulations dominate current chronic use, particularly in North America, including for secondary prevention of cardiovascular events. The unmet needs with current aspirin formulations include a high risk of gastrointestinal (GI) adverse events with plain aspirin, which enteric-coated formulations are not able to overcome, and subject to erratic absorption leading to reduced drug bioavailability. These observations underscore the need for aspirin formulations with a more favorable safety and efficacy profile. Phospholipid-aspirin complex (PL-ASA) is a novel formulation designed to address these needs. It is associated with reduced local acute GI injury compared with plain aspirin, and predictable absorption resulting in more reliable platelet inhibition compared with enteric-coated tablets. This review explores the rationale and pharmacologic profile of PL-ASA intended to address the unmet needs for aspirin therapy.

Long-term functional outcomes and mortality after hospitalization for extracranial hemorrhage

BACKGROUND

The effects of extracranial hemorrhage (ECH), or bleeding outside the brain, are often considered transient. Yet, there are few data on the long-term and functional consequences of ECH.

OBJECTIVE

Define the association of ECH hospitalization with functional independence and survival in a nationally representative cohort of older adults.

DESIGN

Longitudinal cohort study.

SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS

Data from the Health and Retirement Study from 1995 to 2016, a nationally representative, biennial survey of older adults. Adults aged 66 and above with Medicare linkage and at least 12 months of continuous Medicare Part A and B enrollment.

INTERVENTION

Hospitalization for ECH.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Adjusted odds ratios and predicted likelihood of independence in all activities of daily living (ADLs), independence in all instrumental activities of daily living (IADLs) and extended nursing home stay. Adjusted hazard ratio and predicted likelihood for survival.

RESULTS

In a cohort of 6719 subjects (mean age 77, 59% women) with average follow-up time of 8.3 years (55,767 person-years), 736 (11%) were hospitalized for ECH. ECH was associated with a 15% increase in ADL disability, 15% increase in IADL disability, 8% increase in nursing home stays, and 4% increase in mortality. After ECH, subjects became disabled and died at the same annual rate as pre-ECH but never recovered to pre-ECH levels of function. In conclusion, hospitalization for ECH was associated with significant and durable declines in independence and survival. Clinical and research efforts should incorporate the long-term harms of ECH into decision-making and strategies to mitigate these effects.

Multidisciplinary prevention and management strategies for colorectal cancer and cardiovascular disease

Colorectal cancer (CRC) and cardiovascular disease (CVD) are leading causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Their numerous shared and modifiable risk factors underscore the importance of effective prevention strategies for these largely preventable diseases. Conventionally regarded as separate disease entities, clear pathophysiological links and overlapping risk factors represent an opportunity for synergistic collaborative efforts of oncologists and cardiologists. In addition, current CRC treatment approaches can exert cardiotoxicity and thus increase CVD risk. Given the complex interplay of both diseases and increasing numbers of CRC survivors who are at increased risk for CVD, multidisciplinary cardio-oncological approaches are warranted for optimal patient care from primary prevention to acute disease treatment and long-term surveillance.

Resuming aspirin in patients with non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Our primary and secondary aims were to analyze the evidence surrounding mortality and re-bleeding risks in patients on aspirin with non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB) as a function of whether or not aspirin was resumed after the bleeding episode, and to determine whether aspirin intake upon admission affected the outcomes.

Methods

A search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective observational studies was performed. Data extraction and risk of bias assessment were done. Generic inverse variance and random-effects model were employed. Heterogeneity across studies was assessed using the I² test. Certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach for each comparison and outcome, and an evidence profile was created.

Results

Evidence from 1 RCT and 4 observational studies suggests that early aspirin resumption reduced mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 0.20, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.06-0.63) while increasing re-bleeding risk (HR 1.90, 95%CI 0.60-6.00); moderate certainty of evidence. The observational evidence was inconsistent for both mortality (HR 0.84, 95%CI 0.54-1.33) and re-bleeding (HR 0.85, 95%CI 0.47-1.55); very low certainty of evidence. Nine observational studies addressed our secondary aim: 6 provided inconsistent results regarding mortality (pooled odds ratio [OR] 1.1, 95%CI 0.80-1.50) and 4 provided inconsistent results regarding re-bleeding risk (pooled OR 0.92, 95%CI 0.53-1.59); very low certainty of evidence for both outcomes.

Conclusion

Evidence supporting a protective effect of aspirin resumption soon after NVUGIB is of low-to-moderate certainty, and is not informative as to the optimal timing of aspirin resumption.

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].

Aspirin as a Potential Geroprotector: Experimental Data and Clinical Evidence

Aging is a biological process with effects at the molecular, cellular, tissue, organ, system, and organismal levels and is characterized by decline in physical function and higher risks of age-related diseases. The use of anti-aging drugs for disease prevention has become a high priority for science and is a new biomedicine trend. Geroprotectors are compounds which slow aging and increase lifespan of the organism in question. The common painkiller aspirin, a member of the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) family, is one of the potential geroprotective agents. Aspirin is often used in treatment of mild to moderate pain. It has anti-inflammatory and anti-pyretic properties and acts as an inhibitor of cyclooxygenase which results in inhibition of prostaglandin. Acetylsalicylic acid as an active compound of aspirin also inhibits platelet aggregation and is used in the prevention of arterial and venous thrombosis. Aspirin has shown life-extending effects in numerous model organisms. This chapter reviews the evidence for clinical efficacy of aspirin including cardiovascular disease prevention, anti-cancer effects, and improvement of cognitive function. However, there are some limitations of these therapies, including the risk of excessive bleeding. We have also summarized numerous experimental and analytical data that support health and longevity benefits of aspirin treatment by affecting pro-longevity pathways.

Effects of aspirin on the gastrointestinal tract: Pros vs. cons

Acetylsalicylic acid, also known as aspirin, is often used in clinical antipyretic, analgesic and antiplatelet therapy. Aspirin can cause numerous side effects in the gastrointestinal (GI) tract, ranging from unpleasant GI symptoms without gastric mucosal lesions to ulcer bleeding and even death. However, recent studies have found that aspirin can significantly prevent GI tumors. Despite impressive advances in cancer research, screening and treatment options, GI tumors remain a leading cause of death worldwide. Prevention is a far better option than treatment for tumors. Therefore, the present review assesses the pros and cons of aspirin on the GI tract and, on this the basis, the appropriate dose of aspirin to protect it.

All-cause mortality following low-dose aspirin treatment for patients with high cardiovascular risk in remote Australian Aboriginal communities: an observational study

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefit and risk of low-dose acetylsalicylic acid (aspirin) in patients from remote Aboriginal communities in the Northern Territory, Australia.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study using primary care and hospital data routinely used for healthcare. Aspirin users and non-users were compared before and after controlling confounders by matching. Marginal structural models (MSM) were applied to ascertain the benefit and risk.

SETTING

The benefit and harm of aspirin were investigated in patients aged ≥18 years from 54 remote Aboriginal communities.

PARTICIPANTS

None had a previous cardiovascular event or major bleeds. Patients on anticoagulants or other antiplatelets were excluded.

INTERVENTION

Aspirin at a dose of 75-162 mg/day.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Endpoints were all-cause, cardiovascular mortality and incidences of cardiovascular events and major bleeds.

RESULTS

8167 predominantly Aboriginal adults were included and followed between July 2009 and June 2017 (aspirin users n=1865, non-users n=6302, mean follow-up 4 years with hospitalisations 6.4 per person). Univariate analysis found material differences in demographics, prevalence of chronic diseases and outcome measures between aspirin users and non-users before matching. After matching, aspirin was significantly associated with reduced all-cause mortality (HR=0.45: 95% CI 0.34 to 0.60; p<0.001), but not bleeding (HR=1.13: 95% CI 0.39 to 3.26; p=0.820). After using MSMs to eliminate the effects of confounders, loss of follow-up and time dependency of treatment, aspirin was associated with reduced all-cause mortality (HR=0.60: 95% CI 0.47 to 0.76; p<0.001), independent of age (HR=1.06; p<0.001), presence of diabetes (HR=1.42; p<0.001), hypertension (HR=1.61; p<0.001) and alcohol abuse (HR=1.81; p<0.001). No association between aspirin and major bleeding was found (HR=1.14: 95% CI 0.48 to 2.73; p=0.765). Sensitivity analysis suggested these findings were unlikely to have been the result of unmeasured confounding.

CONCLUSION

Aspirin was associated with reduced all-cause mortality. Bleeding risk was less compared with survival benefits. Aspirin should be considered for primary prevention in Aboriginal people with high cardiovascular risk.

The efficacy and safety of irsogladine maleate in nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug or aspirin-induced peptic ulcer and gastritis

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Irsogladine maleate, an enhancer of gastric mucosal protective factors, has demonstrated its efficacy for various gastric mucosal injuries. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of irsogladine for prevention of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or aspirin-induced peptic ulcer and gastritis.

METHODS

In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, exploratory clinical trial, 100 patients over 50 years of age who needed continuous NSAIDs or aspirin for more than 8 weeks were randomly assigned to either test group (irsogladine maleate 2 mg, twice daily, 39 patients for full analysis) or placebo group (37 patients for full analysis). Primary outcomes were incidence of peptic ulcer and ratio of modified Lanza score (MLS) 2 to 4. Secondary outcome was the number of acute erosions confirmed by endoscopy at 8 weeks. Adverse effects were also compared.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in gastric protective effects between test and placebo groups. However, two cases of peptic ulcer in the placebo group but none in the test group were observed. These two cases of peptic ulcer were Helicobacter pylori-negative. In addition, H. pylori-negative group showed significant changes in MLS score (p = 0.0247) and edema score (p = 0.0154) after the treatment compared to those before treatment in the test group. There was no significant difference in adverse events between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

The efficacy of irsogladine maleate was found in H. pylori-negative group, suggesting its potential as a protective agent against NSAIDs or aspirin-induced peptic ulcer and gastritis.

Aspirin has potential benefits for primary prevention of cardiovascular outcomes in diabetes: updated literature-based and individual participant data meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials

Background

The clinical benefit of aspirin for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in diabetes remains uncertain. To evaluate the efficacy and safety of aspirin for the primary prevention of cardiovascular outcomes and all-cause mortality events in people with diabetes, we conducted an updated meta-analysis of published randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and a pooled analysis of individual participant data (IPD) from three trials.

Methods

Randomised controlled trials of aspirin compared with placebo (or no treatment) in participants with diabetes with no known CVD were identified from MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and manual search of bibliographies to January 2019. Relative risks with 95% confidence intervals were used as the summary measures of associations.

Results

We included 12 RCTs based on 34,227 participants with a median treatment duration of 5.0 years. Comparing aspirin use with no aspirin, there was a significant reduction in risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE)0.89 (0.83–0.95), with a number needed to treat (NNT)of 95 (95% CI 61 to 208) to prevent one MACE over 5 years average follow-up. Evidence was lacking of heterogeneity and publication bias among contributing trials for MACE. Aspirin use had no effect on other endpoints including all-cause mortality; however, there was a significant reduction in stroke for aspirin dosage ≤ 100 mg/day 0.75 (0.59–0.95). There were no significant effects of aspirin use on major bleeding and other bleeding events, though some of the estimates were imprecise. Pooled IPD from the three trials (2306 participants) showed no significant evidence of an effect of aspirin on any of the outcomes evaluated; however, aspirin reduced the risk of MACE in non-smokers 0.70 (0.51–0.96) with a NNT of 33 (95% CI 20 to 246) to prevent one MACE.

Conclusions

Aspirin has potential benefits in cardiovascular primary prevention in diabetes. The use of low dose aspirin may need to be individualised and based on each individual’s baseline CVD and bleeding risk.

Systematic review registration PROSPERO: CRD42019122326

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12933-019-0875-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Update of Antiplatelet Therapy in Patients Without Known Cardiovascular Disease

Platelet activation and aggregation play a critical role in thrombosis, a fundamental pathophysiologic event responsible for the acute clinical manifestations of atherothrombotic events such as acute coronary syndrome, myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke/transient ischemic attack and peripheral artery disease. Dual antiplatelet therapy (low-dose aspirin plus ADP-P2Y12 receptor blockers) has become the cornerstone of therapy for the management of acute and chronic coronary artery disease and the prevention of ischemic complications associated with percutaneous coronary intervention. However, dual antiplatelet therapy in primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in patients without known cardiovascular disease did not significantly reduce the risk of cardiovascular events, such as myocardial infarction, stroke or death, but significantly increased the rate of bleeding. Furthermore, despite multiple randomized controlled trials evaluating the efficacy and safety of aspirin use in patients without known cardiovascular disease, its role in primary prevention is still unclear, especially in patients with a higher risk of cardiovascular disease (non-diabetic individuals with >2 risk factors for coronary artery disease, elderly >60 years with additional risk factors, and patients with diabetes). Currently, there are four ongoing randomized controlled trials aiming to fill the missing gap in the efficacy and safety of aspirin therapy for primary prevention in these patients. The current European and United States Guidelines agree that primary prevention of cardiovascular disease is essential, but there are some substantial differences in risk estimation and treatment strategies among patients without known cardiovascular disease. This short review is focused on these differences and practical treatment approach to these patients based on present European and United States recommendations.

Increased susceptibility of aging gastric mucosa to injury and delayed healing: Clinical implications

In this editorial we comment on the article by Fukushi K et al published in the recent issue of the World Journal of Gastroenterology 2018; 24(34): 3908-3918. We focus specifically on the mechanisms of the anti-thrombotic action of aspirin, gastric mucosal injury and aging-related increased susceptibility of gastric mucosa to injury. Aspirin is widely used not only for the management of acute and chronic pain and arthritis, but also importantly for the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular events such as myocardial infarcts and strokes. Clinical trials have consistently shown that antiplatelet therapy with long term, low dose aspirin (LDA) - 75 to 325 mg daily, dramatically reduces the risk of non-fatal myocardial infarcts, stroke and mortality in patients with established arterial diseases. However, such treatment considerably increases the risk of gastrointestinal (GI) ulcerations and serious bleeding by > 2-4 fold, especially in aging individuals. This risk is further increased in patients using LDA together with other antiplatelet agents, other nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents (NSAIDs) and/or alcohol, or in patients with Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection. Previous studies by our group and others have demonstrated prominent structural and functional abnormalities in gastric mucosa of aging individuals (which we refer to as aging gastric mucosa or “aging gastropathy”) compared to the gastric mucosa of younger individuals. Aging gastric mucosa has impaired mucosal defense, increased susceptibility to injury by a variety of noxious agents such as aspirin, other NSAIDs and ethanol, and delayed and impaired healing of injury. The mechanism underlying these abnormalities of aging gastric mucosa include reduced mucosal blood flow causing hypoxia, upregulation of PTEN, activation of pro-apoptotic caspase-3 and caspase-9, and reduced survivin (anti-apoptosis protein), importin-α (nuclear transport protein), vascular endothelial growth factor, and nerve growth factor. The decision regarding initiation of a long-term LDA therapy should be made after a careful consideration of both cardiovascular and GI risk factors. The latter include a previous history of GI bleeding and/or ulcers, age ≥ 70, male gender, concurrent use of other NSAIDs, alcohol consumption and H. pylori infection. Furthermore, the incidence of GI ulcers and bleeding can be reduced in patients on long term LDA treatment by several measures. Clinicians treating such patients should test for and eradicate H. pylori, instruct patients to avoid alcohol and non-aspirin NSAIDs, including cyclooxygenase-2-selective NSAIDs, and prescribe proton pump inhibitors in patients on LDA therapy. In the future, clinicians may be able to prescribe one of several potential new drugs, which include aspirin associated with phosphatidylcholine (PL2200), which retains all property of aspirin but reduces by approximately 50% LDA-induced GI ulcerations.

Efficacy and Safety of Proton Pump Inhibitors in the Long-Term Aspirin Users: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Long-term aspirin use in cardiovascular disease prevention may result in gastrointestinal bleeding. Although proton pump inhibitors (PPI) have been shown to reduce the risks of peptic ulcers and dyspeptic symptoms in long-term aspirin users in the randomized controlled trials, there are safety concerns about the long-term use of PPI.

STUDY QUESTION

What is the safety and efficacy of PPI in patients using aspirin in long term for prevention of cardiovascular diseases and stroke?

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, ProQuest, and relevant references from inception through February 2015, and used random-effects model for meta-analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 10 publications from 9 studies (n = 6382) were included in the meta-analysis. Compared with control, PPI reduced the risks of peptic ulcers [risk ratio (RR): 0.19; 95% confidence interval: 0.13-0.26; P < 0.00001], gastric ulcers [0.24 (0.16-0.35); P < 0.00001], duodenal ulcers [0.12 (0.05-0.29); P < 0.00001], bleeding ulcers [0.22 (0.10-0.51); P = 0.0004], and erosive esophagitis [0.14 (0.07-0.28); P < 0.00001]. PPI increased the resolution of epigastric pain [1.13 (1.03-1.25); P = 0.01], heartburn [1.24 (1.18-1.31); P < 0.00001], and regurgitation [1.26 (1.13-1.40); P < 0.0001], but did not increase the risks of all-cause mortality [1.72 (0.61-4.87); P = 0.31], cardiovascular mortality [1.80 (0.59-5.44); P = 0.30], nonfatal myocardial infarction/ischemia [0.56 (0.22-1.41); P = 0.22], ischemic stroke/transient ischemic attack [1.09 (0.34-3.53); P = 0.89] and other adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

The PPI seems to be effective in preventing peptic ulcers and erosive esophagitis and in resolution of dyspeptic symptoms without increasing adverse events, cardiac risks or mortality in long-term aspirin users.

Non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB) is bleeding that develops in the oesophagus, stomach or proximal duodenum. Peptic ulcers, caused by Helicobacter pylori infection or use of NSAIDs and low-dose aspirin (LDA), are the most common cause. Although the incidence and mortality associated with NVUGIB have been decreasing owing to considerable advances in the prevention and management of NVUGIB over the past 20 years, it remains a common clinical problem with an annual incidence of ∼67 per 100,000 individuals in the United States in 2012. NVUGIB is a medical emergency, and mortality is in the range ∼1-5%. After resuscitation and initial assessment, early (within 24 hours) diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopy together with intragastric pH control with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) form the basis of treatment. With a growing ageing population treated with antiplatelet and/or anticoagulant medications, the clinical management of NVUGIB is complex as the risk between gastrointestinal bleeding events and adverse cardiovascular events needs to be balanced. The best clinical approach includes identification of risk factors and prevention of bleeding; available strategies include continuous treatment with PPIs or H. pylori eradication in those at increased risk of developing NVUGIB. Treatment with PPIs and/or use of cyclooxygenase-2-selective NSAIDs should be implemented in those patients at risk of NVUGIB who need NSAIDs and/or LDA.

Use of proton pump inhibitors and the risk of coronary events in new users of low-dose acetylsalicylic acid in UK primary care

This study evaluated the risk of cardiovascular events associated with the use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) in new users of acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) for the secondary prevention of cardiovascular events. Two cohorts of patients aged 50–84 years were identified from UK primary care databases: individuals with a first prescription for ASA (75−300 mg/day) for secondary prevention of cardiovascular events (n = 39,513; CVD cohort) or with a record of hospitalisation for an acute coronary event (n = 42,542; ACS cohort) in 2000–2007. Cases of nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI) and coronary death were identified: 1,222 in the CVD cohort and 604 among new users of ASA in the ACS cohort. A nested case–control analysis estimated the relative risk (RR) of non-fatal MI or coronary death associated with use vs non-use of PPI therapy. Current continuous use of PPI therapy was not associated with a significant increase in RR overall: in the CVD cohort (RR = 1.14 [95% confidence interval = 0.91−1.43]); in the ACS cohort (0.88 [0.66−1.18]); or among current continuous users of ASA as antiplatelet monotherapy (CVD cohort: 1.15 [0.80−1.66]; ACS cohort: 0.73 [0.43−1.23]; pooled analysis of both cohorts: 0.96 [0.62−1.48]). In conclusion, among first-time users of ASA for the secondary prevention of cardiovascular events, PPI use was not shown to be associated with an increased risk of non-fatal MI or coronary death.

The contribution of clinical and pathological predisposing factors to severe gastro-duodenal lesions in patients with long-term low-dose aspirin and proton pump inhibitor therapy

BACKGROUND

Preventive strategies developed to avoid the complications of antiplatelet therapies recommend the evaluation of risk factors for gastrointestinal events and indicated gastroprotective strategies.

AIM

We aimed to assess the impact of predisposing factors - histological findings, concomitant drug consumption, comorbidities, symptoms, social habits, Helicobacter pylori infection - on severe gastro-duodenal lesions in patients with low-dose aspirin and concomitant protective therapy with proton pump inhibitors (PPI).

METHOD

We enrolled 237 patients with LDA and PPI therapy, referred for upper digestive endoscopy, divided into two groups according to the severity of their endoscopic lesions (172 patients with no or mild endoscopic lesions and 65 patients with severe endoscopic lesions).

RESULTS

In the univariate logistic regression model, the factors associated with severe gastro-duodenal lesions were gender (OR=1.87, 95% CI: 1.04-3.41), anticoagulants (OR=2.40, 95% CI: 1.26-4.53), gastric atrophy and/or intestinal metaplasia (OR=1.85, 95% CI: 1.04-3.32), congestive heart failure (OR=2.59, 95% CI: 1.16-6.62), anaemia (OR=3.01, 95% CI: 1.67-5.47) and smoking (OR=4.29, 95% CI: 1.57-12.32). In the final model, anticoagulants (p=0.041<0.05) and anaemia (p=0.019<0.05) were risk factors for severe lesions via multivariate regression analysis, while for active/inactive chronic gastritis and smoking a positive dependency with a tendency towards statistical significance (p<0.10) was noticed for severe gastric lesions.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients treated with low-dose aspirin and gastroprotective therapy with proton pump inhibitors we have enough evidence to consider co-treatment with anticoagulants and anaemia important predictors for severe endoscopic lesions, while other factors such as inflammation in gastric biopsies, congestive heart failure, co-treatment with clopidogrel and smoking tended to have a positive influence on risk for severe gastro-duodenal lesions.

Age-specific risks, severity, time course, and outcome of bleeding on long-term antiplatelet treatment after vascular events: a population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND

Lifelong antiplatelet treatment is recommended after ischaemic vascular events, on the basis of trials done mainly in patients younger than 75 years. Upper gastrointestinal bleeding is a serious complication, but had low case fatality in trials of aspirin and is not generally thought to cause long-term disability. Consequently, although co-prescription of proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) reduces upper gastrointestinal bleeds by 70-90%, uptake is low and guidelines are conflicting. We aimed to assess the risk, time course, and outcomes of bleeding on antiplatelet treatment for secondary prevention in patients of all ages.

METHODS

We did a prospective population-based cohort study in patients with a first transient ischaemic attack, ischaemic stroke, or myocardial infarction treated with antiplatelet drugs (mainly aspirin based, without routine PPI use) after the event in the Oxford Vascular Study from 2002 to 2012, with follow-up until 2013. We determined type, severity, outcome (disability or death), and time course of bleeding requiring medical attention by face-to-face follow-up for 10 years. We estimated age-specific numbers needed to treat (NNT) to prevent upper gastrointestinal bleeding with routine PPI co-prescription on the basis of Kaplan-Meier risk estimates and relative risk reduction estimates from previous trials.

FINDINGS

3166 patients (1582 [50%] aged ≥75 years) had 405 first bleeding events (n=218 gastrointestinal, n=45 intracranial, and n=142 other) during 13 509 patient-years of follow-up. Of the 314 patients (78%) with bleeds admitted to hospital, 117 (37%) were missed by administrative coding. Risk of non-major bleeding was unrelated to age, but major bleeding increased steeply with age (≥75 years hazard ratio [HR] 3·10, 95% CI 2·27-4·24; p<0·0001), particularly for fatal bleeds (5·53, 2·65-11·54; p<0·0001), and was sustained during long-term follow-up. The same was true of major upper gastrointestinal bleeds (≥75 years HR 4·13, 2·60-6·57; p<0·0001), particularly if disabling or fatal (10·26, 4·37-24·13; p<0·0001). At age 75 years or older, major upper gastrointestinal bleeds were mostly disabling or fatal (45 [62%] of 73 patients vs 101 [47%] of 213 patients with recurrent ischaemic stroke), and outnumbered disabling or fatal intracerebral haemorrhage (n=45 vs n=18), with an absolute risk of 9·15 (95% CI 6·67-12·24) per 1000 patient-years. The estimated NNT for routine PPI use to prevent one disabling or fatal upper gastrointestinal bleed over 5 years fell from 338 for individuals younger than 65 years, to 25 for individuals aged 85 years or older.

INTERPRETATION

In patients receiving aspirin-based antiplatelet treatment without routine PPI use, the long-term risk of major bleeding is higher and more sustained in older patients in practice than in the younger patients in previous trials, with a substantial risk of disabling or fatal upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Given that half of the major bleeds in patients aged 75 years or older were upper gastrointestinal, the estimated NNT for routine PPI use to prevent such bleeds is low, and co-prescription should be encouraged.

FUNDING

Wellcome Trust, Wolfson Foundation, British Heart Foundation, Dunhill Medical Trust, National Institute of Health Research (NIHR), and the NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre.

Aspirin for primary prevention of cardiovascular and all-cause mortality events in diabetes: updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

AIMS

To evaluate the benefits and harms of aspirin for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality events in people with diabetes by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials of aspirin compared with placebo (or no treatment) in people with diabetes with no history of cardiovascular disease were identified from MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library and a manual search of bibliographies to November 2015. Study-specific relative risks with 95% CIs were aggregated using random effects models.

RESULTS

A total of 10 randomized trials were included in the review. There was a significant reduction in risk of major adverse cardiovascular events: relative risk of 0.90 (95% CI 0.81-0.99) in groups taking aspirin compared with placebo or no treatment. Limited subgroup analyses suggested that the effect of aspirin on major adverse cardiovascular events differed by baseline cardiovascular disease risk, medication compliance and sex (P for interaction for all > 0.05).There was no significant reduction in the risk of myocardial infarction, coronary heart disease, stroke, cardiovascular mortality or all-cause mortality. Aspirin significantly reduced the risk of myocardial infarction for a treatment duration of ≤ 5 years. There were differences in the effect of aspirin by dosage and treatment duration on overall stroke outcomes (P for interaction for all < 0.05). There was an increase in risk of major or gastrointestinal bleeding events, but estimates were imprecise and not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

The emerging data do not clearly support guidelines that encourage the use of aspirin for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in adults with diabetes who are at increased cardiovascular disease risk.

Upper Gastrointestinal Toxicity Associated With Long-Term Aspirin Therapy: Consequences and Prevention

Antiplatelet therapy represents a fundamental part of preventive management for patients who are at risk of a secondary cardiovascular disease (CVD) event. In most cases, the antiplatelet regimen is based on low-dose aspirin, a drug that is highly effective in reducing the incidence of CVD events, but is associated with a substantial risk of gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity. The dyspeptic symptoms, which can result from aspirin administration, and which may occur with or without associated ulceration and bleeding, may lead patients to discontinue therapy, thus increasing their CVD risk. For patients in whom aspirin is indicated and who are deemed to be at increased risk of upper GI events, concomitant therapy with a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) is currently recommended. These agents are highly effective in reducing the upper GI lesions associated with aspirin therapy and have been associated with increased aspirin adherence. However, widespread under-prescribing of PPIs and potential noncompliance with their use means that substantial numbers of patients are at unnecessary risk of upper GI toxicity and-if aspirin therapy is discontinued-CVD events. Provision of aspirin and an immediate-release PPI as a coordinated-delivery combination tablet has been shown to both reduce the risk of gastric ulcer formation and improve patient compliance. This strategy, which may ultimately reduce the incidence of CVD outcomes because of the associated reduction in GI symptoms and the potential for greater patient adherence to aspirin, warrants further investigation under both randomized controlled conditions (explanatory trials), and in real-life settings (pragmatic trials).

Similar Efficacy of Proton-Pump Inhibitors vs H2-Receptor Antagonists in Reducing Risk of Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding or Ulcers in High-Risk Users of Low-Dose Aspirin

BACKGROUND & AIMS

It is not clear whether H₂-receptor antagonists (H2RAs) reduce the risk of gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding in aspirin users at high risk. We performed a double-blind randomized trial to compare the effects of a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) vs a H2RA antagonist in preventing recurrent upper GI bleeding and ulcers in high-risk aspirin users.

METHODS

We studied 270 users of low-dose aspirin (≤325 mg/day) with a history of endoscopically confirmed ulcer bleeding at 8 sites in Hong Kong and Japan. After healing of ulcers, subjects with negative results from tests for Helicobacter pylori resumed aspirin (80 mg) daily and were assigned randomly to groups given a once-daily PPI (rabeprazole, 20 mg; n = 138) or H2RA (famotidine, 40 mg; n = 132) for up to 12 months. Subjects were evaluated every 2 months; endoscopy was repeated if they developed symptoms of upper GI bleeding or had a reduction in hemoglobin level greater than 2 g/dL and after 12 months of follow-up evaluation. The adequacy of upper GI protection was assessed by end points of recurrent upper GI bleeding and a composite of recurrent upper GI bleeding or recurrent endoscopic ulcers at month 12.

RESULTS

During the 12-month study period, upper GI bleeding recurred in 1 patient receiving rabeprazole (0.7%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.1%-5.1%) and in 4 patients receiving famotidine (3.1%; 95% CI, 1.2%-8.1%) (P = .16). The composite end point of recurrent bleeding or endoscopic ulcers at month 12 was reached by 9 patients receiving rabeprazole (7.9%; 95% CI, 4.2%-14.7%) and 13 patients receiving famotidine (12.4%; 95% CI, 7.4%-20.4%) (P = .26).

CONCLUSIONS

In a randomized controlled trial of users of low-dose aspirin at risk for recurrent GI bleeding, a slightly lower proportion of patients receiving a PPI along with aspirin developed recurrent bleeding or ulcer than of patients receiving an H2RA with the aspirin, although this difference was not statistically significant. ClincialTrials.gov no: NCT01408186.

Cardioprotective potential of a lanosteryl triterpene from Protorhus longifolia

CONTEXT

The current rapid increase in the incidence of cardiovascular events indicates a need for the discovery of more effective cardioprotective agents.

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluated the cardioprotective potential of a lanosteryl triterpene from Protorhus longifolia (Benrh.) Engl. stem bark.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Spectroscopic data analysis was used to confirm the structure of methyl-3β-hydroxylanosta-9, 24-dien-21-oate (RA-3). The cardioprotective effect of RA-3 in isoproterenol-induced myocardial injury in hyperlipidemic rats was investigated. Rats were divided into the normal diet (ND) fed and high fat diet (HFD) fed groups. The HFD rats were further subdivided into three groups. The experimental group was orally administered with RA-3 (100 mg/kg) for 15 days. The rats were then injected with isoproterenol (85 mg/kg) to induce myocardial injury. At the end of the experiment, hearts and blood tissues were collected and used for histology and biochemical assays, respectively.

RESULTS

RA-3 exhibited a cardioprotective effect as it minimized myocardial injury in HFD rats. Few lesions of acute hyaline degeneration and reduced fat deposition were observed in the heart tissue of the triterpene pretreated rats. Lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) activity was decreased in the blood of the RA-3 pretreated rats (44.1 mU/mL) compared to the untreated group (64.8 mU/mL). Increased glutathione (GSH) content and catalase (CAT) activity along with lower levels of malondialdehyde (MDA) in the triterpene pretreated animals (120.8 nmol/μL) than in the non-treated HFD fed rats (143.6 nmol/μL) were also observed.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

The cardioprotective effect exhibited by RA-3 indicates its potential use in the management of cardiovascular diseases (CVD) and related health problems.

Clinical Risk Factors for Gastroduodenal Ulcer in Romanian Low-Dose Aspirin Consumers

Background. Aspirin use for cardiovascular or cancer prevention is limited due to its gastrointestinal side effects. Objective. Our prospective, observational case-control study aims to identify the predictive factors for ulcers in low-dose aspirin consumers (75-325 mg/day). Methods. The study included patients who underwent an upper digestive endoscopy and took low-dose aspirin treatment. Results. We recruited 51 patients with ulcer (ulcer group) and 108 patients with no mucosal lesions (control group). In univariate analysis, factors significantly associated with ulcers were male gender (p = 0.001), anticoagulants (p = 0.029), nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (p = 0.013), heart failure (p = 0.007), liver (p = 0.011) or cerebrovascular disease (p = 0.004), diabetes mellitus (p = 0.043), ulcer history (p = 0.044), and alcohol consumption (p = 0.018), but not Helicobacter pylori infection (p = 0.2). According to our multivariate regression analysis results, history of peptic ulcer (OR 3.07, 95% CI 1.06-8.86), cotreatment with NSAIDs (OR 8, 95% CI 2.09-30.58) or anticoagulants (OR 4.85, 95% CI 1.33-17.68), male gender (OR 5.2, 95% CI 1.77-15.34), and stroke (OR 7.27, 95% CI 1.40-37.74) remained predictors for ulcer on endoscopy. Conclusions. Concomitant use of NSAIDs or anticoagulants, comorbidities (cerebrovascular disease), and male gender are the most important independent risk factors for ulcer on endoscopy in low-dose aspirin consumers, in a population with a high prevalence of H. pylori infection.

Bleeding Risk with Long-Term Low-Dose Aspirin: A Systematic Review of Observational Studies

BACKGROUND

Low-dose aspirin has proven effectiveness in secondary and primary prevention of cardiovascular events, but is also associated with an increased risk of major bleeding events. For primary prevention, this absolute risk must be carefully weighed against the benefits of aspirin; such assessments are currently limited by a lack of data from general populations.

METHODS

Systematic searches of Medline and Embase were conducted to identify observational studies published between 1946 and 4 March 2015 that reported the risks of gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding or intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) with long-term, low-dose aspirin (75-325 mg/day). Pooled estimates of the relative risk (RR) for bleeding events with aspirin versus non-use were calculated using random-effects models, based on reported estimates of RR (including odds ratios, hazard ratios, incidence rate ratios and standardized incidence ratios) in 39 articles.

FINDINGS

The incidence of GI bleeding with low-dose aspirin was 0.48-3.64 cases per 1000 person-years, and the overall pooled estimate of the RR with low-dose aspirin was 1.4 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.2-1.7). For upper and lower GI bleeding, the RRs with low-dose aspirin were 2.3 (2.0-2.6) and 1.8 (1.1-3.0), respectively. Neither aspirin dose nor duration of use had consistent effects on RRs for upper GI bleeding. The estimated RR for ICH with low-dose aspirin was 1.4 (1.2-1.7) overall. Aspirin was associated with increased bleeding risks when combined with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, clopidogrel and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors compared with monotherapy. By contrast, concomitant use of proton pump inhibitors decreased upper GI bleeding risks relative to aspirin monotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The risks of major bleeding with low-dose aspirin in real-world settings are of a similar magnitude to those reported in randomized trials. These data will help inform clinical judgements regarding the use of low-dose aspirin in prevention of cardiovascular events.

Use of cardiovascular medicines in newly treated type 2 diabetes patients: A retrospective cohort study in general practice

AIMS

To describe the drug utilisation patterns of aspirin, antihypertensives, vasodilators, and statins in a cohort of newly treated type 2 diabetes subjects previously unexposed to CVD agents.

METHODS

A population-based retrospective cohort study was conducted using a national pharmacy claims database of newly treated type 2 diabetes subjects aged 40 years or older. Data on the use of aspirin, antihypertensives, vasodilators, and statins 1 year after antidiabetic agent initiation were analysed. Poisson regression with a robust error variance was used to estimate adjusted relative risk (RRadj) and 95% CIs between socio-demographic and treatment factors on CVD agent use.

RESULTS

Over a 2-year period (2008-2009), 6093 subjects were identified. One year after antidiabetic agent initiation, 82% of the study population received at least one CVD agent, with 54% receiving aspirin, 64% receiving antihypertensives, 6% vasodilators, and 62% receiving statins. Subjects aged 40-49 years were significantly less likely than those aged 60-69 years to receive CVD agents (RRadj 0.83, 95% CI 0.80-0.87). Over 40% of subjects received antihypertensives without aspirin and statins, while 30% of subjects on statins did not receive aspirin.

CONCLUSIONS

Substantial CVD agent utilisation was noted 1 year after antidiabetic agent initiation. Being aged younger than 60-69 years was associated with decreased utilisation of CVD agents.

Aspirin in the Treatment of Cancer: Reductions in Metastatic Spread and in Mortality: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses of Published Studies

BACKGROUND

Low-dose aspirin has been shown to reduce the incidence of cancer, but its role in the treatment of cancer is uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

We conducted a systematic search of the scientific literature on aspirin taken by patients following a diagnosis of cancer, together with appropriate meta-analyses.

METHODS

Searches were completed in Medline and Embase in December 2015 using a pre-defined search strategy. References and abstracts of all the selected papers were scanned and expert colleagues were contacted for additional studies. Two reviewers applied pre-determined eligibility criteria (cross-sectional, cohort and controlled studies, and aspirin taken after a diagnosis of cancer), assessed study quality and extracted data on cancer cause-specific deaths, overall mortality and incidence of metastases. Random effects meta-analyses and planned sub-group analyses were completed separately for observational and experimental studies. Heterogeneity and publication bias were assessed in sensitivity analyses and appropriate omissions made. Papers were examined for any reference to bleeding and authors of the papers were contacted and questioned.

RESULTS

Five reports of randomised trials were identified, together with forty two observational studies: sixteen on colorectal cancer, ten on breast and ten on prostate cancer mortality. Pooling of eleven observational reports of the effect of aspirin on cause-specific mortality from colon cancer, after the omission of one report identified on the basis of sensitivity analyses, gave a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.76 (95% CI 0.66, 0.88) with reduced heterogeneity (P = 0.04). The cause specific mortality in five reports of patients with breast cancer showed significant heterogeneity (P<0.0005) but the omission of one outlying study reduced heterogeneity (P = 0.19) and led to an HR = 0.87 (95% CI 0.69, 1.09). Heterogeneity between nine studies of prostate cancer was significant, but again, the omission of one study led to acceptable homogeneity (P = 0.26) and an overall HR = 0.89 (95% CI 0.79-0.99). Six single studies of other cancers suggested reductions in cause specific mortality by aspirin, and in five the effect is statistically significant. There were no significant differences between the pooled HRs for the three main cancers and after the omission of three reports already identified in sensitivity analyses heterogeneity was removed and revealed an overall HR of 0.83 (95% CI 0.76-0.90). A mutation of PIK3CA was present in about 20% of patients, and appeared to explain most of the reduction in colon cancer mortality by aspirin. Data were not adequate to examine the importance of this or any other marker in the effect of aspirin in the other cancers. On bleeding attributable to aspirin two reports stated that there had been no side effect or bleeding attributable to aspirin. Authors on the other reports were written to and 21 replied stating that no data on bleeding were available.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

The study highlights the need for randomised trials of aspirin treatment in a variety of cancers. While these are awaited there is an urgent need for evidence from observational studies of aspirin and the less common cancers, and for more evidence of the relevance of possible bio-markers of the aspirin effect on a wide variety of cancers. In the meantime it is urged that patients in whom a cancer is diagnosed should be given details of this research, together with its limitations, to enable each to make an informed decision as to whether or not to take low-dose aspirin.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW PROTOCOL NUMBER

CRD42015014145.

Risk of gastrointestinal complications associated to NSAIDs, low-dose aspirin and their combinations: Results of a pharmacovigilance reporting system

Gastrointestinal (GI) complications are one of the most limiting cause of use of NSAIDs. Beyond others well defined factors, history of peptic ulcer, older age, Helicobacter pylori infection and use of gastrotoxic drugs may affect their GI safety profile. In particular, the risk of GI complications associated to the use of antiplatelet drugs, especially low-dose acetylsalicylic acid (LDA) should deserve much attention. However, only few studies have focused on the effect of combination LDA/NSAIDs on the GI tract compared with the monotherapy and much less studies assessed this effect with multiple NSAIDs use. We aimed to characterize the GI safety profile of NSAIDs and LDA as monotherapy or their combinations in real-life conditions by analysing spontaneous adverse drug reactions (ADRs) reporting system in a Southern Italy. We used the case/non-case method in the Italian Pharmacovigilance Network (RNF). Cases were reports of GI events in the RNF between January 2007 and December 2011. Non-cases were all other reports during the same period. The association between NSAID and suspected GI ADRs was calculated using the reporting odds ratio (ROR) with 95% confidence intervals as a measure of disproportionality while adjusting for age, and concomitant use of antineoplastic agents or drugs for cardiovascular diseases. Sub-analysis were performed within the NSAID class. Among the 2816 adverse drug reactions recorded, we identified 374 (13.3%) cases of GI complications. Upper GI complications were the most frequently reported type of events. The highest associations were found for the combined use of NSAIDs and/or LDA, whilst the lowest associations were for their respective monotherapy. Looking at individual NSAIDs the highest association with GI events was observed for ketorolac exposure followed by nimesulide, diclofenac, aspirin, ketoprofen, and ibuprofen. This study highlights the primary role of the national spontaneous reporting system to bring out potential signals, such as the inappropriate drug use pattern, which however, have to be furtherly studied in-depth with ad hoc population-based studies.

Adult Patients' Perspectives on the Benefits and Harms of Overused Screening Tests: a Qualitative Study

BACKGROUND

In recent years, there has been a growing interest in reducing the overuse of healthcare services. However, little is known about how patients conceptualize the benefits and harms of overused screening tests or how patients make decisions regarding these tests.

OBJECTIVE

To determine how patients think about the harms and benefits of overused screening tests and how they consider these and other factors when making decisions.

DESIGN

Semi-structured, qualitative interviews.

PARTICIPANTS

The study comprised 50 patients, ages 50-84, who had previously received or not received any of four overused screening services: 1) prostate cancer screening (men ages 50-69), 2) colon cancer screening (men and women ages 76-85), 3) osteoporosis screening (low-risk women ages 50-64), or 4) cardiovascular disease screening (low-risk men and women ages 50-85).

APPROACH

We conducted a thematic analysis, using a hybrid inductive-deductive approach. Two independent coders analyzed interview transcriptions to identify themes and exemplifying quotes.

KEY RESULTS

Many patients could not name a harm of screening. When they did name harms, patients often focused on only the harms of the screening test itself and rarely mentioned harms further along the screening cascade (e.g., from follow-up testing and treatment). In contrast, patients could easily name benefits of screening, although many seemed to misunderstand or overestimate the magnitude of the benefits. Furthermore, patients described many additional factors they considered when making screening decisions, including their clinicians' recommendations, their age, family or friends' experiences with disease, and insurance coverage.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights the need to help adults recognize and understand the benefits and harms of screening and make appropriate decisions about overused screening tests.

Decision Aids: The Effect of Labeling Options on Patient Choices and Decision Making

BACKGROUND

Conscious and unconscious biases can influence how people interpret new information and make decisions. Current standards for creating decision aids, however, do not address this issue.

METHOD

Using a 2×2 factorial design, we developed surveys that contained a decision scenario (involving a choice between aspirin or a statin drug to lower risk of heart attack) and a decision aid. Each aid presented identical information about reduction in heart attack risk and likelihood of a major side effect. They differed in whether the options were labeled and the amount of decisional guidance: information only (a balance sheet) versus information plus values clarification (a multicriteria decision analysis). We sent the surveys to members of 2 Internet survey panels. After using the decision aid, participants indicated their preferred medication. Those using a multicriteria decision aid also judged differences in the comparative outcome data provided for the 2 options and the relative importance of achieving benefits versus avoiding risks in making the decision.

RESULTS

The study sample size was 536. Participants using decision aids with unlabeled options were more likely to choose a statin: 56% versus 25% (P < 0.001). The type of decision aid made no difference. This effect persisted after adjustment for differences in survey company, age, gender, education level, health literacy, and numeracy. Participants using unlabeled decision aids were also more likely to interpret the data presented as favoring a statin with regard to both treatment benefits and risk of side effects (P ≤ 0.01). There were no significant differences in decision priorities (P = 0.21).

CONCLUSION

Identifying the options in patient decision aids can influence patient preferences and change how they interpret comparative outcome data.

To treat or not to treat very elderly naïve patients with atrial fibrillation with vitamin K antagonists (VKA): results from the VENPAF cohort

Despite the recommendations in the guidelines, physicians still underuse warfarin in very elderly patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). The risks of stroke and major bleeding both increase with age, but it is still not clear whether the beneficial effects of vitamin K antagonists (VKA) in preventing stroke outweigh the related bleeding risks in fragile, very elderly patients. The bleeding rates reported in real-world observational studies differ considerably. The aim of this study was to retrospectively assess the incidence of major bleeding in VKA-naïve patients over 80 years old with NVAF at a large anticoagulation clinic. Significant predictors of major bleeding were also investigated. Sixty-five major bleeding events (3.4 per 100 patient-years) and 25 thromboembolic events (1.3 per 100 patient-years) were recorded in a sample of 798 patients with a median follow-up of 2.2 years. Patients over 85 years old had significantly more major bleeding events than the 80- to 84-year olds (4.7 vs. 2.6 per 100 patient-years, p 0.014). Spontaneous bleeding was also significantly more common (3.0 vs. 1.3 per 100 patient-years, p 0.008) in the very elderly group. Age and diabetes were the only independent risk factor for bleeding on multivariate Cox analysis (Age HR 1.80, 95% CI 1.10-2.93; diabetes HR 1.76, 95% CI 1.00-3.09). These data show a sharp increase in major bleeding episodes among the very elderly with atrial fibrillation. Further studies are warranted with a view to identifying patients at risk.

Benefit-harm analysis and charts for individualized and preference-sensitive prevention: example of low dose aspirin for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease and cancer

BACKGROUND

Clinical practice guidelines provide separate recommendations for different diseases that may be prevented or treated by the same intervention. Also, they commonly provide recommendations for entire populations but not for individuals. To address these two limitations, our aim was to conduct benefit-harm analyses for a wide range of individuals using the example of low dose aspirin for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease and cancer and to develop Benefit-Harm Charts that show the overall benefit-harm balance for individuals.

METHODS

We used quantitative benefit-harm modeling that included 16 outcomes to estimate the probability that low dose aspirin provides more benefits than harms for a wide range of men and women between 45 and 84 years of age and without a previous myocardial infarction, severe ischemic stroke, or cancer. We repeated the quantitative benefit-harm modeling for different combinations of age, sex, and outcome risks for severe ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke, myocardial infarction, cancers, and severe gastrointestinal bleeds. The analyses considered weights for the outcomes, statistical uncertainty of the effects of aspirin, and death as a competing risk. We constructed Benefit-Harm Charts that show the benefit-harm balance for different combinations of outcome risks.

RESULTS

The Benefit-Harm Charts ( http://www.benefit-harm-balance.com ) we have created show that the benefit-harm balance differs largely across a primary prevention population. Low dose aspirin is likely to provide more benefits than harms in men, elderly people, and in those at low risk for severe gastrointestinal bleeds. Individual preferences have a major impact on the benefit-harm balance. If, for example, it is a high priority for individuals to prevent stroke and severe cancers while severe gastrointestinal bleeds are deemed to be of little importance, the benefit-harm balance is likely to favor low dose aspirin for most individuals. Instead, if severe gastrointestinal bleeds are judged to be similarly important compared to the benefit outcomes, low dose aspirin is unlikely to provide more benefits than harms.

CONCLUSIONS

Benefit-Harm Charts support individualized benefit-harm assessments and decision making. Similarly, individualized benefit-harm assessments may allow guideline developers to issue more finely granulated recommendations that reduce the risk of over- and underuse of interventions. The example of low dose aspirin for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease and cancer shows that it may be time for guideline developers to provide combined recommendations for different diseases that may be prevented or treated by the same intervention.

Aspirin for Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease and Cancer. A Benefit and Harm Analysis

Background

Aspirin is widely used for prevention of cardiovascular disease. In recent years randomized trials also suggested a preventive effect for various types of cancer. We aimed to assess, in a quantitative way, benefits and harms of aspirin for primary prevention of both cardiovascular disease and cancer for a general US population between 40 and 85 years of age.

Methods

We used the Gail/National Cancer Institute approach for assessing benefits and harms. This approach provides a probability that a treatment is more beneficial than harmful and incorporates multiple outcomes, the importance of these outcomes, considers different outcome risks and treats mortality as a competing risk. Our main outcomes were the risks of seven types of cancer, myocardial infarction, ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke and gastrointestinal bleeding. We obtained effect estimates from recent meta-analyses of randomized trials and used baseline risks from the Centers for Disease Control. We conducted four sensitivity analyses to assess the influence of different assumptions about outcome risks and preferences and considered the sampling variation of the effect estimates for aspirin.

Results

The main analysis as well as the sensitivity analyses showed that aspirin has more benefits than harms. In the main analysis, the index (positive if number of prevented events > excess number of harm events over 10 years per 1,000 persons) ranged from 2 (95% CI 0.0 to 11.8; in women age 45 to 54 years) to 8 (95% CI -0.1 to 83.7; in men age 65 to 74 years). In the sensitivity analyses, the index was also positive for all age categories suggesting more benefits than harms.

Conclusion

This study suggests an overall benefit of aspirin for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease and cancer based on population-based data. For individual preventive counseling, additional benefit harm analyses should explore which individuals should or should not take aspirin based on their risk profile for cardiovascular, cancer and gastrointestinal outcomes and based on their outcome preferences. Thereby, risk-stratified and preference-sensitive prevention could become a reality.

Management of low-dose aspirin and clopidogrel in clinical practice: a gastrointestinal perspective

Low-dose aspirin, alone or combined with other antiplatelet agents, is increasingly prescribed for cardiovascular prevention. However, the cardiovascular benefits should be evaluated together with the gastrointestinal risks. Low-dose aspirin is associated with upper and lower gastrointestinal injury, although lower gastrointestinal effects are poorly characterized. This gastrointestinal risk differs among antiplatelets drugs users. The most important risk factors are history of peptic ulcer, older age, and concomitant use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or dual antiplatelet therapy. Effective upper gastrointestinal prevention strategies are available and should be used in at-risk patients taking low-dose aspirin or clopidogrel. Proton pump inhibitors seem to be the best gastroprotective agents, whereas the benefits of Helicobacter pylori eradication are still unclear. Low-dose aspirin has additional effects in the gastrointestinal tract. A large body of evidence indicates that it can protect against different cancers, in particular colorectal cancer. This effect could modify the future indications for use of low-dose aspirin and the risk-benefit balance.

Chemopreventive effects of aspirin at a glance

Experimental, epidemiological, and clinical data from the last two decades have each supported the hypothesis that aspirin possesses anticancer properties, and that its use may also reduce the lifetime probability of developing or dying from a number of cancers. Aspirin's ability to act on multiple key metabolic and signaling pathways via inhibition of the cyclooxygenase (COX) enzyme, as well as through COX-independent mechanisms, makes it particularly relevant in the fight against cancer. A growing body of evidence indicates that aspirin may not only reduce cancer risk, but also prevent metastasis and angiogenesis while slowing the rate of mutation-inducing DNA damage. These emerging benefits of aspirin are offset to some extent by the known risks of treatment, such as cardiovascular events and gastrointestinal bleeding. However, it has been shown that pre-treatment risk assessment of individual patients and the use of proton pump inhibitors or Helicobacter pylori eradication therapy concomitantly with aspirin treatment can reduce these potential risks. Thus, the significant benefits of aspirin treatment, coupled with recent data concerning its risks, may prove to tip the balance in favor of aspirin use in cancer prevention.

Antithrombotic drugs, patient characteristics, and gastrointestinal bleeding: Clinical translation and areas of research

Gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) is a potentially fatal and avoidable medical condition that poses a burden on global health care costs. Current understanding of the roles of platelet activation and thrombin generation/activity in vascular medicine has led to the development of effective antithrombotic treatments. However, in parallel with a sustained coronary and cerebral flow patency, the increasingly intensive treatment with warfarin; direct oral anticoagulant drugs [DOACs], and/or with aspirin ± clopidogrel (or ± prasugrel or ± ticagrelor), has increased the burden of GIBs related to the use of antithrombotic agents. Compelling evidence concerning this issue is accumulating to indicate that: 1) the risk of GIB related to the use of antithrombotic drugs dramatically differs in different clinical settings; and 2) the characteristics of patients (e.g., severity of illness, comorbidities) in whom it is used exert a greater impact on the risk of GIB than the type of antithrombotic agent employed. The latter concept argues for the occurrence of GIB as reflecting the presence of patients at the highest risk for adverse outcomes. The HAS-BLED score identifies subjects at risk of bleeding among those untreated and those treated with warfarin, DOACs and/or low-dose aspirin. Its use within the frame of a severity score (e.g., the CHA2DS2-VASc score in patients with atrial fibrillation) helps balance the benefits and the risks of an antithrombotic treatment and identify those patients in whom the absolute gain (vascular events prevented) outweighs the risk of GIB. Potential implications of the latter information in settings other than atrial fibrillation is thoroughly discussed.

Prophylactic use of aspirin: systematic review of harms and approaches to mitigation in the general population

A careful assessment of benefits and harms is required to assess suitability of aspirin as a prophylactic public health measure. However, comprehensive population-level data on harms are lacking. We collected and synthesized age and sex-specific data on harms relevant to aspirin use in average-risk individuals aged 50 years or older. We conducted systematic literature searches to identify baseline rates of gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding, peptic ulcer, major extra-cranial bleeding, and case-fatality rates due to GI bleeding or peptic ulcer in general population. The magnitude of aspirin-associated increase, the prevalence and attributable risk of Helicobacter pylori infection on these events in aspirin users was also assessed. Baseline rates of major extracranial bleeding events and GI complications increase with age; an almost threefold to fourfold increase is observed from age 50-54 to 70-74 years. Low or standard-dose aspirin use increases GI bleeding events by 60% leading to an annual excess of 0.45 and 0.79 GI bleeding events per 1,000 women and men aged 50-54 years respectively. 5-10% of major GI complications are fatal; a clear age dependence--higher fatality in older individuals, is seen. Eradication of H. pylori infection before aspirin use could reduce the incidence of upper GI complications by 25-30%. GI complications are increased by about 60% due to aspirin use but are fatal only in a very small proportion of individuals younger than 70 years of age. Major bleeding events that are comparable in severity to cancer or CVD, are infrequent. Screening and eradication of H. pylori infection could substantially lower aspirin-related GI harms.

Patterns in the use of low-dose acetylsalicylic acid and other therapies following upper gastrointestinal bleeding

BACKGROUND

Anticoagulants and/or antiplatelet agents such as acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) are important in prevention of cardiovascular (CV) events, but may be associated with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). However, discontinuing these agents may leave patients at risk of CV events.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to assess patterns of therapy after UGIB in routine clinical practice.

METHODS

The Health Improvement Network UK primary care database was used to identify a cohort of patients aged 40-84 years with a UGIB event between 2000 and 2007 (n = 2,036). Patients were followed up for 1 year from the recorded UGIB. Re-prescription rates for antithrombotics and drugs that can modify the risk of UGIB were estimated at 30, 90, 180, and 365 days.

RESULTS

At 365 days, the re-prescription rate was 43 % for ASA, 66 % for warfarin, 69 % for clopidogrel, and 49 % for dipyridamole. The re-prescription rate of gastroprotective agents at 365 days for current users of histamine H2-receptor antagonists was 36 % and that of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) was 97 %. In patients who were prescribed ASA before UGIB (n = 572), only 24 % were prescribed a PPI in the previous year. In patients who were prescribed ASA in the year after UGIB (n = 337), 92 % were prescribed a PPI.

CONCLUSIONS

Antiplatelet use fell after UGIB events. In patients who were prescribed a PPI after a UGIB event, there was increased re-prescription of antiplatelet agents and antithrombotics.

Aspirin for primary prevention of cardiovascular events: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and subgroup analysis by sex and diabetes status

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the benefits and harms of aspirin for the primary prevention of CVD and determine whether the effects vary by sex and diabetes status.

METHODS

We searched Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases for randomized controlled trials comparing the effects of aspirin with placebo or control in people with no pre-existing CVD. Two investigators independently extracted data and assessed the study quality. Analyses were performed using Stata version 12.

RESULTS

Fourteen trials (107,686 participants) were eligible. Aspirin was associated with reductions in major cardiovascular events (risk ratio, 0.90; 95% confidence interval, 0.85-0.95), myocardial infarction (0.86; 0.75-0.93), ischemic stroke (0.86; 0.75-0.98) and all-cause mortality (0.94; 0.89-0.99). There were also increases in hemorrhagic stroke (1.34; 1.01-1.79) and major bleeding (1.55; 1.35-1.78) with aspirin. The number needed to treat to prevent 1 major cardiovascular event over a mean follow-up of 6.8 years was 284. By comparison, the numbers needed to harm to cause 1 major bleeding is 299. In subgroup analyses, pooled results demonstrated a reduction in myocardial infarction among men (0.71; 0.59-0.85) and ischemic stroke among women (0.77; 0.63-0.93). Aspirin use was associated with a reduction (0.65; 0.51-0.82) in myocardial infarction among diabetic men. In meta-regression analyses, the results suggested that aspirin therapy might be associated with a decrease in stroke among diabetic women and a decrease in MI among diabetic men and risk reductions achieved with low doses (75 mg/day) were as large as those obtained with higher doses (650 mg/day).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of low-dose aspirin was beneficial for primary prevention of CVD and the decision regarding an aspirin regimen should be made on an individual patient basis. The effects of aspirin therapy varied by sex and diabetes status. A clear benefit of aspirin in the primary prevention of CVD in people with diabetes needs more trials.

Cost-effectiveness of aspirin adjuvant therapy in early stage colorectal cancer in older patients

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Recent observational studies showed that post-operative aspirin use reduces cancer relapse and death in the earliest stages of colorectal cancer. We sought to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of aspirin as an adjuvant therapy in Stage I and II colorectal cancer patients aged 65 years and older.

METHODS

Two five-state Markov models were constructed separately for Stage I and II colorectal cancer using TreeAge Pro 2014. Two hypothetical cohorts of 10,000 individuals at a starting age of 65 years and with colorectal cancer in remission were put through the models separately. Cost-effectiveness of aspirin was evaluated against no treatment (Stage I and II) and capecitabine (Stage II) over a 20-year period from the United States societal perspective. Extensive one-way sensitivity analyses and multivariable Probabilistic Sensitivity Analyses (PSA) were performed.

RESULTS

In the base case analyses, aspirin was cheaper and more effective compared to other comparators in both stages. Sensitivity analyses showed that no treatment and capecitabine (Stage II only) can be cost-effective alternatives if the utility of taking aspirin is below 0.909, aspirin's annual fatal adverse event probability exceeds 0.57%, aspirin's relative risk of disease progression is 0.997 or more, or when capecitabine's relative risk of disease progression is less than 0.228. Probabilistic Sensitivity Analyses (PSA) further showed that aspirin could be cost-effective 50% to 80% of the time when the willingness-to-pay threshold was varied from USD 20,000 to USD 100,000.

CONCLUSION

Even with a modest treatment benefit, aspirin is likely to be cost-effective in Stage I and II colorectal cancer, thus suggesting a potential unique role in secondary prevention in this group of patients.

Gastrointestinal ulcers, role of aspirin, and clinical outcomes: pathobiology, diagnosis, and treatment

Peptic ulcer disease is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in the US with more than six million diagnoses annually. Ulcers are reported as the most common cause of hospitalization for upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding and are often a clinical concern due to the widespread use of aspirin and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, both of which have been shown to induce ulcer formation. The finding that Helicobacter pylori infection (independent of aspirin use) is associated with the development of ulcers led to a more thorough understanding of the causes and pathogenesis of ulcers and an improvement in therapeutic options. However, many patients infected with H. pylori are asymptomatic and remain undiagnosed. Complicating matters is a current lack of understanding of the association between aspirin use and asymptomatic ulcer formation. Low-dose aspirin prescriptions have increased, particularly for cardioprotection. Unfortunately, the GI side effects associated with aspirin therapy continue to be a major complication in both symptomatic and asymptomatic patients. These safety concerns should be important considerations in the decision to use aspirin and warrant further education. The medical community needs to continue to improve awareness of aspirin-induced GI bleeding to better equip physicians and improve care for patients requiring aspirin therapy.

Absence of Helicobacter pylori is not protective against peptic ulcer bleeding in elderly on offending agents: lessons from an exceptionally low prevalence population

Aim. Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection is exceptionally rare in population from the north-eastern region of Peninsular Malaysia. This provides us an opportunity to contemplate the future without H. pylori in acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding.

Methods. All cases in the GI registry with GI bleeding between 2003 and 2006 were reviewed. Cases with confirmed non-variceal aetiology were analysed. Rockall score > 5 was considered high risk for bleeding and primary outcomes studied were in-hospital mortality, recurrent bleeding and need for surgery.

Results. The incidence of non-variceal upper GI bleeding was 2.2/100,000 person-years. Peptic ulcer bleeding was the most common aetiology (1.8/100,000 person-years). In-hospital mortality (3.6%), recurrent bleeding (9.6%) and need for surgery (4.0%) were uncommon in this population with a largely low risk score (85.2% with score ≤5). Elderly were at greater risk for bleeding (mean 68.5 years, P = 0.01) especially in the presence of duodenal ulcers (P = 0.04) despite gastric ulcers being more common. NSAIDs, aspirin and co-morbidities were the main risk factors.

Conclusions. The absence of H. pylori infection may not reduce the risk of peptic ulcer bleeding in the presence of risk factors especially offending drugs in the elderly.

Primary non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding in NSAID and low-dose aspirin users: development and validation of risk scores for either medication in two large Dutch cohorts

BACKGROUND

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and low-dose acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) have several adverse gastrointestinal (GI) effects, including upper GI bleeding. We aimed to develop a simple risk score to identify high risk NSAID and ASA users for primary upper GI bleeding.

METHODS

Using data from two large anonymized health insurance databases, we defined a development and validation cohort with NSAID and ASA users which were followed-up for the occurrence of a primary upper GI bleeding. Cox regression analyses identified risk factors which were combined into simple risk scores. C-statistics were used to evaluate the discriminative ability of these scores in a validation cohort.

RESULTS

In total, 421 cases of upper GI bleeding were identified in the initial cohort of 784,263 NSAID users (incidence rate 54.2 per 10,000 person-years), while 1,295 cases of upper GI bleeding were identified in 235,531 ASA users (incidence rate 37.9 per 10,000 person-years). The risk of upper GI bleeding increased with a higher risk score, which for NSAID users included age, male gender, anemia and concomitant use of ASA or anticoagulants. For ASA users, age, anemia, diabetes and concomitant use of other antiplatelet drugs or anticoagulants were included in the risk score. The C-statistics in the validation cohort were 0.68 and 0.63 or NSAID and ASA users, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Risk factors for primary upper GI bleeding are to a large extent similar for NSAID and ASA users. Using a risk score based on these risk factors, patients at the highest risk can be identified with moderate accuracy.