Poor awareness of preventing aspirin-induced gastrointestinal injury with combined protective medications

Proton pump inhibitors and gastroprotection in patients treated with antithrombotic drugs: A cardiologic point of view

Aspirin, other antiplatelet agents, and anticoagulant drugs are used across a wide spectrum of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases. A concomitant proton pump inhibitor (PPI) treatment is often prescribed in these patients, as gastrointestinal complications are relatively frequent. On the other hand, a potential increased risk of cardiovascular events has been suggested in patients treated with PPIs; in particular, it has been discussed whether these drugs may reduce the cardiovascular protection of clopidogrel, due to pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic interactions through hepatic metabolism. Previously, the concomitant use of clopidogrel and omeprazole or esomeprazole has been discouraged. In contrast, it remains less known whether PPI use may affect the clinical efficacy of ticagrelor and prasugrel, new P2Y12 receptor antagonists. Current guidelines recommend PPI use in combination with antiplatelet treatment in patients with risk factors for gastrointestinal bleeding, including advanced age, concurrent use of anticoagulants, steroids, or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection. In patients taking oral anticoagulant with risk factors for gastrointestinal bleeding, PPIs could be recommended, even if their usefulness deserves further data. H. pylori infection should always be investigated and treated in patients with a history of peptic ulcer disease (with or without complication) treated with antithrombotic drugs. The present review summarizes the current knowledge regarding the widespread combined use of platelet inhibitors, anticoagulants, and PPIs, discussing consequent clinical implications.

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

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

Current Studies of Aspirin as an Anticancer Agent and Strategies to Strengthen its Therapeutic Application in Cancer

Aspirin has emerged as a promising intervention in cancer in the past decade. However, there are existing controversies regarding the anticancer properties of aspirin as its mechanism of action has not been clearly defined. In addition, the risk of bleeding in the gastrointestinal tract from aspirin is another consideration that requires medical and pharmaceutical scientists to work together to develop more potent and safe aspirin therapy in cancer. This review presents the most recent studies of aspirin with regard to its role in cancer prevention and treatment demonstrated by highlighted clinical trials, mechanisms of action as well as approaches to develop aspirin therapy best beneficial to cancer patients. Hence, this review provides readers with an overview of aspirin research in cancer that covers not only the unique features of aspirin, which differentiate aspirin from other non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), but also strategies that can be used in the development of drug delivery systems carrying aspirin for cancer management. These studies convey optimistic messages on the continuing efforts of the scientist on the way of developing an effective therapy for patients with a low response to current cancer treatments.

Efficacy of Teprenone for Prevention of NSAID-Induced Gastrointestinal Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: The study aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the efficacy of teprenone with control or other drugs for reducing the incidence of gastrointestinal (GI) adverse events in patients receiving long-term non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Methods: Databases of PubMed, Embase, BioMed Central, CENTRAL, and Google Scholar were searched up to November 10th, 2020 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing teprenone with control or other drugs. A random-effects model was used for the meta-analysis. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) tool was used for assessing the certainty of evidence. Results: Seven RCTs were included. Six compared teprenone with control and one with famotidine. Meta-analysis indicated a statistically significant reduced risk of GI ulcers in patients receiving teprenone as compared to control after 12 weeks/3months (RR 0.37 95% CI 0.17, 0.18 I ² = 0% p = 0.01). Pooled data of three open-label studies indicated statistically significant reduction of GI symptoms in patients on teprenone as compared to control at 6 months and 12 months, but not at 3 months. Comparing teprenone with control, our analysis indicated non-significant but a tendency of better reduction in Modified Lanza Score (MLS) with teprenone. The RCT comparing teprenone to famotidine demonstrated better reduction of MLS with famotidine. The certainty of evidence-based on GRADE was deemed to be low. Conclusion: Low-quality evidence indicates a beneficial role of teprenone in preventing GI injuries in patients receiving long-term NSAIDs. Further high-quality RCTs comparing teprenone with placebo as well as other gastroprotective drugs are needed to strengthen current evidence.

Natural polyphenols prevent indomethacin-induced and diclofenac-induced Caco-2 cell death by reducing endoplasmic reticulum stress regardless of their direct reactive oxygen species scavenging capacity

Objectives

Indomethacin (INDO) and diclofenac (DIC) can induce intestinal cell death through induction of oxidative stress-mediated ER stress and mitochondrial dysfunction. This study investigated the cytoprotective potential of 11 polyphenols, namely caffeic acid (CAF), curcumin (CUR), epigallocatechin gallate (EGCG), gallic acid (GAL), hypophyllanthin (HYPO), naringenin (NAR), phyllanthin (PHY), piperine (PIP), quercetin (QUE), rutin (RUT) and silymarin (SLY) against these two NSAIDs in Caco-2 cells.

Methods

Reactive oxygen species (ROS) production was determined with fluorescence spectroscopy using specific probes (DHE, DCFH-DA, HPF). Cell viability and mitochondrial function were assessed by MTT and TMRE assays. The mRNA levels of Bax, Bcl-2 and CHOP proteins were determined by quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction technique.

Key findings

All test polyphenols reduced NSAIDs-mediated ROS production. Only EGCG, QUE and RUT protected INDO-/DIC-induced cell death. These three polyphenols suppressed Bax/Bcl-2 mRNA ratio, CHOP up-regulation and MMP disruption in NSAIDs-treated cells. CAF and NAR prevented cytotoxicity from INDO, but not DIC. The cytoprotective effect of NAR, but not CAF, involved alteration of Bax/Bcl-2 mRNA ratio or MMP disruption, but not CHOP transcription.

Conclusion

The cytoprotective activity of polyphenols against NSAIDs-induced toxicity stemmed from either suppression of CHOP-related ER and mitochondria stresses or other CHOP-independent pathways, but not from the intrinsic ROS scavenging capacity.

The Role of Cyclooxygenase-2 in Colorectal Cancer

Colorectal cancer is the third common cancer in this world, accounting for more than 1 million cases each year. However, detailed etiology and mechanism of colorectal cancer have not been fully understood. For example, cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) and its product prostaglandin E₂ (PGE₂) have been closely linked to its occurrence, progression and prognosis. However, the mechanisms on how COX-2 and PGE₂-mediate the pathogenesis of colorectal cancer are obscure. In this review, we have summarized recent advances in studies of pathogenesis and control in colorectal cancer to assist further advances in the research for the cure of the cancer. In addition, the knowledge gained may also guide the audiences for reduction of the risk and control of this deadly disease.

COX-2 Signaling in the Tumor Microenvironment

Tumorigenesis is a multistep, complicated process, and many studies have been completed over the last few decades to elucidate this process. Increasingly, many studies have shifted focus toward the critical role of the tumor microenvironment (TME), which consists of cellular players, cell-cell communications, and extracellular matrix (ECM). In the TME, cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) has been found to be a key molecule mediating the microenvironment changes. COX-2 is an inducible form of the enzyme that converts arachidonic acid into the signal transduction molecules (thromboxanes and prostaglandins). COX-2 is frequently expressed in many types of cancers and has been closely linked to its occurrence, progression, and prognosis. For example, COX-2 has been shown to (1) regulate tumor cell growth, (2) promote tissue invasion and metastasis, (3) inhibit apoptosis, (4) suppress antitumor immunity, and (5) promote sustainable angiogenesis. In this chapter, we summarize recent advances of studies that have evaluated COX-2 signaling in TME.

The Protective Effect of Teprenone on Aspirin-Related Gastric Mucosal Injuries

Objective

Aspirin usage is associated with increased risk of gastrointestinal bleeding. The present study explored the potential of teprenone, an antiulcerative, in preventing aspirin-related gastric mucosal injuries.

Methods

280 patients with coronary diseases, naïve to aspirin medication, were admitted between 2011 and 2013 at the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang Chinese Medical University and randomized into two groups (n = 140). The aspirin group received aspirin enteric-coated tablets 100 mg/day, while the aspirin+teprenone group received teprenone 50 mg 3 times/day along with aspirin. The patients were recorded for gastrointestinal symptoms and gastric mucosal injuries during a follow-up period of 12 months with 3-month intervals.

Results

During the 3-month follow-up, no significant difference was observed in the incidence rate of gastrointestinal symptoms between the two groups (P = 0.498). However, the incidence rate of gastrointestinal symptoms was significantly lower in the aspirin+teprenone group than in the aspirin group during the follow-ups at 6 months (P = 0.036) and 12 months (P = 0.036). The incidence rate of gastric mucosal injuries in the aspirin group was significantly increased at 12 months compared to that at 3 months (P = 0.016). The incidence rates at 12 months and cumulative for the entire follow-up period in the aspirin+teprenone group were both significantly lower than those of the aspirin group (P = 0.049 and P = 0.001, respectively).

Conclusion

Long-term use of low-dose aspirin causes varying degrees of gastric mucosal damages and gastrointestinal symptoms; the severity will increase within a certain range with the extension of medication duration. Teprenone mitigates the gastrointestinal symptoms caused by low-dose aspirin, lowering both the incidence and severity of gastric mucosal injuries and exerting a positive protective effect.

Recent advances in pharmacological research on the management of irritable bowel syndrome

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), a common gastrointestinal (GI) disorder, is associated with various factors, including lifestyle, infection, stress, intestinal flora, and related diseases. The pharmacotherapeutic stimulation of receptors and downstream signaling pathways is effective in reducing IBS symptoms; however, it is still associated with adverse effects. Various receptors related to GI motility and visceral hypersensitivity should be considered to enhance the benefit/risk ratio of IBS treatments. This review discusses recent pharmacological advances in IBS management. Several receptors related to GI motility and abdominal pain are investigated in various angles. 5-Hydroxytryptamine (5-HT) is an important neurotransmitter that activates the colonic mucosal 5-HT₄ receptor without causing severe cardiovascular adverse effects. The clinical potential of ramosetron for diarrhea-predominant IBS has been suggested because of a lower risk of ischemic colitis than conventional 5-HT₃ receptor antagonists. Toll-like receptors (TLRs), especially TLR2 and TLR4, show a significant effect on the post-infection symptoms and lipopolysaccharide-mediated regulation of GI motility. Histamine is a well-known nitrogenous compound that regulates inflammatory responses and visceral hypersensitivity. Histamine 1 receptor-mediated sensitization of the transient receptor potential vanilloid 1 is associated with IBS. Pharmacological approaches based on these signaling pathways could be useful in the development of novel IBS treatments.

Acid-Suppressive Therapy and Risk of Infections: Pros and Cons

This narrative review summarises the benefits, risks and appropriate use of acid-suppressing drugs (ASDs), proton pump inhibitors and histamine-2 receptor antagonists, advocating a rationale balanced and individualised approach aimed to minimise any serious adverse consequences. It focuses on current controversies on the potential of ASDs to contribute to infections-bacterial, parasitic, fungal, protozoan and viral, particularly in the elderly, comprehensively and critically discusses the growing body of observational literature linking ASD use to a variety of enteric, respiratory, skin and systemic infectious diseases and complications (Clostridium difficile diarrhoea, pneumonia, spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, septicaemia and other). The proposed pathogenic mechanisms of ASD-associated infections (related and unrelated to the inhibition of gastric acid secretion, alterations of the gut microbiome and immunity), and drug-drug interactions are also described. Both probiotics use and correcting vitamin D status may have a significant protective effect decreasing the incidence of ASD-associated infections, especially in the elderly. Despite the limitations of the existing data, the importance of individualised therapy and caution in long-term ASD use considering the balance of benefits and potential harms, factors that may predispose to and actions that may prevent/attenuate adverse effects is evident. A six-step practical algorithm for ASD therapy based on the best available evidence is presented.

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).

PPI versus Histamine H2 Receptor Antagonists for Prevention of Upper Gastrointestinal Injury Associated with Low-Dose Aspirin: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

This study compared proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and histamine H2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs) for prevention of low-dose aspirin (LDA)-related gastrointestinal (GI) erosion, ulcer and bleeding. Electronic databases including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, and WanFang Data were searched from the date of their establishment to December 31, 2013. Randomized controlled trials comparing PPIs and H2RAs for prevention of GI injury associated with low-dose aspirin (LDA) were collected. Two reviewers independently abstracted studies and patient characteristics and appraised study quality using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.1 software. We included nine RCTs involving 1047 patients. The meta-analysis showed that PPIs were superior to H2RAs for prevention of LDA-associated GI erosion/ulcer [odds ratio (OR=0.28, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.16-0.50] and bleeding (OR=0.28, 95% CI: 0.14-0.59). In conclusion, PPIs were superior to H2RAs for prevention of LDA-related GI erosion/ulcer and bleeding. Higher quality, large, multicenter RCTs are needed to demonstrate the preventive effect of the two acid-suppressive drugs.

Strategies for prevention of re-bleeding after NSAIDs-related ulcers

AIM: To compare the therapeutic efficacy and safety of teprenone combined with short- versus long-term use of omeprazole in the prevention of re-bleeding after endoscopic hemostasis for NSAIDs-related ulcers.

METHODS: Patients with NSAIDs-related ulcers who underwent Monteggia liquid spraying for bleeding were randomly divided into four groups: a teprenone group (n = 28), an omeprazole group (n = 33), a short-term combination group (n = 31), and a long-term combination group (n = 35). The incidences of re-bleeding and adverse reactions occurring during the periods of 0-13, 14-26, 0-26 and 27-52 wk were compared among the four groups.

RESULTS: The rate of re-bleeding occurring between 0 and 13 wk was significantly higher in the teprenone group than in the other groups (all P < 0.05), and the differences were not statistically significant between the other three groups (all P > 0.05). During the periods between 14 and 26 weeks and between 27 and 52 wk, there were no statistically significant differences in the rates of re-bleeding between the four groups (all P > 0.05). The incidences of adverse reactions showed no significant differences between the four groups during the period of the first 26 weeks (all P > 0.05) or between the omeprazole group and long-term combination group during the period between 27 and 52 wk (P > 0.05), but were significantly higher in the omeprazole group and long-term combination group than in the short-term combination group (both P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION: Teprenone in combination with short-term use of omeprazole has comparable efficacy to long-term use of omeprazole but is associated with significantly less adverse reactions in preventing the occurrence of re-bleeding after NSAIDs-related ulcers.

Esomeprazole and aspirin fixed combination for the prevention of cardiovascular events

Low dose aspirin therapy plays a fundamental role in both the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular events. Although the evidence using low dose aspirin for secondary prevention is well-established, the decision to use aspirin for primary prevention is based on an evaluation of the patient’s risk of cardiovascular events compared to their risk of adverse events, such as bleeding. In addition to the risk of bleeding associated with long term aspirin administration, upper gastrointestinal side effects, such as dyspepsia often lead to discontinuation of therapy, which places patients at an increased risk for cardiovascular events. One option to mitigate adverse events and increase adherence is the addition of esomeprazole to the medication regimen. This review article provides an evaluation of the literature on the concomitant use of aspirin and esomeprazole available through February 2013. The efficacy, safety, tolerability, cost effectiveness, and patient quality of life of this regimen is discussed. A summary of the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interactions between aspirin and esomeprazole, as well as other commonly used cardiovascular medications are also reviewed. The addition of esomeprazole to low dose aspirin therapy in patients at high risk of developing gastric ulcers for the prevention of cardiovascular disease, significantly reduced their risk of ulcer development. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic studies suggested that esomeprazole did not affect the pharmacokinetic parameters or the antiplatelet effects of aspirin. Therefore, for those patients who are at a high risk of developing a gastrointestinal ulcer, the benefit of adding esomeprazole likely outweighs the risks of longer term proton pump inhibitor use, and the combination can be recommended. Administering the two agents separately may also be more economical. On the other hand, for those patients at lower risk of developing a gastrointestinal ulcer, both the additional risk and cost make the inclusion of a proton pump inhibitor unwarranted.

Mechanisms, prevention and clinical implications of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug-enteropathy

This article reviews the latest developments in understanding the pathogenesis, detection and treatment of small intestinal damage and bleeding caused by nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). With improvements in the detection of NSAID-induced damage in the small intestine, it is now clear that this injury and the associated bleeding occurs more frequently than that occurring in the stomach and duodenum, and can also be regarded as more dangerous. However, there are no proven-effective therapies for NSAID-enteropathy, and detection remains a challenge, particularly because of the poor correlation between tissue injury and symptoms. Moreover, recent studies suggest that commonly used drugs for protecting the upper gastrointestinal tract (i.e., proton pump inhibitors) can significantly worsen NSAID-induced damage in the small intestine. The pathogenesis of NSAID-enteropathy is complex, but studies in animal models are shedding light on the key factors that contribute to ulceration and bleeding, and are providing clues to the development of effective therapies and prevention strategies. Novel NSAIDs that do not cause small intestinal damage in animal models offer hope for a solution to this serious adverse effect of one of the most widely used classes of drugs.