Risk of gastrointestinal haemorrhage with long term use of aspirin: meta-analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Derry S
PROVIDER: S-EPMC27521 | biostudies-literature | 2000 Nov
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Risk of gastrointestinal haemorrhage with long term use of aspirin: meta-analysis.
BMJ (Clinical research ed.) 20001101 7270
<h4>Objectives</h4>To assess the incidence of gastrointestinal haemorrhage associated with long term aspirin therapy and to determine the effect of dose reduction and formulation on the incidence of such haemorrhage.<h4>Design</h4>Meta-analysis of 24 randomised controlled trials (almost 66 000 participants).<h4>Intervention</h4>Aspirin compared with placebo or no treatment, for a minimum of one year.<h4>Main outcome measures</h4>Incidence of gastrointestinal haemorrhage.<h4>Results</h4>Gastroint ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Background and objectivesAspirin is widely used for short-term treatment of pain, fever or colds, but there are only limited data regarding the safety of this use. To summarize the available data on this topic, we conducted a meta-analysis of the published clinical trial literature regarding the gastrointestinal adverse effects of short-term use of aspirin in comparison with placebo and other medications commonly used for the same purpose.Data sources and methodsAn extensive literature search identified 119,310 articles regarding possible adverse effects of aspirin, among which 23,131 appeared to possibly include relevant data. An automated text-mining procedure was used to score the references for potential relevance for the meta-analysis. The 3,983 highest-scoring articles were reviewed individually to identify those with data that could be included in this analysis. Ultimately, 78 relevant articles were identified that contained gastrointestinal adverse event data from clinical trials of aspirin versus placebo or an active comparator. Odds ratios (ORs) computed using a Mantel-Haenszel estimator were used to summarize the comparative effects on dyspepsia, nausea/vomiting, and abdominal pain, considered separately and also aggregated as 'minor gastrointestinal events'. Gastrointestinal bleeds, ulcers, and perforations were also investigated.ResultsData were obtained regarding 19,829 subjects (34 % treated with aspirin, 17 % placebo, and 49 % an active comparator). About half of the aspirin subjects took a single dose. Aspirin was associated with a higher risk of minor gastrointestinal events than placebo or active comparators: the summary ORs were 1.46 (95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.15-1.86) and 1.81 (95 % CI 1.61-2.04), respectively. Ulcers, perforation, and serious bleeding were not seen after use of aspirin or any of the other interventions.ConclusionsDuring short-term use, aspirin is associated with a higher frequency of gastrointestinal complaints than other medications commonly used for treatment of pain, colds, and fever. Serious adverse events were not observed with aspirin or any of the comparators.
| S-EPMC3627011 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND: Age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is the main cause of blindness and the curative options are limited. The objective of this meta-analysis was to determine the association between aspirin use and risk of AMD. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and reference lists. A meta-analysis was performed by STATA software. RESULTS: Ten studies involving 171,729 individuals examining the association between aspirin use and risk of AMD were included. Among the included studies, 2 were randomized-controlled trials (RCTs), 4 were case-control studies and 4 were cohort studies. The relative risks (RRs) were pooled using a random-effects model. Relative risks with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of aspirin use as a risk for AMD. The pooled RR of 10 included studies between the use of aspirin and risk of AMD was 1.09 (95% CI, 0.96-1.24). The same result was detected in early and late stage AMD subgroup analysis. In the subgroup analyses, the pooled RR of RCTs, case-control studies and cohort studies were 0.81 (95% CI, 0.64-1.02), 1.02 (95% CI, 0.92-1.14) and 1.08 (95% CI, 0.91-1.28), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The use of aspirin was not associated with the risk of AMD.
| S-EPMC3597550 | biostudies-other
Project description:ImportanceThe US Preventive Services Task Force recently recommended the use of aspirin to prevent colorectal cancer and cardiovascular disease among many US adults. However, the association of aspirin use with the risk for other cancer types and the potential population-wide effect of aspirin use on cancer, particularly within the context of screening, remain uncertain.ObjectivesTo examine the potential benefits of aspirin use for overall and subtype-specific cancer prevention at a range of doses and durations of use and to estimate the absolute benefit of aspirin in the context of screening.Design, setting, and participantsTwo large US prospective cohort studies, the Nurses' Health Study (1980-2010) and Health Professionals Follow-up Study (1986-2012), followed up 135 965 health care professionals (88 084 women and 47 881 men, respectively) who reported on aspirin use biennially. The women were aged 30 to 55 years at enrollment in 1976; the men, aged 40 to 75 years in 1986. Final follow-up was completed on June 30, 2012, for the Nurses' Health Study cohort and January 31, 2010, for the Health Professionals Follow-up Study cohort, and data were accessed from September 15, 2014, to December 17, 2015.Main outcomes and measuresRelative risks (RRs) for incident cancers and population-attributable risk (PAR).ResultsAmong the 88 084 women and 47 881 men who underwent follow-up for as long as 32 years, 20 414 cancers among women and 7571 cancers among men were documented. Compared with nonregular use, regular aspirin use was associated with a lower risk for overall cancer (RR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.94-0.99), which was primarily owing to a lower incidence of gastrointestinal tract cancers (RR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.80-0.91), especially colorectal cancers (RR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.75-0.88). The benefit of aspirin on gastrointestinal tract cancers appeared evident with the use of at least 0.5 to 1.5 standard aspirin tablets per week; the minimum duration of regular use associated with a lower risk was 6 years. Among individuals older than 50 years, regular aspirin use could prevent 33 colorectal cancers per 100 000 person-years (PAR, 17.0%) among those who had not undergone a lower endoscopy and 18 colorectal cancers per 100 000 person-years (PAR, 8.5%) among those who had. Regular aspirin use was not associated with the risk for breast, advanced prostate, or lung cancer.Conclusions and relevanceLong-term aspirin use was associated with a modest but significantly reduced risk for overall cancer, especially gastrointestinal tract tumors. Regular aspirin use may prevent a substantial proportion of colorectal cancers and complement the benefits of screening.
| S-EPMC4900902 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundChronic microinflammation contributes to the progression of chronic kidney disease (CKD). Aspirin (ASA) has been used to treat inflammation for centuries. The effects of long-term low-dose ASA on CKD progression are unclear.MethodsWe examined the association of long-term use of newly initiated low-dose ASA (50-200 mg/day) with all-cause mortality using Cox proportional hazard models; with cardiovascular/cerebrovascular (CV) mortality and with end stage kidney disease (ESKD) using Fine and Gray competing risk regression models; with progression of CKD defined as patients' eGFR slopes steeper than -5 mL/min/1.73m2/year using logistic regression models in a nationwide cohort of US Veterans with incident CKD. Among 831,963 patients, we identified 385,457 who either initiated ASA (N = 21,228) within 1 year of CKD diagnosis or never received ASA (N = 364,229). We used propensity score matching to account for differences in key characteristics, yielding 29,480 patients (14,740 in each group).ResultsIn the matched cohort, over a 4.9-year median follow-up period, 11,846 (40.2%) patients (6,017 vs. 5,829 ASA users vs. non-users) died with 25.8% CV deaths, and 934 (3.2%) patients (476 vs. 458) reached ESKD. ASA users had a higher risk of faster decline of kidney functions, i.e., steeper slopes (OR 1.30 [95%CI: 1.18, 1.44], p < 0.01), but did not have apparent benefits on mortality (HR 0.97 [95%CI: 0.94, 1.01], p = 0.17), CV mortality (Sub-Hazard Ratio [SHR]1.06 [95%CI: 0.99-1.14], p = 0.11), or ESKD (SHR1.00 [95%CI: 0.88, 1.13], p = 0.95).ConclusionChronic low-dose ASA use was associated with faster kidney function deterioration, and no association was observed with mortality or risk of ESKD.
| S-EPMC10726126 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and objective: Long-term aspirin use for the primary prevention of cancer remains controversial, and variations in the effect of aspirin use on cancer outcomes by aspirin dose, follow-up duration, or study population have never been systematically evaluated. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of aspirin on primary cancer prevention and to determine whether the effect differed according to aspirin dose, follow-up duration, or study population. Materials and methods: Seven electronic databases were searched from inception to September 30, 2019. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that compared aspirin use versus no aspirin use in participants without pre-existing cancer and reported cancer outcomes were selected. Data were screened and extracted by different investigators. Analyses were performed using Review Manager 5.3 and Comprehensive Meta-Analysis 2.0. Total cancer incidence was defined as the primary clinical endpoint. Total cancer mortality, all-cause mortality, major bleeding, and total bleeding events were the secondary outcomes. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on aspirin dose, follow-up duration, and study populations. Results: Twenty-nine RCTs that randomized 200,679 participants were included. Compared with no aspirin, aspirin use was not associated with significant reductions in total cancer incidence (RR = 1.01, 95% CI: 0.97 to 1.04, P = 0.72), total cancer mortality (RR = 1.00, 95% CI: 0.93 to 1.07, P = 0.90), or all-cause mortality (RR = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.94 to 1.02, P =0.31); however, aspirin use was associated with a 44% increase in the risk of major bleeding (RR = 1.44, 95% CI: 1.32 to 1.57, P < 0.00001) and a 52% increase in the risk of total bleeding events (RR = 1.52, 95% CI: 1.33 to 1.74, P < 0.00001). Subgroup analyses demonstrated consistent results. Conclusions: Long-term aspirin use in individuals without pre-existing cancer was not associated with a significant reduction in total cancer incidence, cancer mortality, or all-cause mortality; however, aspirin use was associated with a significant increase in the risk of bleeding. Therefore, aspirin is not an appropriate choice for the primary cancer prevention.
| S-EPMC7532493 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe usefulness of aspirin to defend against cardiovascular disease in both primary and secondary settings is well recognized by the medical profession. Multiple studies also have found that daily aspirin significantly reduces cancer incidence and mortality. Despite these proven health benefits, aspirin use remains low among populations targeted by cardiovascular prevention guidelines. This article seeks to determine the long-term economic and population-health impact of broader use of aspirin by older Americans at higher risk for cardiovascular disease.Methods and findingsWe employ the Future Elderly Model, a dynamic microsimulation that follows Americans aged 50 and older, to project their lifetime health and spending under the status quo and in various scenarios of expanded aspirin use. The model is based primarily on data from the Health and Retirement Study, a large, representative, national survey that has been ongoing for more than two decades. Outcomes are chosen to provide a broad perspective of the individual and societal impacts of the interventions and include: heart disease, stroke, cancer, life expectancy, quality-adjusted life expectancy, disability-free life expectancy, and medical costs. Eligibility for increased aspirin use in simulations is based on the 2011-2012 questionnaire on preventive aspirin use of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. These data reveal a large unmet need for daily aspirin, with over 40% of men and 10% of women aged 50 to 79 presenting high cardiovascular risk but not taking aspirin. We estimate that increased use by high-risk older Americans would improve national life expectancy at age 50 by 0.28 years (95% CI 0.08-0.50) and would add 900,000 people (95% CI 300,000-1,400,000) to the American population by 2036. After valuing the quality-adjusted life-years appropriately, Americans could expect $692 billion (95% CI 345-975) in net health benefits over that period.ConclusionsExpanded use of aspirin by older Americans with elevated risk of cardiovascular disease could generate substantial population health benefits over the next twenty years and do so very cost-effectively.
| S-EPMC5130201 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceLow-dose aspirin use for chemoprevention of lung cancer risk remains controversial.ObjectivesTo investigate the association between low-dose aspirin use and lung cancer risk, and to identify specific subgroups that may derive the most benefit from low-dose aspirin use.Design, setting, and participantsThis nationwide, retrospective, cohort study used data from the Korean National Health Information Database from 2002 to 2015. Data analyses were performed from October 2016 to December 2018. Eligible participants (n = 12 969 400) were people aged 40 to 84 years who had undergone national health screening between 2009 and 2010 and had no history of lung cancer between 2006 and 2010 and no standard-dose aspirin use for 6 months between 2002 and 2010.Main outcomes and measuresThe duration of low-dose aspirin use between January 2002 and December 2010 was calculated for each participant. Lung cancer was defined as the first recorded diagnosis of lung cancer-using International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision codes and expanding benefit coverage-between January 2011 and December 2015.ResultsA total of 63 040 participants with a mean (SD) age of 66.4 (9.3) years received a diagnosis of lung cancer. Of these, 45 156 (71.6%) were men. The incidence rate of lung cancer was 98.8 per 100 000 person-years. The duration of low-dose aspirin use was none for 10 987 417 participants (84.7%), 1 to 2 years for 750 992 participants (5.8%), 3 to 4 years for 506 945 participants (3.9%), 5 to 6 years for 371 062 participants (2.9%), 7 to 8 years for 240 528 participants (1.9%), and 9 years for 112 456 participants (0.9%). Compared with no aspirin use, 5 to 6 years (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.92-0.99]), 7 to 8 years (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.90-0.99]), and 9 years (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.84-0.94]) of aspirin use were significantly associated with reduced lung cancer risk. After stratified analysis, a significant reduction of lung cancer risk was observed among people aged 65 years or older and among people without diabetes.Conclusions and relevanceAlthough the use of low-dose aspirin for more than 5 years was associated with decreased risk of lung cancer, particularly among elderly participants and among people without diabetes, the observed effect size was quite modest. Future prospective studies are needed to determine whether there is a causal association.
| S-EPMC6484667 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe aim of this study was to determine the risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH), ischaemic stroke, all stroke, any vascular event and all-cause mortality in 30-day survivors of ICH, according to age and sex.Patients and methodsWe linked national hospital discharge, population and cause of death registers to obtain a cohort of Dutch 30-day survivors of ICH from 1998 to 2010. We calculated cumulative incidences of recurrent ICH, ischaemic stroke, all stroke and composite vascular outcome, adjusted for competing risk of death and all-cause mortality. Additionally, we compared survival with the general population.ResultsWe included 19,444 ICH-survivors (52% male; median age 72 years, interquartile range 61-79; 78,654 patient-years of follow-up). First-year cumulative incidence of recurrent ICH ranged from 1.5% (95% confidence interval 0.9-2.3; men 35-54 years) to 2.4% (2.0-2.9; women 75-94 years). Depending on age and sex, 10-year risk of recurrent ICH ranged from 3.7% (2.6-5.1; men 35-54 years) to 8.1% (6.9-9.4; women 55-74 years); ischaemic stroke 2.6% to 7.0%, of all stroke 9.9% to 26.2% and of any vascular event 15.0% to 40.4%. Ten-year mortality ranged from 16.7% (35-54 years) to 90.0% (75-94 years). Relative survival was lower in all age-groups of both sexes, ranging from 0.83 (0.80-0.87) in 35- to 54-year-old men to 0.28 (0.24-0.32) in 75- to 94-year-old women.DiscussionICH-survivors are at high risk of recurrent ICH, of ischaemic stroke and other vascular events, and have a sustained reduced survival rate compared to the general population.ConclusionThe high risk of recurrent ICH, other vascular events and prolonged reduced survival-rates warrant clinical trials to determine optimal secondary prevention treatment after ICH.
| S-EPMC7856590 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Antithrombotic (anticoagulant or antiplatelet) therapy is withheld from some patients with cerebral cavernous malformations, because of uncertainty around the safety of these drugs in such patients. We aimed to establish whether antithrombotic therapy is associated with an increased risk of intracranial haemorrhage in adults with cerebral cavernous malformations. METHODS:In this population-based, cohort study, we used data from the Scottish Audit of Intracranial Vascular Malformations, which prospectively identified individuals aged 16 years and older living in Scotland who were first diagnosed with a cerebral cavernous malformation during 1999-2003 or 2006-10. We compared the association between use of antithrombotic therapy after first presentation and the occurrence of intracranial haemorrhage or persistent or progressive focal neurological deficit due to the cerebral cavernous malformations during up to 15 years of prospective follow-up with multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression assessed in all individuals identified in the database. We also did a systematic review and meta-analysis, in which we searched Ovid MEDLINE and Embase from database inception to Feb 1, 2019, to identify comparative studies to calculate the intracranial haemorrhage incidence rate ratio according to antithrombotic therapy use. We then generated a pooled estimate using the inverse variance method and a random effects model. FINDINGS:We assessed 300 of 306 individuals with a cerebral cavernous malformation who were eligible for study. 61 used antithrombotic therapy (ten [16%] of 61 used anticoagulation) for a mean duration of 7·4 years (SD 5·4) during follow-up. Antithrombotic therapy use was associated with a lower risk of subsequent intracranial haemorrhage or focal neurological deficit (one [2%] of 61 vs 29 [12%] of 239, adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·12, 95% CI 0·02-0·88; p=0·037). In a meta-analysis of six cohort studies including 1342 patients, antithrombotic therapy use was associated with a lower risk of intracranial haemorrhage (eight [3%] of 253 vs 152 [14%] of 1089; incidence rate ratio 0·25, 95% CI 0·13-0·51; p<0·0001; I2=0%). INTERPRETATION:Antithrombotic therapy use is associated with a lower risk of intracranial haemorrhage or focal neurological deficit from cerebral cavernous malformations than avoidance of antithrombotic therapy. These findings provide reassurance about safety for clinical practice and require further investigation in a randomised controlled trial. FUNDING:UK Medical Research Council, Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government, The Stroke Association, Cavernoma Alliance UK, and the Remmert Adriaan Laan Foundation.
| S-EPMC6744367 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Administration of aspirin has the potential for significant side effects of gastrointestinal (GI) injury mainly caused by gastric acid stimulation, especially in long-term users or users with original gastrointestinal diseases. The debate on the optimal treatment of aspirin-induced gastrointestinal injury is ongoing. We aimed to compare and rank the different treatments for aspirin-induced gastrointestinal injury based on current evidence. Methods: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), and Chinese databases for published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of different treatments for aspirin-induced gastrointestinal injury from inception to 1 May 2021. All of the direct and indirect evidence included was rated by network meta-analysis under a Bayesian framework. Results: A total of 10 RCTs, which comprised 503 participants, were included in the analysis. The overall quality of evidence was rated as moderate to high. Eleven different treatments, including omeprazole, lansoprazole, rabeprazole, famotidine, geranylgeranylacetone, misoprostol, ranitidine bismuth citrate, chili, phosphatidylcholine complex, omeprazole plus rebamipide, and placebo, were evaluated in terms of preventing gastrointestinal injury. It was suggested that omeprazole plus rebamipide outperformed other treatments, whereas geranylgeranylacetone and placebo were among the least treatments. Conclusion: This is the first systematic review and network meta-analysis of different treatments for aspirin-induced gastrointestinal injury. Our study suggested that omeprazole plus rebamipide might be considered the best option to treat aspirin-induced gastrointestinal injury. More multicenter, high quality, large sample size randomized controlled trials will confirm the advantages of these medicines in the treatment of aspirin-induced gastrointestinal injury in the future.
| S-EPMC8406693 | biostudies-literature