Association Between Long-Term Aspirin Use and Frailty in Men: The Physicians' Health Study.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Chronic inflammation may lead to frailty, however the potential for anti-inflammatory medications such as aspirin to prevent frailty is unknown. We sought to examine the association between long-term aspirin use and prevalent frailty.Methods
We included 12 101 men ≥60 years who participated in the Physicians' Health Study I, a completed aspirin randomized controlled trial (1982-1989). Annual questionnaires collected self-reported data on daily aspirin use, lifestyle, and clinical variables. Average aspirin use was summed into 2 categories: ≤60 days/year and >60 days/year. Frailty was assessed using a 33-item index 11 years after trial completion. A score of ≥0.21 was considered frail. Propensity score inverse probability of treatment weighting was used for statistical control of confounding. Logistic regression models estimated odds of frailty as a function of categories of average aspirin use.Results
Mean age was 70.5 years (range 60-101). Following an average of 11 ± 0.6 years of follow-up, aspirin use was reported as ≤60 days/year for 15%; 2413 participants (20%) were frail. Frequency of aspirin use was associated with smoking, alcohol consumption, hypertension, and cardiovascular disease, but negatively associated with bleeding and Coumadin use. The odds ratio (95% confidence intervals) for frailty was 0.85 (0.76-0.96) for average aspirin use >60 days/year versus aspirin use ≤60 days/year. Results were similar using an alternate definition of frailty.Conclusions
Long-term regular aspirin use is inversely associated with frailty among older men, even after consideration of multimorbidity and health behaviors. Work is needed to understand the role of medications with anti-inflammatory properties on aging.
SUBMITTER: Orkaby AR
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8140052 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
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:ObjectivesLimited data suggest that a healthy diet is associated with a lower risk of frailty. We sought to assess the relationship between three measures of diet quality and frailty among male physicians.DesignCross-sectional analysis of a cohort study.SettingPhysicians' Health Study.ParticipantsA total of 9861 initially healthy US men, aged 60 years or older, who provided data on frailty status and dietary habits.MeasurementsA cumulative deficit frailty index (FI) was calculated using 33 variables encompassing domains of comorbidity, functional status, mood, general health, social isolation, and change in weight. Diet quality was measured using the Alternative Healthy Eating Index (aHEI), Mediterranean Diet Score (MDS), and Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension (DASH).ResultsThe FI identified 38% of physicians as non-frail, 44% as pre-frail, and 18% as frail. Multinomial logistic regression models adjusted for age, smoking status, and energy intake showed that compared with the lowest aHEI quintiles, those in the highest quintiles had lower odds of frailty and pre-frailty compared with non-frailty (odds ratio [OR] for frailty = .47; 95% confidence interval [CI] = .39-.58; for pre-frailty: OR = .75; CI = .65-.87). Exercise did not modify this association (P interaction >.1). Similar relationships were observed for DASH and MDS quintiles with frailty and pre-frailty. Restricted cubic splines showed an inverse dose-response relationship of diet quality scores with odds of frailty and pre-frailty.ConclusionCross-sectional data show an inverse dose-response relationship of diet quality with pre-frailty and frailty. Future longitudinal studies are needed to investigate whether healthier diet is a modifiable risk factor for frailty. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00000500. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:770-776, 2020.
| S-EPMC7156335 | 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:ImportanceProspective data on the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) according to dose and duration of aspirin therapy are limited.ObjectiveTo examine the potential benefits of aspirin use for primary HCC prevention at a range of doses and durations of use within 2 prospective, nationwide populations.Design, setting, and participantsPooled analysis of 2 prospective US cohort studies: the Nurses' Health Study and the Health Professionals Follow-up Study. Data were accessed from November 1, 2017, through March 7, 2018. A total of 133 371 health care professionals who reported data on aspirin use, frequency, dosage, and duration of use biennially since 1980 in women and 1986 in men were included. Individuals with a cancer diagnosis at baseline (except nonmelanoma skin cancer) were excluded.Main outcomes and measuresCox proportional hazards regression models were used to calculate multivariable adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for HCC.ResultsOf the 133 371 participants, 87 507 were women and 45 864 were men; in 1996, the median time of follow-up, the mean (SD) age was 62 (8) years for women and 64 (8) years for men. Over more than 26 years of follow-up encompassing 4 232 188 person-years, 108 incident HCC cases (65 women, 43 men) were documented. Compared with nonregular use, regular aspirin use (≥2 standard-dose [325-mg] tablets per week) was associated with reduced HCC risk (adjusted HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.34-0.77). This benefit appeared to be dose related: compared with nonuse, the multivariable-adjusted HR for HCC was 0.87 (95% CI, 0.51-1.48) for up to 1.5 standard-dose tablets per week, 0.51 (95% CI, 0.30-0.86) for more than 1.5 to 5 tablets per week, and 0.49 (95% CI, 0.28-0.96) for more than 5 tablets per week (P for trend = .006). Significantly lower HCC risk was observed with increasing duration (P for trend = .03); this decrease was apparent with use of 1.5 or more standard-dose aspirin tablets per week for 5 or more years (adjusted HR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.21-0.77). In contrast, use of nonaspirin nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs was not significantly associated with HCC risk (adjusted HR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.78-1.51).Conclusions and relevanceThis study suggests that regular, long-term aspirin use is associated with a dose-dependent reduction in HCC risk, which is apparent after 5 or more years of use. Similar associations were not found with nonaspirin NSAIDs. Further research appears to be needed to clarify whether aspirin use represents a feasible strategy for primary prevention against HCC.
| S-EPMC6440745 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVES: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. DESIGN:Meta-analysis of 24 randomised controlled trials (almost 66 000 participants). INTERVENTION:Aspirin compared with placebo or no treatment, for a minimum of one year. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Incidence of gastrointestinal haemorrhage. RESULTS:Gastrointestinal haemorrhage occurred in 2.47% of patients taking aspirin compared with 1.42% taking placebo (odds ratio 1.68; 95% confidence interval 1.51 to 1.88); the number needed to harm was 106 (82 to 140) based on an average of 28 months' therapy. At doses below 163 mg/day, gastrointestinal haemorrhage occurred in 2.30% of patients taking aspirin compared with 1.45% taking placebo (1.59; 1.40 to 1.81). Meta-regression showed no relation between gastrointestinal haemorrhage and dose. For modified release formulations of aspirin the odds ratio was 1.93 (1.15 to 3.23). CONCLUSIONS:Long term therapy with aspirin is associated with a significant increase in the incidence of gastrointestinal haemorrhage. No evidence exists that reducing the dose or using modified release formulations would reduce the incidence of gastrointestinal haemorrhage.
| S-EPMC27521 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAlthough aspirin is increasingly utilized to reduce the event of severe perioperative complications, the effect of long-term aspirin use (L-AU) on perioperative complications in patients undergoing shoulder arthroplasty (SA) has not been well studied. The goal of the present study is to identify the influence of L-AU on perioperative complications in individuals undergoing SA.MethodsWe selected data from the National Inpatient Sample database between 2010 and 2019, to identify adult patients with SA. Patients were subsequently categorized into L-AU and whole non-L-AU cohorts according to the presence of aspirin use. The demographic and comorbidity characteristics were matched using propensity score matching (PSM). The Pearson chi-square test, Wilcoxon rank test and logistic regression were utilized to assess the association of L-AU with perioperative complications.ResultsFrom 2010 to 2019, a total of 162,418 SA patients satisfied the inclusion criteria, with 22,659 (13.95%) using aspirin on a long-term basis. The vast majority of the patients with pre-existing L-AU were aged 65-74 years, female, White and had Medicare insurance. L-AU before surgery was linked to increased risks of perioperative complications, such as blood transfusion (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 1.339), genitourinary disease (aOR: 1.349), acute renal failure (aOR: 1.292), acute myocardial infarction (aOR: 1.494), higher total charge (L-AU vs. the whole non-L-AU vs. matched non-L-AU: $66,727.15 vs. $59,697.08 vs. $59,926.32), and prolonged hospitalization stay (LOS) (aOR: 0.837). However, L-AU was considered a protective factor of acute cerebrovascular disease (aOR: 0.722) and stroke (aOR: 0.725).ConclusionsOur study is based on the largest open-access all-payer inpatient database, revealing a noteworthy finding of aspirin's protective and adverse impact on different postoperative complications in the US population, such as acute cardiovascular disease, and stroke, etc. Further studies assessing the optimum preoperative aspirin duration and dosage to meet the best benefit quantity for patients with planned joint arthroplasties are suggested.
| S-EPMC10666390 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveSepsis is the syndrome of life-threatening organ dysfunction resulting from dysregulated host response to infection. Aspirin, an anti-inflammatory agent, may play a role in attenuating the inflammatory response during infection. We evaluated the association between aspirin use and long-term rates of sepsis as well as sepsis outcomes.MethodsWe analyzed data from 30,239 adults ≥45 years old in the Reasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) cohort. The primary exposure was aspirin use, identified via patient interview. The primary outcome was sepsis hospitalization, defined as admission for infection with two or more systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria. We fit Cox proportional hazards models assessing the association between aspirin use and rates of sepsis, adjusted for participant demographics, health behaviors, chronic medical conditions, medication adherence, and biomarkers. We used a propensity-matched analysis and a series of sensitivity analyses to assess the robustness of our results. We also examined risk of organ dysfunction and hospital mortality during hospitalization for sepsis.ResultsAmong 29,690 REGARDS participants with follow-up data available, 43% reported aspirin use (n = 12,869). Aspirin users had higher sepsis rates (hazard ratio 1.35; 95% CI: 1.22-1.49) but this association was attenuated following adjustment for potential confounders (adjusted HR 0.99; 95% CI: 0.88-1.12). We obtained similar results in propensity-matched and sensitivity analyses. Among sepsis hospitalizations, aspirin use was not associated with organ dysfunction or hospital death.ConclusionsIn the REGARDS cohort, baseline aspirin use was not associated with long-term rates of sepsis.
| S-EPMC5905958 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIncreasing overuse of opioids in the United States may be driven in part by physician prescribing. However, the extent to which individual physicians vary in opioid prescribing and the implications of that variation for long-term opioid use and adverse outcomes in patients are unknown.MethodsWe performed a retrospective analysis involving Medicare beneficiaries who had an index emergency department visit in the period from 2008 through 2011 and had not received prescriptions for opioids within 6 months before that visit. After identifying the emergency physicians within a hospital who cared for the patients, we categorized the physicians as being high-intensity or low-intensity opioid prescribers according to relative quartiles of prescribing rates within the same hospital. We compared rates of long-term opioid use, defined as 6 months of days supplied, in the 12 months after a visit to the emergency department among patients treated by high-intensity or low-intensity prescribers, with adjustment for patient characteristics.ResultsOur sample consisted of 215,678 patients who received treatment from low-intensity prescribers and 161,951 patients who received treatment from high-intensity prescribers. Patient characteristics, including diagnoses in the emergency department, were similar in the two treatment groups. Within individual hospitals, rates of opioid prescribing varied widely between low-intensity and high-intensity prescribers (7.3% vs. 24.1%). Long-term opioid use was significantly higher among patients treated by high-intensity prescribers than among patients treated by low-intensity prescribers (adjusted odds ratio, 1.30; 95% confidence interval, 1.23 to 1.37; P<0.001); these findings were consistent across multiple sensitivity analyses.ConclusionsWide variation in rates of opioid prescribing existed among physicians practicing within the same emergency department, and rates of long-term opioid use were increased among patients who had not previously received opioids and received treatment from high-intensity opioid prescribers. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health.).
| S-EPMC5428548 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundFrailty is a multidimensional syndrome characterized by loss of physiologic and cognitive reserves that confers vulnerability to adverse outcomes. We determined the prevalence, correlates and outcomes associated with frailty among adults admitted to intensive care.MethodsWe prospectively enrolled 421 critically ill adults aged 50 or more at 6 hospitals across the province of Alberta. The primary exposure was frailty, defined by a score greater than 4 on the Clinical Frailty Scale. The primary outcome measure was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcome measures included adverse events, 1-year mortality and quality of life.ResultsThe prevalence of frailty was 32.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 28.3%-37.5%). Frail patients were older, were more likely to be female, and had more comorbidities and greater functional dependence than those who were not frail. In-hospital mortality was higher among frail patients than among non-frail patients (32% v. 16%; adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.81, 95% CI 1.09-3.01) and remained higher at 1 year (48% v. 25%; adjusted hazard ratio 1.82, 95% CI 1.28-2.60). Major adverse events were more common among frail patients (39% v. 29%; OR 1.54, 95% CI 1.01-2.37). Compared with nonfrail survivors, frail survivors were more likely to become functionally dependent (71% v. 52%; OR 2.25, 95% CI 1.03-4.89), had significantly lower quality of life and were more often readmitted to hospital (56% v. 39%; OR 1.98, 95% CI 1.22-3.23) in the 12 months following enrolment.InterpretationFrailty was common among critically ill adults aged 50 and older and identified a population at increased risk of adverse events, morbidity and mortality. Diagnosis of frailty could improve prognostication and identify a vulnerable population that might benefit from follow-up and intervention.
| S-EPMC3903764 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAlthough much has been written about the potential power of the association between physicians' personal health practices and those of their patients, objective studies of this relationship are lacking. We investigated this association using objectively measured health care indicators.MethodsWe assessed 8 indicators of quality of health care (screening and vaccination practices) for primary care physicians (n = 1488) and their adult patients (n = 1,886,791) in Israel's largest health maintenance organization; the physicians were also patients in this health care system.ResultsFor all 8 indicators, patients whose physicians were compliant with the preventive practices were more likely (p < 0.05) to also have undergone these preventive measures than patients with noncompliant physicians. We also found that more similar preventive practices showed somewhat stronger relations. For example, among patients whose physician had received the influenza vaccine, 49.1% of eligible patients received flu vaccines compared with 43.2% of patients whose physicians did not receive the vaccine (5.9% absolute difference, 13.7% relative difference). This is twice the relative difference (7.2%) shown for pneumococcal vaccine-eligible patients of influenza-vaccinated versus nonvaccinated physicians (60.9% v. 56.8%). When we examined the rates of unrelated practices, we found that, for example, mammography rates were identical for patients whose physicians did and did not receive the influenza vaccine.InterpretationWe found a consistent, positive relation between physicians' and patients' preventive health practices. Objectively establishing this healthy doctor-healthy patient relation should encourage prevention-oriented health care systems to better support and evaluate the effects on patients of improving the physical health of medical students and physicians.
| S-EPMC3652935 | biostudies-literature