Skip to main content
medRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search

A Comparison of Contemporary versus Older Studies of Aspirin for Primary Prevention

View ORCID ProfileFrank Moriarty, View ORCID ProfileMark H. Ebell
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/19004267
Frank Moriarty
1HRB Centre for Primary Care Research, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, 123 St. Stephens Green, Dublin 2, Ireland.
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Frank Moriarty
  • For correspondence: frankmoriarty@rcsi.ie
Mark H. Ebell
2College of Public Health, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA.
MD, MS
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Mark H. Ebell
  • For correspondence: ebell@uga.edu ebell@uga.edu
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Supplementary material
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

Objective This study compares the benefits and harms of aspirin for primary prevention before and after widespread use of statins and colorectal cancer screening.

Methods We compared studies of aspirin for primary prevention that recruited patients from 2005 onward with previous individual patient meta-analyses that recruited patients from 1978 to 2002. Data for contemporary studies were synthesized using random-effects models. We report vascular (major adverse cardiovascular events [MACE], myocardial infarction [MI], stroke), bleeding, cancer, and mortality outcomes.

Results The IPD analyses of older studies included 95,456 patients for CV prevention and 25,270 for cancer mortality, while the four newer studies had 61,604 patients. Relative risks for vascular outcomes for older vs newer studies follow: MACE: 0.89 (95% CI 0.83-0.95) vs 0.93 (0.86-0.99); fatal hemorrhagic stroke: 1.73 (1.11-2.72) vs 1.06 (0.66-1.70); any ischemic stroke: 0.86 (0.74-1.00) vs 0.86 (0.75-0.98); any MI: 0.84 (0.77-0.92) vs 0.88 (0.77-1.00); and non-fatal MI: 0.79 (0.71-0.88) vs 0.94 (0.83-1.08). Cancer death was not significantly decreased in newer studies (RR 1.11, 0.92-1.34). Major hemorrhage was significantly increased for both older and newer studies (RR 1.48, 95% CI 1.25-1.76 vs 1.37, 95% CI 1.24-1.53). There was no effect in either group on all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, fatal stroke, or fatal MI.

Conclusions In the modern era characterized by widespread statin use and cancer screening, aspirin does not reduce the risk of non-fatal MI or cancer death. There are no mortality benefits and a significant risk of major hemorrhage. Aspirin should no longer be recommended for primary prevention.

What is already known about this subject?

  • The cumulative evidence for aspirin suggests a role in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease, and in reducing cancer incidence and mortality.

  • However most of the trials of aspirin for primary prevention were set in Europe and the United States and recruited patients prior to the year 2000.

  • The benefits and harms of aspirin should be considered separately in studies performed in the eras before and after widespread use of statins and colorectal cancer screening.

What does this study add?

  • This study provides the most detailed summary to date of cardiac, stroke, bleeding, mortality and cancer outcomes to date in the literature.

  • In trials of aspirin for primary prevention from 2005 onwards, aspirin reduced major adverse cardiovascular events but significantly increased the risk of bleeding, with no benefit for mortality or,

  • Unlike older studies, there was no reduction in cancer mortality and non-fatal myocardial infarction.

How does this impact on clinical practice?

  • Our study suggests aspirin should not be recommended for primary prevention in the modern era.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors declare: support for the study as detailed below; no financial relationships with any organisations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous three years; Dr. Ebell served as a member of the US Preventive Services Task Force from 2012 to 2015 and voted on the current USPSTF recommendation regarding aspirin for primary prevention that is discussed in this manuscript.

Funding Statement

This work was supported in part by a 2019 Fulbright Teaching/Research Award to Dr. Ebell, and the HRB Centre for Primary Care Research grant (HRC/2014/01) for Dr. Moriarty.

Author Declarations

All relevant ethical guidelines have been followed and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Not Applicable

All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.

Not Applicable

Any clinical trials involved have been registered with an ICMJE-approved registry such as ClinicalTrials.gov and the trial ID is included in the manuscript.

Not Applicable

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant Equator, ICMJE or other checklist(s) as supplementary files, if applicable.

Yes

Footnotes

  • Support: This work was supported in part by a 2019 Fulbright Teaching/Research Award to Dr. Ebell, and the HRB Centre for Primary Care Research grant (HRC/2014/01) for Dr. Moriarty.

Data Availability

Extracted data used in this meta-analysis and analysis code are available at www.doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3149365.

http://www.doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3149365

  • Abbreviations

    ATT
    Antithrombotic Trialists
    CI
    Confidence interval
    ESC
    European Society of Cardiology
    IPD
    Individual patient data
    MI
    Myocardial infarction
    NICE
    National Institute for Health and Care Excellence
    NNT
    Number needed to treat
    RR
    Relative risk
    SIGN
    Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network
    T2DM
    Type 2 diabetes mellitus
    USPTF
    United States Preventive Services Task Force
  • Copyright 
    The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC 4.0 International license.
    Back to top
    PreviousNext
    Posted August 15, 2019.
    Download PDF

    Supplementary Material

    Data/Code
    Email

    Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

    NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

    Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
    A Comparison of Contemporary versus Older Studies of Aspirin for Primary Prevention
    (Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from medRxiv
    (Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the medRxiv website.
    CAPTCHA
    This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
    Share
    A Comparison of Contemporary versus Older Studies of Aspirin for Primary Prevention
    Frank Moriarty, Mark H. Ebell
    medRxiv 19004267; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/19004267
    Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
    Citation Tools
    A Comparison of Contemporary versus Older Studies of Aspirin for Primary Prevention
    Frank Moriarty, Mark H. Ebell
    medRxiv 19004267; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/19004267

    Citation Manager Formats

    • BibTeX
    • Bookends
    • EasyBib
    • EndNote (tagged)
    • EndNote 8 (xml)
    • Medlars
    • Mendeley
    • Papers
    • RefWorks Tagged
    • Ref Manager
    • RIS
    • Zotero
    • Tweet Widget
    • Facebook Like
    • Google Plus One

    Subject Area

    • Cardiovascular Medicine
    Subject Areas
    All Articles
    • Addiction Medicine (269)
    • Allergy and Immunology (549)
    • Anesthesia (134)
    • Cardiovascular Medicine (1747)
    • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (238)
    • Dermatology (172)
    • Emergency Medicine (310)
    • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (653)
    • Epidemiology (10778)
    • Forensic Medicine (8)
    • Gastroenterology (583)
    • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (2933)
    • Geriatric Medicine (286)
    • Health Economics (531)
    • Health Informatics (1918)
    • Health Policy (833)
    • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (742)
    • Hematology (290)
    • HIV/AIDS (627)
    • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (12495)
    • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (684)
    • Medical Education (299)
    • Medical Ethics (86)
    • Nephrology (321)
    • Neurology (2780)
    • Nursing (150)
    • Nutrition (431)
    • Obstetrics and Gynecology (553)
    • Occupational and Environmental Health (597)
    • Oncology (1454)
    • Ophthalmology (440)
    • Orthopedics (172)
    • Otolaryngology (255)
    • Pain Medicine (190)
    • Palliative Medicine (56)
    • Pathology (379)
    • Pediatrics (864)
    • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (362)
    • Primary Care Research (333)
    • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (2630)
    • Public and Global Health (5338)
    • Radiology and Imaging (1002)
    • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (594)
    • Respiratory Medicine (722)
    • Rheumatology (329)
    • Sexual and Reproductive Health (288)
    • Sports Medicine (278)
    • Surgery (327)
    • Toxicology (47)
    • Transplantation (149)
    • Urology (125)