Department of Medicine and Aging, and Center of Aging Science and Translational Medicine (CESI-Met), "G. D'Annunzio" University Foundation School of Medicine, Via Luigi Polacchi, 66013, Chieti, Italy.
Intern Emerg Med. 2019 Nov;14(8):1217-1231. doi: 10.1007/s11739-019-02191-4. Epub 2019 Sep 21.
Aspirin, in 2017, has celebrated its 120th birthday. The efficacy and safety of low-dose aspirin in secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease is well supported by many studies, instead in primary prevention it remains controversial, especially in the aftermath of the publication in 2018 of three novel primary prevention randomized clinical trials, showing that the benefit of low-dose aspirin, although additive to that of statin, is counterbalanced by an excess of (mainly gastrointestinal) bleeding events. The signal for a net benefit seems to be even more controversial in the elderly starting aspirin after the age of 70 years. While international guidelines have promptly downgraded their recommendations to more conservative indications, the practicing clinician is called to make the effort to individualize the treatment, after careful evaluation of the haemorrhagic risk vis-a-vis the risk to develop, in the mid-term and long-term follow-up, major cardiovascular events or cancer. This is a particularly complex task, given the different immediate and long-term impact of diverse outcomes on health, the dynamic nature over time of the benefit/risk balance, prompting periodic re-assessments of its indication, and the interindividual variability in aspirin response. The chemopreventive properties of aspirin, anticipated by a large body of epidemiological and mechanistic evidence, are awaiting their final confirmation by the long-term follow-up of the latest trials specifically designed to assess this endpoint, with the expectation to subvert the delicate benefit/risk balance of aspirin in primary prevention. This review is intended to provide an interpretation of past and current evidence to guide clinical decision making on the contemporary patient.
阿司匹林于 2017 年庆祝了它的 120 岁生日。许多研究都充分证实了小剂量阿司匹林在心血管疾病二级预防中的疗效和安全性,但在一级预防中,其效果仍存在争议,尤其是在 2018 年发表了三项新的一级预防随机临床试验之后,这些试验表明,小剂量阿司匹林的获益虽然与他汀类药物的获益相加,但却被(主要是胃肠道)出血事件的增加所抵消。在 70 岁以上开始服用阿司匹林的老年人中,这种净获益的信号似乎更具争议。虽然国际指南迅速将其建议降级为更保守的适应证,但临床医生需要努力根据出血风险与中期和长期随访中发生重大心血管事件或癌症的风险来个体化治疗。这是一项特别复杂的任务,因为不同的结局对健康的直接和长期影响不同,获益/风险平衡随着时间的推移而发生变化,需要定期重新评估其适应证,以及阿司匹林反应的个体间变异性。大量流行病学和机制证据预期阿司匹林具有化学预防作用,但仍需要通过专门设计来评估这一终点的最新试验的长期随访来最终证实,这有望颠覆阿司匹林在一级预防中的微妙获益/风险平衡。本文旨在对过去和当前的证据进行解读,以指导当代患者的临床决策。