Search

Clinicians often have to make treatment decisions based on the likelihood that an individual patient will benefit. In this article we consider the relevance of relative and absolute risk reductions, and draw attention to the importance of expressing the results of trials and subgroup analyses in terms of absolute risk. We describe the limitations of univariate subgroup analysis in situations in which there are several determinants of treatment effect, and review the potential for targeting treatments with risk models, especially when benefit is probably going to be dependent on the absolute risk of adverse outcomes with or without treatment. The ability to systematically take into account the characteristics of an individual patient and their interactions, to consider the risks and benefits of interventions separately if needed, and to provide patients with personalised estimates of their likelihood of benefit is shown using the example of endarterectomy for symptomatic carotid stenosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Lifelong antiplatelet treatment is recommended after ischaemic vascular events, on the basis of trials done mainly in patients younger than 75 years. Upper gastrointestinal bleeding is a serious complication, but had low case fatality in trials of aspirin and is not generally thought to cause long-term disability. Consequently, although co-prescription of proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) reduces upper gastrointestinal bleeds by 70-90%, uptake is low and guidelines are conflicting. We aimed to assess the risk, time course, and outcomes of bleeding on antiplatelet treatment for secondary prevention in patients of all ages.Methods: We did a prospective population-based cohort study in patients with a first transient ischaemic attack, ischaemic stroke, or myocardial infarction treated with antiplatelet drugs (mainly aspirin based, without routine PPI use) after the event in the Oxford Vascular Study from 2002 to 2012, with follow-up until 2013. We determined type, severity, outcome (disability or death), and time course of bleeding requiring medical attention by face-to-face follow-up for 10 years. We estimated age-specific numbers needed to treat (NNT) to prevent upper gastrointestinal bleeding with routine PPI co-prescription on the basis of Kaplan-Meier risk estimates and relative risk reduction estimates from previous trials.Findings: 3166 patients (1582 [50%] aged ≥75 years) had 405 first bleeding events (n=218 gastrointestinal, n=45 intracranial, and n=142 other) during 13 509 patient-years of follow-up. Of the 314 patients (78%) with bleeds admitted to hospital, 117 (37%) were missed by administrative coding. Risk of non-major bleeding was unrelated to age, but major bleeding increased steeply with age (≥75 years hazard ratio [HR] 3·10, 95% CI 2·27-4·24; p<0·0001), particularly for fatal bleeds (5·53, 2·65-11·54; p<0·0001), and was sustained during long-term follow-up. The same was true of major upper gastrointestinal bleeds (≥75 years HR 4·13, 2·60-6·57; p<0·0001), particularly if disabling or fatal (10·26, 4·37-24·13; p<0·0001). At age 75 years or older, major upper gastrointestinal bleeds were mostly disabling or fatal (45 [62%] of 73 patients vs 101 [47%] of 213 patients with recurrent ischaemic stroke), and outnumbered disabling or fatal intracerebral haemorrhage (n=45 vs n=18), with an absolute risk of 9·15 (95% CI 6·67-12·24) per 1000 patient-years. The estimated NNT for routine PPI use to prevent one disabling or fatal upper gastrointestinal bleed over 5 years fell from 338 for individuals younger than 65 years, to 25 for individuals aged 85 years or older.Interpretation: In patients receiving aspirin-based antiplatelet treatment without routine PPI use, the long-term risk of major bleeding is higher and more sustained in older patients in practice than in the younger patients in previous trials, with a substantial risk of disabling or fatal upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Given that half of the major bleeds in patients aged 75 years or older were upper gastrointestinal, the estimated NNT for routine PPI use to prevent such bleeds is low, and co-prescription should be encouraged.Funding: Wellcome Trust, Wolfson Foundation, British Heart Foundation, Dunhill Medical Trust, National Institute of Health Research (NIHR), and the NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses a study which investigated the effects of antihypertensive-drug class on interindividual variation in blood pressure and risk of stroke. The researchers identified randomised controlled trials (RCT) from published systematic reviews and searched Medline and Cochrane databases from 1950 to first week of July 2009. Poor reporting of interindividual variation in blood pressure in RCT of antihypertensive drugs was found. Several issues that need to be discussed are also cited, including the low rate of reporting of blood pressure.

Background: A one-dose-fits-all approach to use of aspirin has yielded only modest benefits in long-term prevention of cardiovascular events, possibly due to underdosing in patients of large body size and excess dosing in patients of small body size, which might also affect other outcomes.Methods: Using individual patient data, we analysed the modifying effects of bodyweight (10 kg bands) and height (10 cm bands) on the effects of low doses (≤100 mg) and higher doses (300-325 mg or ≥500 mg) of aspirin in randomised trials of aspirin in primary prevention of cardiovascular events. We stratified the findings by age, sex, and vascular risk factors, and validated them in trials of aspirin in secondary prevention of stroke. Additionally, we assessed whether any weight or height dependence was evident for the effect of aspirin on 20-year risk of colorectal cancer or any in-trial cancer.Results: Among ten eligible trials of aspirin in primary prevention (including 117 279 participants), bodyweight varied four-fold and trial median weight ranged from 60·0 kg to 81·2 kg (p<0·0001). The ability of 75-100 mg aspirin to reduce cardiovascular events decreased with increasing weight (pinteraction=0·0072), with benefit seen in people weighing 50-69 kg (hazard ratio [HR] 0·75 [95% CI 0·65-0·85]) but not in those weighing 70 kg or more (0·95 [0·86-1·04]; 1·09 [0·93-1·29] for vascular death). Furthermore, the case fatality of a first cardiovascular event was increased by low-dose aspirin in people weighing 70 kg or more (odds ratio 1·33 [95% CI 1·08-1·64], p=0·0082). Higher doses of aspirin (≥325 mg) had the opposite interaction with bodyweight (difference pinteraction=0·0013), reducing cardiovascular events only at higher weight (pinteraction=0·017). Findings were similar in men and women, in people with diabetes, in trials of aspirin in secondary prevention, and in relation to height (pinteraction=0·0025 for cardiovascular events). Aspirin-mediated reductions in long-term risk of colorectal cancer were also weight dependent (pinteraction=0·038). Stratification by body size also revealed harms due to excess dosing: risk of sudden death was increased by aspirin in people at low weight for dose (pinteraction=0·0018) and risk of all-cause death was increased in people weighing less than 50 kg who were receiving 75-100 mg aspirin (HR 1·52 [95% CI 1·04-2·21], p=0·031). In participants aged 70 years or older, the 3-year risk of cancer was also increased by aspirin (1·20 [1·03-1·47], p=0·02), particularly in those weighing less than 70 kg (1·31 [1·07-1·61], p=0·009) and consequently in women (1·44 [1·11-1·87], p=0·0069).Interpretation: Low doses of aspirin (75-100 mg) were only effective in preventing vascular events in patients weighing less than 70 kg, and had no benefit in the 80% of men and nearly 50% of all women weighing 70 kg or more. By contrast, higher doses of aspirin were only effective in patients weighing 70 kg or more. Given that aspirin's effects on other outcomes, including cancer, also showed interactions with body size, a one-dose-fits-all approach to aspirin is unlikely to be optimal, and a more tailored strategy is required.Funding: Wellcome Trust and National Institute for Health Research Oxford Biomedical Research Centre. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Aspirin is recommended for secondary prevention after transient ischaemic attack (TIA) or ischaemic stroke on the basis of trials showing a 13% reduction in long-term risk of recurrent stroke. However, the risk of major stroke is very high for only the first few days after TIA and minor ischaemic stroke, and observational studies show substantially greater benefits of early medical treatment in the acute phase than do longer-term trials. We hypothesised that the short-term benefits of early aspirin have been underestimated.Methods: Pooling the individual patient data from all randomised trials of aspirin versus control in secondary prevention after TIA or ischaemic stroke, we studied the effects of aspirin on the risk and severity of recurrent stroke, stratified by the following time periods: less than 6 weeks, 6-12 weeks, and more than 12 weeks after randomisation. We compared the severity of early recurrent strokes between treatment groups with shift analysis of modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score. To understand possible mechanisms of action, we also studied the time course of the interaction between effects of aspirin and dipyridamole in secondary prevention of stroke. In a further analysis we pooled data from trials of aspirin versus control in which patients were randomised less than 48 h after major acute stroke, stratified by severity of baseline neurological deficit, to establish the very early time course of the effect of aspirin on risk of recurrent ischaemic stroke and how this differs by severity at baseline.Findings: We pooled data for 15,778 participants from 12 trials of aspirin versus control in secondary prevention. Aspirin reduced the 6 week risk of recurrent ischaemic stroke by about 60% (84 of 8452 participants in the aspirin group had an ischaemic stroke vs 175 of 7326; hazard ratio [HR] 0·42, 95% CI 0·32-0·55, p<0·0001) and disabling or fatal ischaemic stroke by about 70% (36 of 8452 vs 110 of 7326; 0·29, 0·20-0·42, p<0·0001), with greatest benefit noted in patients presenting with TIA or minor stroke (at 0-2 weeks, two of 6691 participants in the aspirin group with TIA or minor stroke had a disabling or fatal ischaemic stroke vs 23 of 5726 in the control group, HR 0·07, 95% CI 0·02-0·31, p=0·0004; at 0-6 weeks, 14 vs 60 participants, 0·19, 0·11-0·34, p<0·0001). The effect of aspirin on early recurrent ischaemic stroke was due partly to a substantial reduction in severity (mRS shift analysis odds ratio [OR] 0·42, 0·26-0·70, p=0·0007). These effects were independent of dose, patient characteristics, or aetiology of TIA or stroke. Some further reduction in risk of ischaemic stroke accrued for aspirin only versus control from 6-12 weeks, but there was no benefit after 12 weeks (stroke risk OR 0·97, 0·84-1·12, p=0·67; severity mRS shift OR 1·00, 0·77-1·29, p=0·97). By contrast, dipyridamole plus aspirin versus aspirin alone had no effect on risk or severity of recurrent ischaemic stroke within 12 weeks (OR 0·90, 95% CI 0·65-1·25, p=0·53; mRS shift OR 0·90, 0·37-1·72, p=0·99), but dipyridamole did reduce risk thereafter (0·76, 0·63-0·92, p=0·005), particularly of disabling or fatal ischaemic stroke (0·64, 0·49-0·84, p=0·0010). We pooled data for 40,531 participants from three trials of aspirin versus control in major acute stroke. The reduction in risk of recurrent ischaemic stroke at 14 days was most evident in patients with less severe baseline deficits, and was substantial by the second day after starting treatment (2-3 day HR 0·37, 95% CI 0·25-0·57, p<0·0001).Interpretation: Our findings confirm that medical treatment substantially reduces the risk of early recurrent stroke after TIA and minor stroke and identify aspirin as the key intervention. The considerable early benefit from aspirin warrants public education about self-administration after possible TIA. The previously unrecognised effect of aspirin on severity of early recurrent stroke, the diminishing benefit with longer-term use, and the contrasting time course of effects of dipyridamole have implications for understanding mechanisms of action.Funding: Wellcome Trust, the National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre, Oxford. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents randomised controlled trials of risks and benefits of daily low-dose aspirin on cancer incidence, mortality and non-vascular death. It explores cancer deaths in trials of daily aspirin versus control, as well as the time course of effects of aspirin on cancer and outcomes in primary prevention. Results show short-term reductions in cancer incidence and mortality and risk of extracranial bleeds through extended use.

This article presents a clinical trial on the effect of urgent treatment of transient ischaemic attack and minor stroke on early recurrent stroke, called the EXPRESS study. Patients who have suffered a transient ischaemic attack (TIA) or minor stroke are 10 percent more likely to suffer an another episode in the week after the TIA. Models suggest that this could prevented 80-90 percent of the time but there are no studies to back up the claim. This study sought to see if rapid intervention after the first incident could prevent another immediate stroke in non-hospitalized patients. The study showed an 80 percent reduction for recurrence of stroke over the period of the study and says longer studies need to be done.