Search

Competing Interests: Conflict of interest G.L. received consultant and speaker fees from Astra Zeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novo Nordisk, Daiichi Sankyo, Sanofi, and Novartis, and grant support (to the Institution) for investigator-initiated research from American Heart Association, Italian National Health Service, and Italian Minister of Education, University and Research. G.L. received grant support (to the Institution) for investigator-initiated research from American Heart Association, Italian National Health Service and Italian Minister of Education, University and Research. She is currently involved in the Research Programs of the Italian Cardiovascular Network. She reports personal fees for speaker bureau from Astra Zeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novo Nordisk, Daiichi Sankyo, Sanofi and Novartis, outside the submitted work. C.P. received consultant and speaker fees from AbbVie, Acticor Biotech, Amgen, Bayer, Eli Lilly, and Tremeau, and grant support (to the Institution) for investigator-initiated research from AIFA (Italian Drug Agency), Bayer, Cancer Research UK and European Commission; he chaired the Scientific Advisory Board of the International Aspirin Foundation, outside the submitted work.

Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: G.L. received grant support (to the Institution) for investigator-initiated research from American Heart Association, Italian National Health Service, and Italian Minister of Education, University and Research. She is currently involved in the Research Programs of the Italian Cardiovascular Network. She received personal fees from Astra Zeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novo Nordisk, Daiichi Sankyo, Sanofi, and Novartis. C.P. received consultant and speaker fees from Acticor Biotech, Amgen, Bayer, GlaxoSmithKline, Tremeau, Zambon, and grant support (to the Institution) for investigator-initiated research from AIFA (Italian Drug Agency), Bayer, Cancer Research UK and European Commission; he chairs the Scientific Advisory Board of the International Aspirin Foundation.

Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: M.V. reports personal fees for speaker bureau and/or consulting in Advisory Board from Amarin, Amgen, Astra Zeneca, Kalos Medical, Menarini Int, Novartis Pharma, Novo Nordisk, outside the submitted work. C.P. reports personal fees from Acticor Biotech, personal fees from Amgen, personal fees from Bayer, personal fees from GlaxoSmithKline, personal fees from Tremeau, personal fees from Zambon, grants from AIFA (Italian Drug Agency), grants from European Commission, other from Scientific Advisory Board of the International Aspirin Foundation, outside the submitted work.

Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: G.L. received grant support (to the Institution) for investigator-initiated research from American Heart Association, Italian National Health Service, and Italian Minister of Education, University and Research. She is currently involved in the Research Programs of the Italian Cardiovascular Network. She received personal fees from Astra Zeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novo Nordisk, Daiichi Sankyo, Sanofi, and Novartis. C.P. received consultant and speaker fees from Acticor Biotech, Amgen, Bayer, GlaxoSmithKline, Tremeau, and Zambon and grant support (to the Institution) for investigator-initiated research from AIFA (Italian Drug Agency), Bayer, Cancer Research UK, and European Commission; he chairs the Scientific Advisory Board of the International Aspirin Foundation.

Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: G.L. received grant support (to the Institution) for investigator-initiated research from American Heart Association, Italian National Health Service and Italian Minister of Education, University and Research. She is currently involved in the Research Programs of the Italian Cardiovascular Network. She received personal fees from Astra Zeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novo Nordisk, Daiichi Sankyo, Sanofi and Novartis. C.P. received consultant and speaker fees from Acticor Biotech, Amgen, Bayer, GlaxoSmithKline, Tremeau, Zambon, and grant support (to the Institution) for investigator-initiated research from AIFA (Italian Drug Agency), Bayer, Cancer Research UK, and European Commission; he chairs the Scientific Advisory Board of the International Aspirin Foundation.

Although the improved control of hyperglycaemia and other cardiovascular risk factors was associated with a parallel decline of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and death in both type 1 (T1) and type 2 (T2) diabetes mellitus (DM), the burden of death and hospitalization for ASCVD remains significantly higher by about 2-fold versus the matched non-DM population. Life style interventions, such as physical activity and healthy diet, and drugs, such as statins and low-dose aspirin, may have beneficial effects by targeting one or multiple pathways responsible for accelerated atherosclerosis and its thrombotic complications. The debate on the benefit-risk balance of primary cardiovascular prevention with aspirin has been especially vivacious over the past two years, following the publication of three large randomized, placebo-controlled, primary prevention trials in different settings, spanning from healthy elderly to DM subjects. The aim of this review is to discuss the pathophysiological, pharmacological and clinical evidence supporting the appropriate use of low-dose aspirin in DM, within the context of the current multifactorial approach to primary cardiovascular prevention., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest BR reports lecture fees from Bayer AG, Medscape and Novartis and research funding from the Italian Drug Agency (AIFA). CP reports consulting and lecture fees from Acticor Biotech, Amgen, Bayer, GlaxoSmithKline and Zambon and institutional research grants from Bayer, Cancer Research UK (Catalyst Award Aspirin for Cancer Prevention Collaboration), the European Commission and the Italian Drug Agency (AIFA); he serves as chairperson of the Scientific Advisory Board of the International Aspirin Foundation. The authors received no funding from an external source., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

The benefits of aspirin therapy for the secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease clearly outweigh the risks of bleeding, and low-dose aspirin is uniformly recommended in this setting. However, no clear consensus exists about whether, and if so in whom, aspirin therapy is appropriate for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease. Three trials of low-dose aspirin versus placebo in three populations at increased risk of myocardial infarction or ischaemic stroke in the absence of established cardiovascular disease were reported in 2018. The ASPREE trial in elderly people was terminated early for futility because aspirin had no effect on disability-free survival but significantly increased the risk of major haemorrhage and, unexpectedly, all-cause mortality. In the ASCEND trial in patients with diabetes mellitus and no evidence of vascular disease, aspirin significantly reduced serious vascular events but increased major bleeding. In the ARRIVE trial in people with multiple risk factors for cardiovascular disease, aspirin had no effect on major cardiovascular events but increased gastrointestinal bleeding. The aim of this Review is to place these new results in the context of previous evidence on aspirin for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease and to appraise whether the new evidence is likely to enable the more targeted use of aspirin in particular individuals for whom the net benefit is both clinically worthwhile and statistically definite.

The aim of the present review is to analyze how thinking about the cardiovascular safety of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs has evolved during the past two decades, and discuss to what extent the additional information from the Prospective Randomized Evaluation of Celecoxib Integrated Safety Versus Ibuprofen or Naproxen study may alter our current mechanistic understanding and/or clinical practice., (© 2017 American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.)

Linked Articles: This article is part of a joint Themed section with the British Journal of Pharmacology on Targeting Inflammation to Reduce Cardiovascular Disease Risk: a Realistic Clinical Prospect? The rest of the Themed section will appear in a future issue of BJP and will be available at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1476-5381 Prostaglandin (PG) H synthase 2 [also referred to colloquially as cyclooxygenase (COX) 2] represents a key enzyme in arachidonic acid metabolism in health and disease. It is both constitutively expressed in several human tissues (e.g. kidney and brain) and induced in various cell types (including monocytes/macrophages, vascular endothelial cells and colorectal cancer cells) in response to inflammatory cytokines, laminar shear stress and growth factors. Products of COX-2 activity (e.g. PGE2 and prostacyclin) are involved in diverse physiological and pathophysiological processes, including renal haemodynamics and the control of blood pressure, endothelial thromboresistance, pain and inflammation, and colorectal tumorigenesis. Therefore, it is not surprising that COX-2 inhibitors display multifaceted clinical effects, ranging from reduced pain and inflammation to increased blood pressure, an increased risk of atherothrombotic events and a decreased risk of colorectal cancer. The aim of the present article was to review the cardiovascular effects of COX-2 inhibitors [traditional nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (tNSAIDs) and coxibs alike], with a focus on the mechanisms contributing to the clinical readouts of COX-2 inhibition., (© 2016 The British Pharmacological Society.)

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) include aspirin, other traditional NSAIDs, and coxibs. Evidence obtained during the past 10 years has focused attention on the cardiovascular hazard associated with coxibs and some traditional NSAIDs. The large randomized trials of prolonged coxib treatment added importantly to information provided by epidemiological studies that had previously associated regular use of NSAIDs with increased blood pressure and enhanced risk of congestive heart failure, and identified an increased risk of myocardial infarction as a class effect of cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors. The aim of this article is to review the cardiovascular effects of aspirin, other traditional NSAIDs, and coxibs, to discuss the mechanisms underlying these effects, and to provide a clinical perspective on the cardiovascular hazard associated with their use.

Low-dose aspirin has been shown to be effective in preventing about one-fifth of atherothrombotic vascular complications (non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, or vascular death) in a meta-analysis of 16 secondary prevention trials in patients with previous myocardial infarction, stroke, or transient cerebral ischaemia. This corresponds to an absolute reduction of about 10-20 per 1000 patients in the yearly incidence of non-fatal events, and to a smaller, but still definite, reduction in vascular death. Against this benefit, the absolute increase in major extracranial bleeding complications [mostly, gastrointestinal (GI)] is 20- to 50-fold smaller, depending on age and sex. Hence, for secondary prevention, the benefits of antiplatelet therapy substantially exceed the risks. For primary prevention, the balance between vascular events avoided and major bleeds caused by aspirin is substantially uncertain because the risks without aspirin, and hence the absolute benefits of antiplatelet prophylaxis, are at least an order of magnitude lower than in secondary prevention. The aim of this article is to review the updated evidence for the efficacy and safety of low-dose aspirin in primary prevention and to discuss additional health benefits resulting from prolonged antiplatelet therapy in apparently healthy people at low average risk of vascular events.

Metabolic syndrome represents a clustering of risk factors related to an elevated risk of cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes. Occurrence of both metabolic syndrome and diabetes and their vascular complications share several pathogenetic features including subclinical, low-grade inflammation, altered oxidative/antioxidant status, and persistent platelet activation. Despite the availability of multiple interventions to counteract these metabolic changes, including appropriate diet, regular exercise, weight control and drugs, epidemiological data are witnessing the growing trend of the problem, reflecting both the multifactorial nature of these diseases as well as the scarce compliance of patients to established strategies. Several nutraceuticals used in clinical practice have been shown to target the pathogenesis of diabetes mellitus, metabolic syndrome and their complications and to favorably modulate a number of biochemical and clinical endpoints. These compounds include antioxidant vitamins, such as vitamins C and E, flavonoids, vitamin D, conjugated linoleic acid, omega-3 fatty acids, minerals such as chromium and magnesium, alpha-lipoic acid, phytoestrogens, and dietary fibers. Several areas of concern exist regarding the use of dietary supplements and nutraceuticals in this setting, including product standardization, definition of optimal dosing regimen, potential side effects, drug interactions, and need for evidence-based indications.

Mechanisms of platelet inhibition are reviewed with emphasis on the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic determinants of clinical efficacy and safety of antiplatelet drugs. Current developments in antiplatelet therapy are discussed in relation to both primary and secondary prevention of atherothrombotic complications. Interindividual variability in response to antiplatelet agents and new drug targets are outlined within the context of optimizing the balance between the cardiovascular benefits and bleeding risks of antiplatelet therapy. Recent advances in the pharmacogenetics of thienopyridines open the realistic prospect of a personalized choice of the most appropriate antiplatelet agent and tailored dose adjustment for an individual patient.

Background: Low-dose aspirin is of definite and substantial net benefit for many people who already have occlusive vascular disease. We have assessed the benefits and risks in primary prevention., Methods: We undertook meta-analyses of serious vascular events (myocardial infarction, stroke, or vascular death) and major bleeds in six primary prevention trials (95,000 individuals at low average risk, 660,000 person-years, 3554 serious vascular events) and 16 secondary prevention trials (17,000 individuals at high average risk, 43,000 person-years, 3306 serious vascular events) that compared long-term aspirin versus control. We report intention-to-treat analyses of first events during the scheduled treatment period., Findings: In the primary prevention trials, aspirin allocation yielded a 12% proportional reduction in serious vascular events (0.51% aspirin vs 0.57% control per year, p=0.0001), due mainly to a reduction of about a fifth in non-fatal myocardial infarction (0.18%vs 0.23% per year, p<0.0001). The net effect on stroke was not significant (0.20%vs 0.21% per year, p=0.4: haemorrhagic stroke 0.04%vs 0.03%, p=0.05; other stroke 0.16%vs 0.18% per year, p=0.08). Vascular mortality did not differ significantly (0.19%vs 0.19% per year, p=0.7). Aspirin allocation increased major gastrointestinal and extracranial bleeds (0.10%vs 0.07% per year, p<0.0001), and the main risk factors for coronary disease were also risk factors for bleeding. In the secondary prevention trials, aspirin allocation yielded a greater absolute reduction in serious vascular events (6.7%vs 8.2% per year, p<0.0001), with a non-significant increase in haemorrhagic stroke but reductions of about a fifth in total stroke (2.08%vs 2.54% per year, p=0.002) and in coronary events (4.3%vs 5.3% per year, p<0.0001). In both primary and secondary prevention trials, the proportional reductions in the aggregate of all serious vascular events seemed similar for men and women., Interpretation: In primary prevention without previous disease, aspirin is of uncertain net value as the reduction in occlusive events needs to be weighed against any increase in major bleeds. Further trials are in progress., Funding: UK Medical Research Council, British Heart Foundation, Cancer Research UK, and the European Community Biomed Programme.

Currently available NSAIDs represent a heterogeneous group of therapeutic agents characterized by a variable benefit/risk profile. The development of a new class of selective COX-2 inhibitors, the coxibs, has contributed importantly to clarifying the discrete roles of COX-2 vs. COX-1 inhibition in different aspects of NSAID-related efficacy and safety. Cardiovascular toxicity has emerged as a previously unrecognized, mechanism-based effect of COX-2 inhibitors. Lessons learned from the many facets of the coxib failure story may help guiding the successful development of a new class of safer NSAIDs, targeting mediators unrelated to arachidonic acid metabolism or molecular targets downstream of COX-isozymes.

Aspirin has been a commercial drug for over a century, although for most of this history, an understanding of its mechanism of action, as an inhibitor of cyclooxygenase (COX) activity and thus of prostanoid synthesis, was lacking. Over the past fifty years, a large number of other nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) have been developed, and a much deeper understanding of inflammation and prostanoid action has emerged. Indeed, a new class of selective inhibitors of the cyclooxygenase-2 isozyme was introduced, about ten years ago, and these so-called coxibs quickly became regarded as preferable, in certain clinical contexts, to avoid side effects associated with the use of aspirin and previously developed NSAIDs. This regard for coxibs has been challenged, sometimes infamously, as cardiovascular events associated with coxib use have become apparent. A variety of clinical trials have led to seemingly conflicting data concerning the roles of COX-1 and COX-2, and the implications of their relative inhibition, in cardiovascular health and disease. In this Review, the authors offer an assessment of drug pharmacokinetics and enzyme physiology that reconciles cardiovascular appraisals from a wide array of clinical data.

Although conceived at the end of the 19th century, aspirin remains the gold standard of antiplatelet therapy. Approximately 100 randomized clinical trials have established its efficacy and safety in the prevention of myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, and vascular death among high-risk patients treated for a few weeks, at one end of the spectrum, and in low-risk subjects treated up to 10 years at the other. Despite this wealth of data, several issues continue to be debated concerning the use of aspirin as an antiplatelet agent, and novel opportunities appear on the horizon for this 110-year-old drug. These issues include: (1) the optimal dose for cardiovascular prophylaxis; (2) the uncertain threshold of cardiovascular risk for its use in primary prevention; (3) the apparent gender-related difference in its cardioprotective effects; (4) the increasingly popular theme of aspirin "resistance"; (5) the opportunities of chemoprevention in colorectal cancer; and (6) the renewed interest in aspirin as an analgesic agent in osteoarthritic patients at high cardiovascular risk. The aim of this review is to address these issues by integrating our current understanding of the molecular mechanism of action of the drug with the results of clinical trials and epidemiological studies of aspirin as an antiplatelet drug.

Purpose: The clinical course of polycythemia vera is often complicated by thrombosis as well as by the possible transition to myeloid metaplasia with myelofibrosis or acute myeloid leukemia. The aim of this study was to assess the rate of these complications in subjects receiving currently recommended treatments., Patients and Methods: Overall, 1,638 patients from 12 countries were enrolled onto a large, prospective multicenter project aimed at describing the clinical history of polycythemia vera for the following outcomes: survival, the cumulative rate of cardiovascular death and thrombosis, the cumulative rate of leukemia, myelodysplasia, and myelofibrosis. The mean duration of the disease at entry and the duration of the follow-up were 4.9 and 2.7 years, respectively., Results: The overall mortality rate of 3.7 deaths per 100 persons per year resulted from a moderate risk of cardiovascular death and a high risk of death from noncardiovascular causes (mainly hematologic transformations). Age older than 65 years and a positive history of thrombosis were the most important predictors of cardiovascular events. Antiplatelet therapy, but not cytoreductive treatment, was significantly associated with a lower risk of cardiovascular events. We found a consistent association between age and risk of leukemia, and between duration of the disease with risk of myelofibrosis., Conclusion: The European Collaboration on Low-Dose Aspirin in Polycythemia Vera study documents that large international collaborative studies are feasible in this field, in which few epidemiologic data are available. The persistently high mortality rate from hematologic malignancies characterizes the unmet therapeutic need of polycythemic patients and suggests a priority for future studies in this disease.

Inhibition of TXA2-dependent platelet function by aspirin may lead to prevention of thrombosis as well as to excess bleeding. The balance between the two depends critically on the absolute thrombotic versus hemorrhagic risk of the patient. As the risk of experiencing a major vascular event increases, so does the absolute benefit of antiplatelet prophylaxis with aspirin [Figure-see text]. The antithrombotic effect of aspirin does not appear to be dose related over a wide range of daily doses (30 to 1,300 mg), an observation consistent with saturability of platelet COX-1 inhibition by aspirin at very low doses. In contrast, GI toxicity of the drug does appear to be dose related, consistent with dose- and dosing interval-dependent inhibition of COX-1 activity in the nucleated lining cells of the GI mucosa. Thus, aspirin once daily is recommended in all clinical conditions where antiplatelet therapy is effective. Because of safety considerations, physicians are encouraged to use the lowest dose of aspirin shown effective in each clinical setting [Table-see text].

Enhanced platelet biosynthesis of thromboxane A2 is associated with several cardiovascular risk factors, as a consequence of a direct effect on platelet biochemistry and/or some form of endothelial dysfunction. Moreover, episodic increases in thromboxane biosynthesis occur in acute coronary and cerebral ischemic syndromes. Thromboxane-dependent platelet activation represents an important mechanism that amplifies the consequences of acute vascular lesions as well as those of long-standing metabolic or hemodynamic disturbances, and results in increased risk of vascular occlusive events.

Sudden fissuring of an atherosclerotic plaque has been suggested as the primary trigger of transient spontaneous ischemia in both the coronary and cerebral circulation. Measurements of urinary 11-dehydro-TXB2 and 2,3-dinor-TXB2, as well as results of Aspirin trials, have suggested that episodic platelet activation at the site of this acute vascular lesion is mediated, at least partly, by enhanced thromboxane (TX) A2 biosynthesis. Thus, episodic increases in metabolite excretion have been detected in unstable angina. Aspirin (75-325 mg/day) prevents about one third of all fatal and nonfatal thrombotic events in this setting. That a similar "dynamic" thrombotic process occurs during the early phase of acute myocardial infarction is suggested by thromboxane metabolite measurements and by the results of the ISIS-2 trial showing a similar impact of short-term Aspirin therapy to that seen in unstable angina. Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty is associated with transiently enhanced TXA2 biosynthesis and Aspirin-suppressable periprocedural thrombotic complications. On the other hand, both non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus and type IIa hypercholesterolemia are associated with a relatively reproducible and persisting abnormality of TXA2-dependent platelet function. This association is likely to reflect a systemic rather than localized stimulus to platelet activation and a continuous rather than episodic alteration. Low-dose (50 mg/day) Aspirin can largely suppress thromboxane metabolite excretion in both diseases. Thus, low-dose Aspirin and/or selective prostaglandin H2/TXA2-receptor antagonists may be important tools to test the hypothesis that TXA2-dependent platelet activation represents an important transducer of the enhanced thrombotic risk associated with these metabolic abnormalities.