aspirin decreases risk of ovarian cancer

Just after my sending out an article on aspirin in primary prevention of heart and other diseases, JNCI  has conveniently published an assessment of aspirin and ovarian cancer (see aspirin and dec ovarian cancer jnci 2014 in dropbox, or DOI:10.1093/jnci/djt431). in this study the Ovarian Cancer Association Consortium reviewed the literature, finding 12 population-based case-controlled studies between 1992 and 2007, which included 7776 patients with ovarian cancer and 11,843 control subjects.  Findings:

            --Overall ovarian cancer risk was reduced 9% with the use of aspirin
            --Non-significant but similar reduction was found for non-aspirin NSAIDs, and no association with acetaminophen use
            --7 studies assessed the frequency of aspirin use, finding that risk reduction was strongest among daily aspirin users, with a 20% risk reduction
            --3 studies included dose information, finding that low dose aspirin (< 100 mg/d) was associated with the greatest risk reduction (34%). the studies also found that high dose of non-aspirin NSAIDs (>= 500 mg) was associated with a 24% reduced risk, but no relationship with acetaminophen
            --Tumors of low malignant potential (n= 2059) were not associated with analgesic use (ie, it was not just the low-grade tumors that were decreased).  Aspirin use was associated with reduced risks of serous, endometrioid, and mucinous ovarian cancers (though only serous cancers reached statistical significance)

so, ovarian cancer is the most lethal gynecologic malignancy with greater than 140,000 deaths per year worldwide.  There are some data suggesting that ovarian cancer may be related to chronic inflammation, creating a plausible mechanism for aspirin protection.  As I mentioned in the previous e-mail/blog, there are relatively consistent data on aspirin use and decreased colorectal cancer (risk reduction on the order of 50%), but there also data of reduced risk of cancers of the esophagus, bladder, liver, lung, endometrium, and female breast.  It is important to remember that these are all secondary analyses of studies and therefore prone to bias.  However, these studies and their consistency do sway me to prescribing low-dose aspirin to people who are on the borderline for aspirin use for cardioprotection.

Comments

Post a Comment

if you would like to receive the near-daily emails regularly, please email me at gmodest@uphams.org

Popular posts from this blog

diabetes DPP-4 inhibitors and the risk of heart failure

the FDA just came out with a safety alert about 2 DPP-4 inhibitors and the increased risk of heart failure (released 04/05/2016)(see  http://www.fda.gov/Safety/MedWatch/SafetyInformation/SafetyAlertsforHumanMedicalProducts/ucm494252.htm?source=govdelivery&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery ​ ). details: --saxagliptin and alogliptin were singled out because of 2 clinical trials in diabetic patients with heart disease. in each trial more patients taking these meds were hospitalized for heart failure vs those on placebo     --in the saxagliptin trial: 3.5% were hospitalized for heart failure (vs 2.8% on placebo). risk factors included prior heart failure or kidney disease     --in the alogliptin trial: 3.9% were hospitalized for heart failure (vs 3.3% on placebo) --recommendation by the FDA:     -- we should consider stopping these drugs if the patient develops heart failure -- i believe these trials (not cited specifically by the FDA) were the ones in the blog
Read more

cystatin c: better predictor of bad outcomes than creatinine

Image
  another article found significant discordance between creatinine and cystatin C in assessing renal function,  finding that the latter correlated most strongly with both renal and non-renal adverse clinical outcomes (see   ckd cystatin c better than creat AJKD2023  in  dropbox or doi: 10.1053/ j.ajkd.2023.04.002)   Details: -- 158,601 adults who were in the Stockholm Creatinine Measurements (SCREAM) project and had testing of creatinine and cystatin C on the same day during a healthcare encounter, from 2010-2018     -- >400,000 outpatient tests were done for both creatinine and cystatin C levels -- mean age 62, 48% female -- mean eGFR by creatinine (   eGFR cr ) 80; mean eGFR by cystatin C ( eGFR cys  ) 73 -- mean stage of renal insufficiency: 39%  eGFR cr   90+; 38%  eGFR cr  60-89; 12%  eGFR cr  45-59; 7.1%  eGFR cr  30-44; 3.2%  eGFR cr  15-29, 0.7%  eGFR cr  <15 -- mean urinary albumin-to-creat ratio: 12 mg/g -- comorbidities: hypertension 59%, diabetes 8%, coronary heart di
Read more

UPDATE: ASCVD risk factor critique

I decided to do an extensive update of my prior ASCVD (atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease) risk analysis and critique of risk calculators, with much more information about the “non-traditional” risk factors. I felt that there should be more data/clarification, since I think we are really undertreating/not preventing the most common cause of death by relying on the current ASCVD risk calculators   -- Cardiovascular risk models:      -- many of us rely on the various cardiovascular risk models to determine the appropriate approach to patients, and these are often integrated into the electronic medical records      -- these risk models have several very important limitations:          -- they are typically based on community data, eg from the Framingham study etc. But, in clinical practice, we are dealing with the individual and not the community:              -- there is very clear evidence that there are many individual risk factors that are associated with increased risk of a cardi
Read more