Article

Hypothesis formulation from subgroup analyses: nonadherence or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug use explains the lack of clinical benefit of aspirin on first myocardial infarction attributed to "aspirin resistance".

Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton, 33431-0991, USA.
American heart journal (Impact Factor: 4.56). 05/2010; 159(5):744-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2009.11.033
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT "Aspirin resistance" has been defined as the occurrence of cardiovascular events despite regular intake of aspirin. One major analytic study suggesting that "aspirin resistance" is a clinical reality was unable to control for confounding by nonadherence or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs).
We formulated a hypothesis from subgroup analyses in the Physicians' Health Study, a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial testing 325 mg of aspirin every other day among 22,071 apparently healthy US male physicians. We classified participants by nonadherence or NSAIDs and used time-varying Cox proportional hazard models to adjust for confounding.
After 5 years, the blinded aspirin component was terminated early based on the unanimous recommendation of the Data and Safety Monitoring Board. Of 378 confirmed first myocardial infarctions (139 aspirin and 239 placebo), the relative risk (RR) was 0.56 (95% CI 0.45-0.70, P < .00001). There was no statistically significant reduction among aspirin <150/180 pills/y (RR = 0.91, 95% CI 0.61-1.35, P = .62) or NSAID users >60 days per year (RR = 1.54, 95% CI 0.68-3.47, P = .31). There was a statistically significant reduction among aspirin >150/180 pills/y and NSAID users <60 days/y (RR = 0.55, 95% CI 0.44-0.70, P < or = .0001) and an increase among aspirin <150/180 pills/y and NSAID users >60 days/y (RR of 3.43, 95% CI 1.41-8.33, P = .007).
In subgroup analyses useful to formulate hypotheses from a large randomized trial in apparently healthy men, aspirin nonadherence or NSAID use explained the lack of clinical benefit of aspirin on first myocardial infarction that has been attributed to "aspirin resistance." Direct randomized comparisons are necessary in trials designed a priori to test this hypothesis.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
51 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: NSAIDs are used worldwide by more than 30 million people everyday, given their anti-inflammatory, analgesic and antipyretic effects. NSAIDs are approved for several common adult diseases, including acute and chronic musculoskeletal or inflammatory disease, osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis and other arthritic conditions, as well as for children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis. Importantly, the population commonly taking NSAIDs is that of older individuals who also represent the population with the highest risk for cardiovascular (CV) and gastrointestinal adverse effects. In recent years, a growing body of evidence regarding potential risks from chronic use of NSAIDs has emerged. The aim of this review is to update the available data concerning chronic use of NSAIDs in patients with and without CV disease by analyzing the mechanisms of action, the interference of specific NSAIDs with the established CV protective role of low-dose aspirin, and the potential increased risk of myocardial infarction, stroke, hypertension, heart failure and atrial fibrillation.
    Expert Review of Cardiovascular Therapy 09/2014;
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) may interfere with the anti-platelet activity of aspirin at the level of the platelet cyclooxygenase-1 (COX-1) enzyme. In order to examine the interference of common NSAIDs with the anti-platelet activity of aspirin the human platelet rich plasma from voluntary donors was used for arachidonic acid-induced aggreation and determination of thromboxane synthesis. Further, docking studies were used to explain the molecular basis of the NSAID/aspirin interaction. The experimental results showed that celecoxib, dipyrone (active metabolite), ibuprofen, flufenamic acid, naproxen, nimesulide, oxaprozin, and piroxicam significantly interfere with the anti-platelet activity of aspirin, while diclofenac, ketorolac and acetaminophen do not. Docking studies suggested that NSAIDs forming hydrogen bonds with Ser530, Arg120, Tyr385 and other amino acids of the COX-1 hydrophobic channel interfere with antiplatelet activity of aspirin while non interfering NSAIDs do not form relevant hydrogen bond interactions within the aspirin binding site. In conclusion, docking analysis of NSAID interactions at the COX-1 active site appears useful to predict their interference with the anti-platelet activity of aspirin. The results, demonstrate that some NSAIDs do not interfere with the antiplatelet action of aspirin while many others do and provide a basis for understanding the observed differences among individual non-aspirin NSAIDs.
    European journal of pharmacology 09/2013; · 2.59 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Once-daily, low-dose aspirin is a cornerstone in the prophylaxis and treatment of cardiovascular diseases. Aspirin 'resistance' still lacks definition, a standardized reference assay, underlying mechanisms, clinical impact or efficacy of alternative antiplatelet drugs. Aspirin response in several studies has been measured by different platelet function tests, not always reflecting aspirin pharmacodynamics, thus generating significantly heterogeneous results. The EMA indicated serum thromboxane B as the only valid surrogate assay to study different aspirin formulations. Rather than resistance, recent studies focused on sources of intra- and inter-individual variability in response to aspirin, based on pharmacokinetic and/or pharmacodynamic mechanisms. Drug interactions, diabetes, conditions of increased platelet output, obesity and aging can potentially increase the variability of aspirin response. Preliminary studies testing different aspirin regimens showed that twice-daily low doses were more effective than once-daily higher aspirin doses on surrogate end points of platelet inhibition. Large studies are needed to test new disease-tailored, low-dose aspirin regimens.
    Expert Review of Cardiovascular Therapy 03/2013; 11(3):365-79.