ABSTRACT: We undertook a systematic review to synthesise the data on attitudes and behaviour towards the use of aspirin for cancer prevention, and healthcare providers' attitudes towards implementing aspirin in practice. Searches were carried out across 12 databases (e.g. MEDLINE, EMBASE). We used the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool to evaluate study quality, and conducted a narrative synthesis of the data. The review was pre-registered (PROSPERO:CRD42018093453). Thirty-eight studies were identified. Uptake and adherence data were all from trials. Trials recruited healthy participants, those at higher risk of cancer, and those with cancer. Four studies reported moderate to high (40.9–77.7%) uptake to an aspirin trial among people who were eligible. Most trials (18/22) reported high day-to-day adherence (≥80%). Three trials observed no association between gender and adherence. One trial found no association between adherence and colorectal cancer risk. Three studies reported moderate to high (43.6–76.0%) hypothetical willingness to use aspirin. Two studies found that a high proportion of healthcare providers (72.0–76.0%) perceived aspirin to be a suitable cancer prevention option. No qualitative studies were identified. The likelihood that eligible users of aspirin would participate in a trial evaluating the use of aspirin for preventive therapy was moderate to high. Among participants in a trial, day-to-day adherence was high. Further research is needed to identify uptake and adherence rates in routine care, the factors affecting aspirin use, and the barriers to implementing aspirin into clinical care.
Colorectal adenomas have the potential of malignant transformation if left untreated. Multiple randomized controlled trials have been performed to evaluate the efficacy of aspirin in preventing colorectal adenoma recurrence in a population with a history of colorectal adenoma but not colorectal cancer, however, the relationship between aspirin dose and colorectal adenoma recurrence remains unclear. We conducted pairwise meta-analysis, meta-regression, trial sequential analysis, and network meta-analysis of all eligible studies. The ROB 2.0 tool was used to assess the risk of bias in the studies. The confidence in network meta-analysis (CINeMA) approach was used to evaluate the confidence of the network meta-analysis results. The network meta-analysis included eight RCTs (nine reports), comprising four on aspirin (low or high dose) alone and four on aspirin combined with another medication, all compared with placebo. In the network meta-analysis, low-dose aspirin (LDA <300 mg per day) was more effective than high-dose aspirin (HDA [≥]300 mg per day) and placebo, with risk ratios of 0.76 (95% CI: 0.58 to 0.99) and 0.7 (95% CI: 0.54 to 0.91), respectively. LDA was the optimal treatment relative to HDA and placebo (P-score = 0.99). In the trial sequential analysis, LDA was only more effective than placebo when the number of included participants exceeded the optimal information size; this was not the case for HDA. LDA has statistically significant efficacy for colorectal adenoma prevention, but compared with HDA, its efficacy remains uncertain. Further trials are therefore required.
ABSTRACT: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the fourth most common cancer and third leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. Use of chemopreventive agents (CPAs) to reduce the incidence of precursor colorectal adenomas could lower the future burden of CRC. Many classes of potential CPAs have been investigated. To identify the most effective CPAs, we conducted a systematic review and a network meta-analysis (NMA). An electronic search was performed through August 2020 to identify all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the efficacy of CPAs in reducing the incidence of colorectal adenomas at the time of surveillance colonoscopy among patients who had previously undergone polypectomy during an index colonoscopy. In total, 33 RCTs were included in the NMA, which was conducted under a Bayesian inference framework. Random effects models were used with adjustment for follow-up length and control group event rates to yield relative risks (RRs) and 95% credible intervals (CrIs). Our full network consisted of 13 interventions in addition to a placebo arm. Of 20,925 included patients, 7766 had an adenoma. Compared to placebo, the combination of difluoromethylornithine (DFMO) + Sulindac (RR 0.24, CrI 0.10-0.55) demonstrated a protective effect, while aspirin had a RR of 0.77 (CrI 0.60-1.00), celecoxib 800 mg had a RR of 0.56 (CrI 0.31-1.01) and metformin had a RR of 0.56 (CrI 0.22-1.39). Our results suggest that select CPAs may be efficacious in preventing the development of adenomas. Further studies are needed to identify those patients most likely to benefit and the minimum effective dosages of CPAs.
PURPOSE: Colorectal cancer is the second most common cause of cancer death worldwide. Aspirin, due to its antineoplastic effects, has been suggested to have chemopreventive effects on colorectal cancer based on recent trials. We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to provide an updated evidence about the long-term efficacy of daily aspirin use in the prevention of colorectal cancer.
METHODS: We searched Medline/PubMed, Ovid, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the efficacy of daily aspirin use to placebo in healthy individuals at the time of study entry. The desired outcomes of this review were the incidence of advanced lesions (i.e., adenomas with villous component, adenomas ≥1 cm in diameter, adenomas with high-grade dysplasia, and/or invasive cancer) and colorectal adenomas.
RESULTS: A total of 15 articles representing 11 RCTs were included. Overall, the results indicated that aspirin significantly reduced the risk of developing colorectal adenomas but not advanced lesions at 3 years (risk ratio (RR) = 0.84, P < 0.05 and risk ratio = 0.82, P = 0.10, respectively). At 5 years, the risk of advanced lesions but not adenomas was reduced by aspirin (RR = 0.68, P < 0.05 and RR = 0.87, P = 0.22, respectively). Aspirin was not found to have an effect on the risk of advanced lesions or adenomas beyond 5 years (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.82, P = 0.07 and HR = 0.99, P = 0.82, respectively).
CONCLUSION: Overall, aspirin (particularly high dose) only reduced the risk of advanced lesions up to 5 years.
BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common diagnosed cancer and the third leading cause of all cancer deaths in the USA. Some evidences are shown that aspirin can reduce the morbidity and mortality of different cancers, including CRC. Aspirin has become a new focus of cancer prevention and treatment research so far; clinical studies, however, found conflicting conclusions of its anti-cancer characteristics. This study is to summarize the latest evidence of correlation between aspirin use and CRC and/or colorectal adenomas.
METHODS: Databases were searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the salvage setting. The pooled relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was used to estimate the effect of aspirin on colorectal cancer and/or colorectal adenomas. Subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis were also conducted.
RESULTS: The result showed that aspirin use was not associated with incidence of CRC (RR 0.97; 95% CI 0.84-1.12; P = 0.66; I2 = 34%), aspirin use was found to be associated with reduced recurrence of colorectal adenomas (RR 0.83; 95% CI 0.72-0.95; P = 0.006; I2 = 63%) and reduced mortality of CRC (RR 0.79; 95% CI 0.64-0.97; P = 0.02; I2 = 14%). Subgroup analysis found a statistically significant association in low dose with a pooled RR of 0.85 (95% CI 0.74-0.99; P = 0.03; I2 = 31%).
CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis of randomized controlled trial data indicates that aspirin reduces the overall risk of recurrence and mortality of CRC and/or colorectal adenomas. Incidence of CRC was also reduced with low-dose aspirin. The emerging evidence on aspirin's cancer protection role highlights an exciting time for cancer prevention through low-cost interventions.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov no: CRD42020208852; August 18, 2020; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020208852 ).
Objective: The objective of this review was to systematically review and synthesize evidence regarding benefits of using nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for the treatment of colorectal cancer (CRC). Data Sources: The data sources were MEDLINE, PubMed, NEJM, Google Scholar, and Google searches of references from relevant and eligible trials. Review Methods: We screened abstracts and full-text articles of identified references for eligibility and reviewed randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, and meta-analysis for evidence on benefits of using NSAIDs in CRC treatments. For all extracted data, completeness and relevance were checked. Results: The risk of any adenoma among frequent NSAID users was 26.8% vs 39.9% among placebo subjects who later used NSAIDs sporadically (adjusted relative risk = 0.62, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.39-0.98; P trend with NSAID use frequency =.03). Long-term use of aspirin reduces the risk of CRC. Aspirin also reduces the incidence of colon adenomas and mortality, especially when used for >10 years. Rofecoxib is associated with the reduction of CRC; however, it was associated with cardiovascular risk (with an overall unadjusted relative risk of 1.50 [95% CI = 0.76-2.94; P =.24]). Adenoma Prevention with Celecoxib trial shows that, for patients of all genotypes, the estimated cumulative incidence of one or more adenomas by year 3 was 59.8% for those randomized to placebo as compared with 43.3% for those randomized to low-dose (200 mg, twice daily) celecoxib (relative risk [RR] = 0.68; 95% CI = 0.59-0.79; P <.001) and 36.8% for those randomized to high-dose (400 mg, twice daily) celecoxib and 60.7% in placebo group (RR = 0.54; 95% CI = 0.46-0.64; P <.001). Conclusions: The use of COX-2 inhibitors both prior to and after diagnosis of CRC seemed to be mildly associated with the reduction in mortality of patients with CRC. Some literatures state that COX-2 inhibitors might play a synergistic role in adjuvant chemotherapy of FOLFOX regimen. Celecoxib was found to increase the radiosensitization of colon cancer cells.
BACKGROUND: Through search the possible randomized control trials, we make a renewed meta-analysis in order to assess the impact of aspirin in preventing the recurrence of colorectal adenoma.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Medicine/PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Chinese biomedical literature service system (SinoMed) databases were searched for the related randomized controlled trials until to the April 2016. Three different authors respectively evaluated the quality of studies and extracted data, and we used the STATA software to analyze, investigate heterogeneity between the data, using the fixed-effects model to calculate and merge data.
RESULTS: 7 papers were included the renewed meta- analysis, among these studies, two pairs were identified as representing the same study population, with the only difference being the duration of follow-up. Thus there were only five papers included our meta-analysis, and one Chinese paper were also included the work. Results were categorized by the length of follow-up, different kinds of people, varied dose of oral aspirin. The relative of adenoma in patients taking aspirin vs placebo were 0.73 (95% CI 0.55-0.98, P=0.039) with 1 year follow up; 0.84 (95% CI 0.72-0.98, P=0.484) with greater than 1 year follow up; for the advanced adenoma, the RR 0.68 (95% CI 0.49-0.94, P=0.582),for one year; RR=0.75 (95% CI 0.52-1.07, P=0.552) for greater one year. Furthermore the white population could divided into two subgroups according to the different length of follow-up time. When the length of follow-up time less than 3-year, The RR of two subgroups respective were RR=0.86 (95% CI 0.76-0.98, P=0.332), I2=0%, RR=0.68 (95% CI 0.47-0.98, P=0.552), I2=64.6%, But with the extension of follow-up time greater than 2-year, with the white, oral aspirin without considering dose had no efficacy on preventing the recurrence of any adenoma, the RR was 0.86 (95% CI 0.71-1.05, P=0.302), I2=16.4%.
CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis indicated that oral aspirin is associated with a remarkable decrease in the recurrence of any adenoma and advanced adenomas in patients follow-up for 1 year without concerning the dose of aspirin, but with the extension of follow-up time for greater than 1 year, oral aspirin can be effective on preventing the recurrence of any adenoma, but for the advanced adenoma, the result indicated that oral aspirin had no efficacy, According to the inclusion of ethnic groups, we also divided relevant papers into two subgroups as the yellow and white group. Then the follow-up time was less than 3 years, oral aspirin without considering the dose, had an significant efficacy on preventing the recurrence of any adenoma. But with the follow-up greater than 2 years, oral aspirin had no effect in the white.
We undertook a systematic review to synthesise the data on attitudes and behaviour towards the use of aspirin for cancer prevention, and healthcare providers' attitudes towards implementing aspirin in practice. Searches were carried out across 12 databases (e.g. MEDLINE, EMBASE). We used the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool to evaluate study quality, and conducted a narrative synthesis of the data. The review was pre-registered (
PROSPERO:
CRD42018093453). Thirty-eight studies were identified. Uptake and adherence data were all from trials. Trials recruited healthy participants, those at higher risk of cancer, and those with cancer. Four studies reported moderate to high (40.9–77.7%) uptake to an aspirin trial among people who were eligible. Most trials (18/22) reported high day-to-day adherence (≥80%). Three trials observed no association between gender and adherence. One trial found no association between adherence and colorectal cancer risk. Three studies reported moderate to high (43.6–76.0%) hypothetical willingness to use aspirin. Two studies found that a high proportion of healthcare providers (72.0–76.0%) perceived aspirin to be a suitable cancer prevention option. No qualitative studies were identified. The likelihood that eligible users of aspirin would participate in a trial evaluating the use of aspirin for preventive therapy was moderate to high. Among participants in a trial, day-to-day adherence was high. Further research is needed to identify uptake and adherence rates in routine care, the factors affecting aspirin use, and the barriers to implementing aspirin into clinical care.
