Is it even worth it to draw attention to the UK Daily Mail’s headline this week calling aspirin a miracle pill?
Yes, clearly it is, because many, many other stories around the globe hyped the story – although most of them short of the degree to which the Daily Mail did.
Headlines were shouting advice such as “Aspirin should be taken by all over 50s to cut thousands of cancer deaths.”
But Medscape reported that it’s more complicated than that:
Should doctors routinely recommend aspirin for patients 50 to 65 years of age?
“The authors fall short of making an absolute recommendation about this,” Dr. Lichtenfeld noted. However, “the evidence is clearly strong that low-dose aspirin has been demonstrated to significantly reduce incidence and deaths from certain GI cancers,” particularly colorectal cancer.
An answer could come from the US Preventive Services Task Force, which has begun a comprehensive review of the role of aspirin for cancer prevention, according to Dr. Lichtenfeld.
“If the task force says people should be taking aspirin routinely, that’s a very strong recommendation,” he said. “That might be a game changer, but we don’t know yet.”
“Patients will need to make individual decisions about how much risk they are willing to accept to prevent cancer,” he explained. A person with a family history of colorectal cancer might be more willing to accept risk than a person with no such history. “That’s what informed decision making is all about.”
In general, clinicians and researchers contacted by MedPage Today gave the study favorable reviews, but none said they were ready to start routine prescribing for average-risk patients. …
The study is a “fascinating” summary of the available data, said Marc Itskowitz, MD, of Allegheny Health Network in Pittsburgh.
“For a high-risk population for bowel and colon cancer, I would strongly consider using aspirin,” Itskowitz said. “However, in general I don’t recommend aspirin for primary prevention. … because we’re concerned that routine use of aspirin might cause gastrointestinal problems, including GI bleeding and maybe even intracranial bleeding.”
Dr. Margaret McCartney of the UK tweeted this graphic to explain the number needed to treat/number needed to harm for aspirin.
Around 17 fewer deaths, including:
- 16 fewer deaths from cancer overall
- 1.4 fewer deaths from heart attacks
Between two and three extra death from:
- 1.4 more lethal strokes
- 0.3 more serious peptic ulcers
- 0.65 more lethal gastric bleeds
Sounds positive overall, right? Well there are a few important omissions from the analysis that begin to muddy the waters.
Its a bit more complicated than that
These risks and benefits arent evenly spread around the population. Some are at higher risk of side effects. Some peoples genetic make-up means they break down aspirin at different rates some faster, some slower, than average. Some will have a lower risk of cancer without even taking the drug, so they wont benefit as much (though they may still experience side effects). Its an extremely complex, and still slightly murky, picture.
So to be able to recommend aspirin to people in the full knowledge that the risks are being minimised, and the benefits maximised, doctors need to have a better idea of the following:
- What age should people start, and stop, taking aspirin?
- What dose should they take?
- What are the factors that should rule someone out from taking aspirin, and how should we test for them?
At the moment, frustratingly, theres no clear, definitive answer to these questions. And until there are, were discouraging people from stocking up on their own supplies of aspirin without seeking medical advice first.
The National Cancer Institute in April posted, “No Easy Answers About Whether Aspirin Lowers Cancer Risk.”
I’ll end with the point Dr. Len Lichtenfeld made in the Medscape story above. This is not a slam dunk for everyone. This is about individualized, fully-informed, shared decision-making. Sensational news stories should not drive water-cooler discussions about the miracle of aspirin – which is no more miracle today, as a result of this study, than it was yesterday.
Follow us on Twitter: