Chronic Application of Low-Dose Aspirin Affects Multiple Parameters of Three Blood Cellular Types and Antithrombin Activity: A 1:1:1 Propensity Score Matching Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 77 (1) ◽  
pp. 115-121
Author(s):  
Xiao-li Li ◽  
Qiang Wang ◽  
Hui-jun Yin ◽  
Yao-hui Wang ◽  
Jian Cao ◽  
...  
Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 3870-3870
Author(s):  
Hassan Sibai ◽  
Fotios V. Michelis ◽  
Nada Hamad ◽  
Jieun Uhm ◽  
Vikas Gupta ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) is an effective therapy in Acute Myeloid Leukemia and Myelodysplastic Syndrome (AML/MDS). There is controversy over whether reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) results in similar outcomes to myeloablative conditioning (MAC), especially regarding relapse risk. It is difficult to identify the specific cause of the transplant failure rate in RIC patients amongst the multiple possible factors including relapse risk due to disease characteristics of older pts with AML/MDS, or multiple comorbidities in the population receiving RIC, resulting in higher morbidity and mortality, versus expected lower risk of regimen-related toxicity. In order to overcome this, we used a propensity score matching analysis in this study. Methods: A total of 248 patients transplanted for AML or MDS at the Princess Margret Cancer Center between 2009 and 2013 were included in this analysis. Inclusion was restricted to patients receiving Fludarabine/Busulfan plus low dose total body irradiation (TBI) with either RIC conditioning (Fludarabine 30mg/m2/day for 4 days, Busulfan 3.2mg/kg/day for 2 days and TBI 200 cGy n=121) or MAC conditioning (Fludarabine 50mg/m2/day for 4 days, Busulfan 3.2mg/kg/day for 4 days and TBI 400 cGy; n=127). The RIC and MAC groups were compared for overall survival (OS), non-relapse mortality (NRM) and relapse. Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis is used to adjust for the risk factors which affect the choice of treatment between different treatment options. Using PSM analysis, we performed a case-control study with well-balanced pairs of RIC and MAC patients. Pre-transplant variables included in the PSM were age at HCT, HCT-Comorbidity Index (HCT-CI), complete remission status (CR) at HCT, diagnosis (AML vs MDS), cytogenetic risk group (high-risk vs others), donor type (related vs unrelated) and period effect (transplant year). A total of 39 case-control pairs were selected within 0.2 of a difference in propensity score. Paired analysis was adopted throughout the PSM analysis for survival. RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 18 months among survivors in the overall population (n=248), the 2-year OS, NRM and relapse incidence rates were 48.0±3.6%, 34.6±3.6% and 24.8±3.5% respectively There was no difference between the 2 groups in OS (45.2±5.0% in RIC vs 51.7±5.2% in MAC at 2 years; p=0.541) or NRM (32.9±5.2% in RIC vs 35.7±4.9% in MAC at 2 years; p=0.504). However, there was a higher incidence of relapse in the RIC group (31.5±5.1% in RIC vs 18.2±4.8% in MAC at 2 years; p=0.033) Demographic and transplant characteristics were imbalanced between the 2 groups within the overall population, including older age (P=<0.001), higher HCT-CI score (p=0.002) and more related donors in the RIC group (p=0.02). However, no differences were observed in CR status at HCT (p=0.110), subtype of diagnosis (AML vs MDS, p=0.174), or cytogenetic risk group (p=0.278). To overcome baseline imbalances we used a PSM analysis, and 39 case-control pairs (n=78) were selected. All pre-transplant variables became well balanced after propensity score matching, i.e. there were no differences in age (p=0.537), HCT-CI (p=0.931), CR status at HCT (p=0.655), diagnosis (p=0.774), cytogenetic risk group (p=0.784), donor type (p=0.496) or period effect (p=0.984). In the propensity score matched patients, there were no differences in OS (58.0±8.8% in RIC vs 50.9±8.1% in MAC at 2 years; p=0.554), NRM (28.0±8.2% in RIC vs 32.8±7.8% in MAC at 2 years; p=0.688), or relapse (17.8±6.7% in RIC vs 18.0±6.8% in MAC at 2 years; p=0.635). Conclusion: These results suggest, based on a propensity score matching analysis, that the outcomes of a Fludarabine/Busulfan plus low dose TBI based‎ RIC HCT for AML/MDS are equivalent to a Fludarabine/Busulfan plus low dose TBI based MAC with regards to the risk of relapse, NRM, and OS. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abdullah Al Harthi ◽  
Khalid Al Sulaiman ◽  
Ohoud Aljuhani ◽  
Ghazwa B. Korayem ◽  
Ali F. Altebainawi ◽  
...  

Abstract BackgroundMultiple medications with anti-inflammatory effects have been used to manage the hyper-inflammatory response associated with COVID-19. Aspirin is used widely as a cardioprotective agent due to its antiplatelet and anti-inflammatory properties. Its role in hospitalized COVID-19 patients has been assessed and evaluated in the literature. However, no data regards its role in COVID-19 critically ill patients. Therefore, this study aims to evaluate the use of low-dose aspirin (81-100 mg) and its impact on outcomes in COVID-19 critically ill patients. MethodThis is a multicenter, retrospective cohort study for all adult critically ill patients with confirmed COVID-19 admitted to Intensive Care Units (ICUs) between March 1, 2020, and March 31, 2021. Eligible patients were classified into two groups based on aspirin use during ICU stay. The primary outcome is the in-hospital mortality; other outcomes were considered secondary. Propensity score-matched used based on patient’s age, SOFA score, MV status within 24 hours of ICU admission, prone position status, ischemic heart disease (IHD), and stroke as co-existing illness. We considered a P value of < 0.05 statistically significant.ResultsA total of 1033 patients were eligible; 352 patients were included after propensity score matching (1:1 ratio). The in-hospital mortality (HR (95%CI): 0.73 (0.56, 0.97), p-value=0.03) were lower in patients who received aspirin during hospital stay. On the other hand, patients who received aspirin have a higher risk of major bleeding compared to the control group (OR (95%CI): 2.92 (0.91, 9.36), p-value=0.07); but was not statistically significant.ConclusionAspirin use in COVID-19 critically ill patients may have a mortality benefit; nevertheless, it may be linked with an increased risk of significant bleeding. The benefit-risk evaluation for aspirin usage during an ICU stay should be tailored to each patient.


Cancers ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (6) ◽  
pp. 1551
Author(s):  
Sheng-Dean Luo ◽  
Wei-Chih Chen ◽  
Ching-Nung Wu ◽  
Yao-Hsu Yang ◽  
Shau-Hsuan Li ◽  
...  

Background: Aspirin use has been associated with improved survival rates in various cancers. However, it remains unclear if aspirin confers a survival benefit on patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). The aim of this study was to assess the associations between aspirin use and survival in different stages of NPC. Methods: This is a 10-year retrospective cohort study of NPC patients. A total of 565 NPC patients were recruited after we performed a 1:4 propensity score match between aspirin users and non–users. Cox regression models with adjusted covariates were employed to evaluate factors that influence the survival rate of NPC patients. Results: The Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed that the overall survival (p < 0.0001) and disease-specific survival (p < 0.0001) rates of 180-day aspirin users increased. Increased survival rates were also observed in 180-day aspirin users with Stages III and IV, T, N1 and 2, and N3 categories. Cox regression models indicated that factors, including aspirin use (univariate: HR = 0.28, 95% CI = 0.14–0.55, p < 0.001; multivariate: HR = 0.23, 95% CI = 0.12–0.46, p < 0.001), were independent prognostic factors for survival. Conclusions: Aspirin use for more than 180 days is associated with an increased survival rate and is a positive independent prognostic factor in NPC.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abdullah Al Harthi ◽  
Khalid Al Sulaiman ◽  
Ohoud Aljuhani ◽  
Ghazwa B. Korayem ◽  
Ali F. Altebainawi ◽  
...  

Abstract BackgroundMultiple medications with anti-inflammatory effects have been used to manage the hyper-inflammatory response associated with COVID-19. Aspirin is used widely as a cardioprotective agent due to its antiplatelet and anti-inflammatory properties. Its role in hospitalized COVID-19 patients has been assessed and evaluated in the literature. However, no data regards its role in COVID-19 critically ill patients. Therefore, this study aims to evaluate the use of low-dose aspirin (81-100 mg) and its impact on outcomes in COVID-19 critically ill patients. MethodThis is a multicenter, retrospective cohort study for all adult critically ill patients with confirmed COVID-19 admitted to Intensive Care Units (ICUs) between March 1, 2020, and March 31, 2021. Eligible patients were classified into two groups based on aspirin use during ICU stay.The primary outcome is the in-hospital mortality; other outcomes were considered secondary. Propensity score-matched used based on patient’s age, SOFA score, MV status within 24 hours of ICU admission, prone position status, ischemic heart disease (IHD), and stroke as co-existing illness. We considered a P value of < 0.05 statistically significant.ResultsA total of 1033 patients were eligible; 352 patients were included after propensity score matching (1:1 ratio). The in-hospital mortality (HR (95%CI): 0.73 (0.56, 0.97), p-value=0.03) were lower in patients who received aspirin during hospital stay. On the other hand, patients who received aspirin have a higher risk of major bleeding compared to the control group (OR (95%CI): 2.92 (0.91, 9.36), p-value=0.07); but was not statistically significant.ConclusionAspirin use in COVID-19 critically ill patients may have a mortality benefit; nevertheless, it may be linked with an increased risk of significant bleeding. The benefit-risk evaluation for aspirin usage during an ICU stay should be tailored to each patient.


2006 ◽  
Vol 34 (10) ◽  
pp. 8
Author(s):  
ELIZABETH MECHCATIE

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document