‘No Net Benefit’: Daily Aspirin For Most Now Discouraged By Task Force
The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force released a report that finds little to no benefit for people without cardiovascular disease in preventing a heart attack or stroke. And there is an increased risk of bleeding. Based on the evidence, the panel's new guidance says people 60 and up should not start taking daily low-dose aspirin.
NPR:
Daily Aspirin To Prevent Heart Attacks And Strokes Could Do More Harm Than Good
New guidance from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force says people over the age of 60 should not start taking daily, low-dose aspirin to prevent cardiovascular events like heart attacks or strokes. Low-dose aspirin had been a popular prevention measure, but as more evidence has accumulated its benefit has come into question. On Tuesday the task force finalized new recommendations advising against the practice. The task force concludes that initiating daily aspirin in adults 60 years or older has "no net benefit," and increases a person's risk of internal bleeding. (Aubrey and Stone, 4/26)
Stat:
Daily Aspirin Offers Little To No Benefit For Most Adults Trying To Prevent Heart Disease, New Report Says
Taking low-dose aspirin every day to prevent a heart attack or stroke provides little to no benefit to people without cardiovascular disease but could instead increase the risk of dangerous bleeding, a new report from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force says. For adults ages 60 and up who don’t have cardiovascular disease or aren’t at high risk of developing it, the task force determined there was no benefit to starting aspirin if they are not already on it. Among adults 40 to 59 years old, the task force, a volunteer group of medical experts, concluded “with moderate certainty” that there was a small net benefit to taking low-dose aspirin among those who have a 10% or higher risk of developing heart disease in a 10-year period. It’s up to those individuals and their doctors to decide whether to take aspirin, the task force concluded. (Cueto, 4/26)
ABC News:
Aspirin No Longer Recommended To Prevent 1st Heart Attack, Stroke For Most Adults Over 60
For years, doctors recommended people in their 50s start taking baby aspirin every day to protect against heart attacks and stroke. But in recent years, with new evidence of the possible harm of daily aspirin, health experts shifted those recommendations. In major new guidance, an influential physician task force no longer recommends daily aspirin to prevent a first heart attack or stroke among people 60 and older. Meanwhile, the new guidance said people 40 to 59 should only take it if they have a high risk of cardiovascular disease, and in consultation with a doctor. There is little benefit in continuing aspirin beyond the age of 75 years old, experts concluded. (Akusoba, 4/26)
CNN:
Task Force's Updated Guidelines Do Not Recommend Daily Aspirin For Heart Health For Most Adults
If you are between 40 and 59 years old, the USPSTF leaves it up to you and your doctor to decide whether you should take a daily aspirin in specific circumstances. "If you are really healthy, if you're a healthy 40-year-old with no major risk factors, you will do more harm than good with daily aspirin. Your risk of bleeding will exceed the benefits," said Dr. Steven Nissen, chair of cardiovascular medicine at Cleveland Clinic, who was not involved in the new guidelines. "People need to understand that aspirin is not a completely benign or innocent therapy." (Christensen, 4/26)
The Star Tribune:
New Aspirin Guidance Influenced By Minnesota Research
The guidance from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force was strongly influenced by Bloomington-based HealthPartners, which used computer models to weigh aspirin's preventive benefits of reducing heart attacks and strokes vs. its risk of causing bleeding. The task force no longer advises anyone to initiate aspirin without talking to their doctor, but the update to its 2016 guidance doesn't extend to the 30 million Americans already taking the pills to reduce cardiac risks. "We found from our modeling study that the balance between potential benefits and harms is narrower," said Steven Dehmer, a health economist with HealthPartners Institute who led the research. (Olson, 4/26)