Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24114189›Full record

ReviewCurrent oncology reports2013

Role of aspirin in cancer prevention.

Mangesh A Thorat, Jack Cuzick

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current oncology reports, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
10.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

49 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 97 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Acetylsalicylic Acid-Primus Inter Pares in Pharmacology.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Prostaglandin EInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2020
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mangesh A ThoratCentre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, Charterhouse Square, London, EC1M 6BQ, UK, m.thorat@qmul.ac.uk.
Jack Cuzick
Queen Mary University of London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Since its first synthesis in 1897, several medicinal roles and mechanisms of action of aspirin have become apparent; the latest among these being its role in cancer prevention and treatment. A large body of evidence supports aspirin's effect in reducing cancer incidence and cancer mortality, but duration of use needs to be at least 5 years. The beneficial effects are particularly large for colorectal, oesophageal and gastric cancers, with apparently smaller reductions for breast, prostate and lung cancer. The major harm is gastrointestinal bleeding, but serious sequelae are minimal at ages <70 years. It is very likely that use of prophylactic aspirin in the general population aged 50-70+ years will result in net overall benefit. Outstanding issues are: whether standard dose (~300 mg/day) can lead to greater net benefits than low dose (75-100 mg/day), the optimum duration of use, and appropriate ages for use in average-risk individuals.

Indexed as

Anticarcinogenic AgentsAnti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-SteroidalAspirinChemotherapy, AdjuvantDose-Response Relationship, DrugGastrointestinal HemorrhageHumansNeoplasmsOrgan SpecificityPlatelet Aggregation InhibitorsAnticarcinogenic AgentsAnti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-SteroidalAspirinPlatelet Aggregation Inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID24114189
OpenAlexW2056422550

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.