Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41912748›Full record

ReviewCurrent oncology reports2026

Aspirin in Colorectal Cancer Care: Who to Treat, When, and Why.

Dimitrios Stylianakis, Gilberto Morgan, Cinzia Solinas, Eleonora Lai, Andrea Pretta, Maria Letizia Ledda, Valeria Pusceddu, Marco Puzzoni, Pina Ziranu, Serafina Martella and 9 more

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current oncology reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

19 authors.

Dimitrios Stylianakis *School of Medicine of Crete, University Hospital, University of Crete, Heraklion, Greece. dimitrios.stylianakis@gmail.com.
Gilberto Morgan *Department of Medical Oncology, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden.
Cinzia SolinasMedical Oncology, Department of Medical Sciences and Public Health, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Cagliari, University of Cagliari, Cagliari/Monserrato, Italy.
Eleonora LaiMedical Oncology, Department of Medical Sciences and Public Health, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Cagliari, University of Cagliari, Cagliari/Monserrato, Italy.
Andrea PrettaMedical Oncology, Department of Medical Sciences and Public Health, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Cagliari, University of Cagliari, Cagliari/Monserrato, Italy.
Maria Letizia LeddaMedical Oncology, Department of Medical Sciences and Public Health, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Cagliari, University of Cagliari, Cagliari/Monserrato, Italy.
Valeria PuscedduMedical Oncology, Department of Medical Sciences and Public Health, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Cagliari, University of Cagliari, Cagliari/Monserrato, Italy.
Marco PuzzoniMedical Oncology, Department of Medical Sciences and Public Health, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Cagliari, University of Cagliari, Cagliari/Monserrato, Italy.
Pina ZiranuMedical Oncology, Department of Medical Sciences and Public Health, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Cagliari, University of Cagliari, Cagliari/Monserrato, Italy.
Serafina MartellaDepartment of Biomedical and Biotechnological Sciences, University of Catania, Catania, Italy.
Dimitrios TsavdarisFirst Propaedeutic Surgery Department, University General Hospital of Thessaloniki AHEPA, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Ioannis StylianakisSchool of Medicine of Crete, University Hospital, University of Crete, Heraklion, Greece.
Laura DemurtasMedical Oncology, Department of Medical Sciences and Public Health, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Cagliari, University of Cagliari, Cagliari/Monserrato, Italy.
Riccardo GiampieriClinica Oncologica, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria delle Marche, Ancona, Italy.
Francesco PuleoDepartment of Gastroenterology and Digestive Oncology, Delta Hospital (CHIREC), Brussels, Belgium.
Karen Willard-GalloMolecular Immunology Laboratory, Institut Jules Bordet, Université libre de Bruxelles (ULB), Brussels, Belgium.
Luigi ZorcoloDepartment of Surgical Sciences, General and Colorectal Surgery Unit, Colorectal Unit, University of Cagliari, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Cagliari, Monserrato, Italy.
Angelo RestivoDepartment of Surgical Sciences, General and Colorectal Surgery Unit, Colorectal Unit, University of Cagliari, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Cagliari, Monserrato, Italy.
Mario ScartozziMedical Oncology, Department of Medical Sciences and Public Health, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Cagliari, University of Cagliari, Cagliari/Monserrato, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewAspirin is ubiquitous, inexpensive, and mechanistically compelling in colorectal cancer (CRC), yet its clinical role has become more ambiguous with—notwithstanding—new data. Neutral phase III results in unselected disease, biomarker-restricted signals of benefit, and guideline shifts driven by bleeding risk have left clinicians without a consistent, setting-specific approach. This review fills that gap by translating the post-precision aspirin literature into a selection-first framework that specifies who may benefit, when off-trial use is reasonable versus discouraged, and why trial enrolment remains the preferred option in key areas of uncertainty. RECENT

findingsIn prevention, aspirin produces modest reductions in adenoma recurrence in selected high-risk surveillance cohorts and shows delayed cancer-endpoint benefit in Lynch syndrome, highlighting that baseline CRC risk and time horizon are decisive. In older adults and lower-risk settings, the time-to-benefit often does not align with a higher, earlier bleeding liability. After curative-intent treatment, randomised trials now define clear boundaries: routine adjuvant aspirin in unselected resected CRC is not supported, whereas recurrence reduction appears confined to PI3K-pathway / PIK3CA-altered localised disease, supporting biomarker-restricted consideration and rigorous prospective validation. In metastatic CRC, existing signals are largely non-randomised and confounded, precluding anticancer-motivated prescribing outside prospective studies. Aspirin in CRC should be targeted rather than routine. The proposed clinical algorithm integrates setting, absolute risk, PI3K/PIK3CA status, bleeding/antithrombotic context, and expected time horizon to maximise net benefit while reducing avoidable harm, and to prioritise trial enrolment where equipoise persists.

Indexed as

Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-SteroidalAspirinColorectal NeoplasmsHumansNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalAnti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-SteroidalAspirinAspirinBiomarker-guided therapyColorectal cancer (CRC)GuidelinePrecision preventionRisk–benefit assessment

Identifiers

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.