Evidence mapPaperPMID 40010936Full record

ArticleHeart (British Cardiac Society)2025

Balancing the risk of major bleeding against vascular disease risk in people without atherosclerotic disease.

Imen Hammami, Marion Mafham, Jonathan Emberson, Alison Offer, Jemma C Hopewell, Jane Armitage, Colin Baigent, Sarah Parish

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Heart (British Cardiac Society), 2025. 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

8 authors.

Imen HammamiClinical Trial Service Unit and Epidemiological Studies Unit, University of Oxford Nuffield Department of Population Health, Oxford, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0006-7874-1070
Marion MafhamClinical Trial Service Unit and Epidemiological Studies Unit, University of Oxford Nuffield Department of Population Health, Oxford, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0562-3963
Jonathan EmbersonClinical Trial Service Unit and Epidemiological Studies Unit, University of Oxford Nuffield Department of Population Health, Oxford, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7792-9422
Alison OfferClinical Trial Service Unit and Epidemiological Studies Unit, University of Oxford Nuffield Department of Population Health, Oxford, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3367-3207
Jemma C HopewellClinical Trial Service Unit and Epidemiological Studies Unit, University of Oxford Nuffield Department of Population Health, Oxford, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3870-8018
Jane ArmitageClinical Trial Service Unit and Epidemiological Studies Unit, University of Oxford Nuffield Department of Population Health, Oxford, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8691-9226
Colin BaigentClinical Trial Service Unit and Epidemiological Studies Unit, University of Oxford Nuffield Department of Population Health, Oxford, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4856-7420
Sarah ParishClinical Trial Service Unit and Epidemiological Studies Unit, University of Oxford Nuffield Department of Population Health, Oxford, UK sarah.parish@ndph.ox.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3532-0832

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimsIn the primary prevention setting, low-dose aspirin reduces major vascular events (MVEs) by approximately 11% but increases major bleeding (MB) by 40-50%, implying that net benefit will be most evident when the MVE-to-MB ratio is >4. This study aimed to derive cross-validated risk scores for MB and MVE and use the MVE-to-MB ratio to identify groups who may derive differing net benefits from treatment.

methods431 167 UK Biobank participants without known atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease at baseline were followed through record linkage for incident MVEs (myocardial infarction, non-haemorrhagic stroke, transient ischaemic attack, arterial revascularisation or vascular death) and MB (gastrointestinal and intracranial bleeds with hospital admission for ≥2 days). Risk scores were derived for MVE and MB using Cox proportional hazards models with cross-validation. Ratios of observed MVE-to-MB rates were calculated across risk categories.

resultsDuring a median follow-up of 12 years, 18 310 participants suffered an MVE and 5352 an MB. MB risk was highest among participants with frailty, prior bleeds, cancer, liver disease or renal dysfunction, with a 4.3-fold difference in risk between the highest and lowest fifths of MB risk (HR 4.3, 95% CI 3.87 to 4.77). The MVE-to-MB ratio was ≤2.6 in the highest MB risk groups and ≥4 in lower MB risk categories.

conclusionsThe derived models using routinely available disease history and laboratory measurements improved distinction of the MVE-to-MB ratio compared with using conventional models for MB risk including vascular risk factors. Such models can help identify those with moderate MVE risk but low MB risk who may benefit from low-dose aspirin.

Indexed as

AspirinHemorrhagePlatelet Aggregation InhibitorsPrimary PreventionAgedAtherosclerosisFemaleFollow-Up StudiesGastrointestinal HemorrhageHumansIncidenceMaleMiddle AgedRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsUnited KingdomAspirinPlatelet Aggregation InhibitorsCardiovascular DiseasesRisk AssessmentRisk Factors

Identifiers

PMID40010936
PMCPMC12322474

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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 Socratic graph.