The content on or accessible through Medpedia.com is for informational purposes only. Medpedia is not a substitute for professional advice or expert medical services from a qualified health professional.
Read more
Medpedia Answers
(Oncology/Cancer)Medpedia Answers is a platform for asking and answering questions about health and medicine. Read more.
Can aspirin reduce the risk of dying from breast cancer?
A friend of mine has breast cancer and I just found this article today that intrigued me: http://www.ny1.com/5-manhattan-news-content/ny1_living/113837/study-suggests-aspirin-reduces-odds-of-breast-cancer-death
It indicates that women that take aspirin, "usually to protect against heart disease, were 50 percent less likely to have the cancer spread. They were also 50 percent less likely to die from breast cancer." Is this true? If so, why isn't this a well known treatment? Who is doing research on this?
It indicates that women that take aspirin, "usually to protect against heart disease, were 50 percent less likely to have the cancer spread. They were also 50 percent less likely to die from breast cancer." Is this true? If so, why isn't this a well known treatment? Who is doing research on this?
Male
asked Feb 17, 2010 at 11:16AM in Oncology/Cancer
-
3Votes
answered Feb 17, 2010 at 12:51PMI'm not a doctor, but this article does not seem accurate. People with early-stage breast cancer are less likely to die from the disease, whether or not aspirin is involved. Also, whether a cancer spreads depends on many factors.
I'm not sure whether aspirin and breast cancer are even related; the article does say more research is needed before doctors would recommend aspirin as a breast-cancer preventive.
Are there any doctors out there who would like to address this? -
1VotesWe do know that metastasis (spreading of the cancer) is clearly linked to inflammation, and aspirin reduces inflammation.
Of course, aspirin is not the only choice for reducing inflammation; other dietary and lifestyle habits greatly affect the level of inflammation throughout the body. We know about this particularly as affects the cardiovascular system, and that's the reason the study subjects were taking the aspirin in the first place.
These findings, from the well-known Nurses' Health Study, offer intriguing new evidence about the link between cancer and inflammation. Here is an excerpt from a lengthier mainstream press reporting on the study's findings:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-and-world/la-sci-aspirin17-2010feb17,0,4190955.story
"They found that women who took aspirin two to five days per week were 60% less likely to have a recurrence and 71% less likely to die from breast cancer. Those taking it more frequently had a 43% lower risk of recurrence and a 64% lower risk of death."
In research, it's always important not to confuse association with causation. In other words, perhaps there were other lifestyle factors among the nurses who took the aspirin that affected their rates of inflammation, cancer risk, etc. (It makes sense that the study subjects who were educated enough to consume a daily aspirin might know to take other steps to reduce inflammation.)
Another excerpt from the LA Times article:
"The researchers did not monitor aspirin dosage, but the majority of the women taking aspirin did so for its heart benefit, and thus were taking 81 milligrams per day, less than a normal dose. These women may have been more health conscious than other women in the study, and it is possible that other actions on their part were responsible for their improved survival, experts noted."
It's important to note that the Nurses Study is based on self reports.
Finally, there is this important caution in the article:
"Whether aspirin ultimately proves beneficial or not, doctors cautioned that women being treated for breast cancer should not take the medication. It can interfere with the therapy, producing severe side effects."
I hope that helps answer your question. -
1Votesanswered Feb 26, 2010 at 10:02AMI think Gina has pointed out some really good reasons for why the LA Times article is flawed. Here's an excerpt from it that basically says it all.
"The results, reported Tuesday in the Journal of Clinical Oncology, are surprising because at least five large studies have shown that taking aspirin regularly has no effect on the risk of developing breast cancer in the first place. The study's authors described the findings as surprising and worthy of follow-up, but even they cautioned that survivors shouldn't yet begin prophylactic aspirin use."
Whether cancer spreads depends on a variety of factors, such as the grade of the cancer, how long a tumor goes undetected, etc. The mass media do like to find correlations between cancer and just about everything. A great doctor's job is to synthesize information from legitimate studies and data and inform the patient about her (or his) particular case (men get breast cancer, too).-
Just to be clear, Beth: It's your opinion that the LA Times article is flawed, not mine. I found it accurate reporting of the study's implications and limitations.Gina Pera commented Feb 26, 2010 at 10:25AM
-
Sorry for the confusion on that one. Yes, it is my opinion that the LA Times article is less-than-stellar. The headline "Aspirin might reduce recurrence risk for breast cancer survivors, study finds," is designed to make people think that aspirin might, indeed, reduce recurrence and therefore mislead people. I'm not blaming the paper for this, as this is a typical journalistic style designed to draw people to the article. The problem is, though, that we as a society are grasping for a panacea for breast cancer, and the truth is, there really isn't one.Beth L. Gainer commented Feb 26, 2010 at 10:36AM
-
Beth, with all due respect (and as a former managing editor whose job included writing headlines), I find the headline perfectly acceptable. It does not oversell the research findings (note the use of "might") and the story includes plenty of caveats. I find it in no way sensationalistic.
Science works in increments, Beth. Each bit of data adds to a whole. If there is promising evidence for inflammation as a risk factor for cancer, that is a legitimate line of inquiry.Gina Pera commented Feb 26, 2010 at 11:19AM -
As a former and current editor and journalist who has come up with headlines more times than I can count, I can confidently say that I understand how headlines work. I also know how science works. I am in no way implying that new information should be hidden from the public. However, what I am saying is that headlines, articles, and news programs can cause public panic if information is taken out of context.
That's all.Beth L. Gainer commented Feb 26, 2010 at 11:28AM
-
Sign-in
to post an answer to this question.
Related Questions
- Will you feel actual pain in your breast or breasts if you have cancer?
- What is the normal prognosis if Breast Cancer is found in a late stage rather than early?
- Child-bearing and Breast Cancer
- Can breast cancer be linked to vitamin and mineral deficiency?
- What could cause sharp pains under the right breast for about one year that is relieved by taking Bayer aspirin. I have had several stress tests and they all came back ok. Could this be angina?
- Can a woman who has had breast cancer replace DHEA?
- How is osteosarcoma related to the breast cancer gene?
- Familial breast cancer -any idea?
- What is triple negative breast cancer?
- Is it possible to replace Raloxifene for Tamoxifen?
- »» See All
The content on or accessible through Medpedia.com is for informational purposes only. Medpedia is not a substitute for professional advice or expert medical services from a qualified health professional.
Read more
This simple drug, derived initially from willow bark tea centuries ago, has wide ranging effects that are still being elucidated.
The science of the process most likely has to do with what are called cyclooxygenase inhibitors (COX inhibition).