| Literature DB >> 31671812 |
Qin Xiang Ng1,2, Krishnapriya Ramamoorthy3,4, Wayren Loke5, Matthew Wei Liang Lee6, Wee Song Yeo7,8, Donovan Yutong Lim9,10, Vivekanandan Sivalingam11.
Abstract
Worldwide, depression and bipolar disorder affect a large and growing number of people. However, current pharmacotherapy options remain limited. Despite adequate treatment, many patients continue to have subsyndromal symptoms, which predict relapse in bipolar illness and often result in functional impairments. Aspirin, a common nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID), has purported beneficial effects on mood symptoms, showing protective effects against depression in early cohort studies. This systematic review thus aimed to investigate the role of aspirin in mood disorders. Using the keywords (aspirin or acetylsalicy* or asa) and (mood or depress* or bipolar or mania or suicid*), a comprehensive search of PubMed, EMBASE, Medline, PsycINFO, Clinical Trials Register of the Cochrane Collaboration Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Group (CCDANTR), Clinicaltrials.gov and Google Scholar databases found 13,952 papers published in English between 1 January 1988 and 1 May 2019. A total of six clinical studies were reviewed. There were two randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trials and populations drawn from two main cohort studies (i.e., the Geelong Osteoporosis Study and the Osteoarthritis Initiative study). Using a random-effects model, the pooled hazard ratio of the three cohort studies was 0.624 (95% confidence interval: 0.0503 to 1.198, p = 0.033), supporting a reduced risk of depression with aspirin exposure. Overall, the dropout rates were low, and aspirin appears to be well-tolerated with minimal risk of affective switch. In terms of methodological quality, most studies had a generally low risk of bias. Low-dose aspirin (80 to 100 mg/day) is safe, well-tolerated and potentially efficacious for improving depressive symptoms in both unipolar and bipolar depression. Due to its ability to modulate neuroinflammation and central nervous system processes, aspirin may also have valuable neuroprotective and pro-cognitive effects that deserve further exploration. Further randomized, controlled trials involving the adjunctive use of aspirin should be encouraged to confirm its therapeutic benefits.Entities:
Keywords: anti-inflammatory; aspirin; bipolar; depression; mood disorder; psychiatry; systematic review
Year: 2019 PMID: 31671812 PMCID: PMC6895819 DOI: 10.3390/brainsci9110296
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Brain Sci ISSN: 2076-3425
Figure 1Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) flow diagram summarizing the studies identified during the literature search and the abstraction process.
Clinical studies investigating the effects of acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) on mood disorders (arranged alphabetically by first author’s last name).
| Author, Year | Study Design | Sample Size ( | Study Population and Duration | Country of Origin | Conclusions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Saroukhani, 2013 [ | Randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind | 32 | Males with stable bipolar affective disorder (DSM-IV-TR) on maintenance lithium therapy; 6 weeks | Iran | Patients who received aspirin (240 mg/day) had significant improvements in total sexual function and erective function domain scores than placebo group. Baseline and endpoint serum lithium concentrations and mood symptoms remained stable throughout the duration of the study. |
| Savitz, 2018 [ | Multi-site, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind | 99 | At least moderately depressed psychiatric outpatients with Bipolar I, II or NOS (DSM-IV-TR criteria); 6 weeks | United States | Active minocycline (100 mg twice daily) and aspirin (81 mg twice daily) significantly improved depressive symptoms. There was a main effect of aspirin on treatment response. |
| Stolk, 2010 [ | Retrospective linkage record | 5145 | Patients ≥18 years old, who had been dispensed at least five prescriptions for lithium; 10-year period of observation | Netherlands | Presumably, low-dose ASA (30 or 80 mg/day) significantly reduced the relative risk of clinical deteriorations in patients on lithium (adjusted incidence density of medication events (dose increase or drug change) was 0.84, 95% CI: 0.75 to 0.94). |
| Pasco, 2010 [ | 386 | Community-dwelling females; followed for 10 years; population derived from the Geelong Osteoporosis Study | Australia | ASA use associated with protective effect against major depression (age-adjusted OR 0.18, 95% CI: 0.02 to 1.39, | |
| 345 | Reduced risk of major depression in individuals with history of ASA and statin exposure (HR 0.20, 95% CI: 0.04 to 0.85, | ||||
| Veronese, 2018 [ | Longitudinal cohort | 4070 | Community-dwelling adults; followed for 8 years; population derived from ongoing multicenter, longitudinal Osteoarthritis Initiative (OAI) study | United States | Adjusting for confounders, ASA use did not protect against incident depressive symptoms over the study period of 8 years (HR 1.12; 95% CI: 0.78 to 1.62, |
| Williams, 2016 [ | 937 | Community-dwelling males, 24–98 years old; followed for 5 years; population derived from ongoing Geelong Osteoporosis Study | Australia | After adjustment for age and antidepressant use, exposure to ASA was associated with a reduced likelihood of major depression (OR 0.4, 95% CI: 0.2 to 0.9, | |
| 836 | Reduced risk of major depression in individuals with history of ASA and statin use (HR 0.55, 95% CI: 0.23 to 1.32, |
Abbreviations: ASA, aspirin; DSM-IV-TR, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition Text Revision; HR, hazard ratio; OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.
Figure 2Forest plot showing pooled hazard ratios for the effect of ASA exposure on incident depression.
The Newcastle–Ottawa Scale for assessing the quality of cohort studies reviewed.
| Study | Representativeness of the Exposed Cohort a | Selection of the Non-Exposed Cohort a | Ascertainment of Exposure a | Demonstration that Outcome of Interest was Not Present at Start of Study a | Comparability of Cohorts b | Assessment of Outcome a | Follow-up Duration a | Follow-up Adequacy a |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pasco, 2010 (Study 2) [ | * | * | * | * | ** | * | * | * |
| Veronese, 2018 [ | * | * | * | * | ** | * | * | * |
| Williams, 2016 (Study 2) [ | * | * | * | * | ** | * | * | * |
a A study can be awarded a maximum of one star. b A maximum of two stars can be given for comparability.
Results of Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias.
| Study (Author, Year) | Sequence Generation | Allocation Concealment | Blinding | Incomplete Outcome Data | Selective Outcome Reporting | Other Bias |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Saroukhani, 2013 [ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Savitz, 2018 [ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Key: low risk of bias; unclear risk of bias.