This page shows what was measured, who it was measured in, and what that does not settle.
What ASA does in the body
Pain and fever; and, at low dose, preventing clots in people who already have heart or artery disease
Aspirin does something no other anti-inflammatory does: instead of sitting in the enzyme and then leaving, it chemically attaches a fragment of itself to the enzyme and wrecks it for good. In most cells that hardly matters, because the cell simply builds a new enzyme. A platelet cannot — it has no nucleus and no way to make new protein — so one small daily dose keeps every platelet in the bloodstream disarmed for its whole seven-to-ten-day life. That is the entire basis of low-dose aspirin for the heart. It is also why aspirin bleeding is different from other NSAID bleeding: you cannot switch it off by stopping the tablet, only by waiting for new platelets.
What happened in people
All-cause mortality hazard ratio 1.14 (1.01 to 1.29) in the same trial, with cancer death 3.1% against 2.3%
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
The recorded finding that sits closest to something a person would notice. Written into the record, not signed off, and it carries no population or interval.
ADAPTABLE could not separate 81 mg from 325 mg in established disease, in part because 41.6% of those assigned the higher dose switched to the lower one
Where it acts
The cyclooxygenase channel of COX-1 inside the circulating platelet, which has no nucleus and therefore cannot replace the enzyme once it is acetylated
Kind of result
Living longer, or avoiding a major event
Supervision
RNAWiki has not recorded a supervision or regulatory status for this substance.
What the registries record it as
The substance registry classes this as chemical.
FDA substance registry · R16CO5Y76E · read 2026-08-29
Where each sentence above came from
No recorded sentence describes the change this makes in a way that stands on its own. The page opens with what it is taken for instead, and the recorded explanation follows below.
Shown as the opening line on this page.
A limit recorded against this substance. Not signed off as a reviewed claim.
The four opening statements run to 157 words.
Words this page uses
Four words worth knowing first
Chosen from what this page shows, with each one explained before the word it depends on.
Stand-in result
A stand-in result is a number measured because the real result takes too long.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
It is like judging a journey by the speedometer rather than by arriving.
Where that stops being true. Speed does predict arrival. Many stand-in results do not predict the real one.
What people get wrong. A stand-in result is often reported as the result itself.
A surrogate endpoint substituted for a clinical endpoint, valid only where the substitution has been shown to hold.
Randomisation
Randomisation means chance decides who gets which treatment.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
It is like a coin toss deciding the groups.
Where that stops being true. A coin toss is fair once. Fairness here comes from doing it for everyone.
What people get wrong. It is thought to make groups identical. It makes them similar on average, including on things nobody measured.
Allocation of participants to arms by a chance process, so that unmeasured factors are balanced in expectation.
Confidence interval
A confidence interval is the range the true answer is likely to sit in.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
It is like a weather forecast giving a range rather than one number.
Where that stops being true. A forecast range covers tomorrow. This one covers what the study could resolve.
What people get wrong. The middle number is read as the answer. A range crossing zero means no change is still possible.
An interval estimate that would contain the true parameter in a stated proportion of repeated studies.
Pathway
A pathway is a chain of steps inside a cell, each one setting off the next.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
A pathway is like a row of dominoes.
Where that stops being true. Dominoes fall one way. Pathways loop back and can switch themselves off.
What people get wrong. Changing one step is read as changing the outcome. Other steps often absorb it.
An ordered series of molecular interactions producing a defined cellular change.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What was measured, goal by goal
One row for each goal a registered study measured something for. One column for each kind of thing that could be measured.
Registered studies list 40 outcome measures that RNAWiki could read. A registered study says what someone planned to measure. It does not say what they found. 0 of the matched studies tested this substance, and 0 posted a result.
There is no single score. A strong test result and a weak life result are different facts.
Goals down the side, kinds of measurement across the top. Each cell says what kind of thing was registered, not what was found.
Goal
Life outcome
What a body can do
How a person feels
A test result
A step in the body
Harms
How long
Who was studied
Recovery
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a life outcome for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a performance measure for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a symptom measure for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a test result for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a body-step measure for this goal.
—Not recordedHarms were not a registered measure for this goal.
—Not recordedNo finished study window is recorded.
…Waiting for a reviewerWho was studied is listed further down the page.
Healthy ageing
…Waiting for a reviewer1 registered study measure of this kind. No reviewed result yet.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a performance measure for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a symptom measure for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a test result for this goal.
∅Nothing in the sources checkedNo registered study lists a body-step measure for this goal.
—Not recordedHarms were not a registered measure for this goal.
—Not recordedNo finished study window is recorded.
…Waiting for a reviewerWho was studied is listed further down the page.
Which registered measures put each goal on this table
Recovery
non mri selected arm substantial clinical recovery
Healthy ageing
mortality
Sorted by fixed word lists, version v1. A name the rules do not recognise stays unsorted rather than moving to the nearest column.
What each mark on this table means
∅ Nothing in the sources checked
No registered study lists a life outcome for this goal.
— Not recorded
Harms were not a registered measure for this goal.
… Waiting for a reviewer
Who was studied is listed further down the page.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What happened in people
Each card is one study: the exact question it asked, who was in it, and whether it showed what it set out to show.
Disability-free survival — a composite of death, dementia or persistent physical disability; cardiovascular disease, major haemorrhage and all-cause mortality reported as secondary endpoints
Cardiovascular disease 10.7 against 11.3 events per 1,000 person-years, hazard ratio 0.95 (95% CI 0.83 to 1.08); major haemorrhage 8.6 against 6.2, hazard ratio 1.38 (1.18 to 1.62), p<0.001; all-cause mortality 12.7 against 11.1, hazard ratio 1.14 (1.01 to 1.29)
Repeated elsewhere
Partially Replicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. Cancer accounted for 1.6 excess deaths per 1,000 person-years, with cancer-related death in 3.1% on aspirin against 2.3% on placebo (hazard ratio 1.31, 1.10 to 1.56). The investigators described this as unexpected in the context of previous studies and said it should be interpreted with caution; the cause-of-death analyses were post hoc.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Oral immediate-release, enteric-coated, chewable and extended-release tablets, and rectal suppositories; low-dose (typically 75-100 mg) for antiplatelet use and gram-level doses for analgesia
Interval reported. 95% CI 0
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
Time to first occurrence of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, unstable angina, stroke or transient ischaemic attack, in people at moderate estimated risk
269 (4.29%) on aspirin against 281 (4.48%) on placebo, hazard ratio 0.96 (95% CI 0.81 to 1.13), p=0.6038, over a median 60 months; gastrointestinal bleeding 0.97% against 0.46%, hazard ratio 2.11 (1.36 to 3.28), p=0.0007
Repeated elsewhere
Partially Replicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. The observed event rate was much lower than the design assumed, which the investigators attributed to contemporary risk management and which makes the enrolled population effectively low-risk rather than moderate-risk. Their own interpretation is that the role of aspirin at moderate risk could therefore not be addressed by this trial.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Oral immediate-release, enteric-coated, chewable and extended-release tablets, and rectal suppositories; low-dose (typically 75-100 mg) for antiplatelet use and gram-level doses for analgesia
Interval reported. 95% CI 0
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
First serious vascular event — myocardial infarction, stroke or transient ischaemic attack, or death from any vascular cause excluding confirmed intracranial haemorrhage
✓ The study showed what it set out to show
Who was studied
NCT00135226 / ISRCTN60635500 (ASCEND)
How many people
15480
Study design
Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled primary prevention in diabetes
Compared against
A dummy treatment
Kind of result
Living longer, or avoiding a major event
What was found
Serious vascular events 658 (8.5%) against 743 (9.6%), rate ratio 0.88 (95% CI 0.79 to 0.97), p=0.01, over a mean 7.4 years; major bleeding 314 (4.1%) against 245 (3.2%), rate ratio 1.29 (1.09 to 1.52), p=0.003
Repeated elsewhere
Replicated
What this does not prove. Meeting one endpoint in one population does not carry to other goals or other people.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. The efficacy endpoint was met and the trial still concluded against routine use: the absolute benefits were largely counterbalanced by the bleeding hazard. No difference was seen in gastrointestinal tract cancer (2.0% against 2.0%) or all cancers (11.6% against 11.5%).
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Oral immediate-release, enteric-coated, chewable and extended-release tablets, and rectal suppositories; low-dose (typically 75-100 mg) for antiplatelet use and gram-level doses for analgesia
Interval reported. 95% CI 0
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
RNAWiki holds 3 written-up human studies for this substance, each with the question it asked.
How we know it
Each card names the study, the number of people and what the study set out to measure.
What this does not prove
These summaries were written by a person and have not been signed off as reviewed claims.
Why it matters
A study that failed is as informative as one that worked, and both are here.
What we still do not know
No reviewed claim exists, so no exact population, effect size or interval is published yet.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
How close this is to real life
The top step is something a person would feel or care about. The bottom is a guess from software. Filled steps are where evidence exists for this substance.
■Living longer, or avoiding a major eventEvidence recorded. Death, a heart attack, a stroke, a hospital stay.9 registered measures of this kind. 2 written-up studies measured this and did not show a benefit.
□What a body can do day to dayNo evidence recorded. Walking, dressing, breathing, recovering.No registered study measures this.
□Measured performanceNo evidence recorded. How much was lifted, how far was run, how fast.No registered study measures this.
■Symptoms and quality of lifeEvidence recorded. Pain, tiredness, mood, sleep, as the person rated it.1 registered measure of this kind.
■A number that stands in for healthEvidence recorded. Cholesterol, blood sugar, bone density. A stand-in, not the thing itself.5 registered measures of this kind.
■A step measured inside a personEvidence recorded. Something measured in human tissue or human cells.A human record sits on the stored organism ladder.
■AnimalsEvidence recorded. Mice, rats, dogs. Useful for ideas, not proof about people.Stored records in Rat. A result in animals says what to test next. It does not say what happens in people.
□Cells in a dishNo evidence recorded. Cells or chemistry on a bench, far from a whole body.No cell or bench record is stored.
□A guess from softwareNo evidence recorded. Nobody measured it. RNAWiki never publishes one as a finding.RNAWiki stores no prediction for this record. Software can suggest a link. RNAWiki does not publish one as a finding.
Higher on these steps means closer to something a person would feel. It does not mean better done.
What it changes in the body◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
The path through the body
From what a person takes to what changes. A solid line is a step measured in people. A dashed line is a step nobody has measured that way.
Start
ASA
What a person takes: Oral immediate-release, enteric-coated, chewable and extended-release tablets, and rectal suppositories; low-dose (typically 75-100 mg) for antiplatelet use and gram-level doses for analgesia.
The measurement behind this step
Absorbed rapidly from the stomach and upper small intestine, with a plasma half-life for the parent molecule of only about 15 to 20 minutes before hydrolysis to salicylic acid. The pharmacological effect is entirely disconnected from that half-life because platelet inhibition is irreversible and lasts the platelet’s seven-to-ten-day lifespan. Enteric coating reduces gastric contact but also slows and can reduce absorption, which matters when a rapid effect is wanted — chewing an immediate-release tablet is the standard approach in a suspected acute coronary syndrome.
What it acts on
A drug that destroys its target and then leaves
Aspirin does not block the enzyme. It hands over a small chemical group, permanently jams the enzyme with it, and departs as a different molecule. The aspirin is gone from the blood within an hour; the damage stays.
──Measured in people. Written by a person from the study named beside the step. Not signed off as a reviewed claim.
The measurement behind this step
Acetylsalicylic acid transfers its acetyl group to the serine hydroxyl in the cyclooxygenase channel of PTGS1 and leaves as salicylic acid. Plasma half-life of the parent is about 15 to 20 minutes. This is a suicide-substrate mechanism, unique among the NSAIDs, and the reason a dissociation constant is not the right way to describe its potency.
Most cells shrug this off and build a new enzyme within hours. A platelet has no nucleus and cannot make new protein, so it stays disarmed for its whole seven-to-ten-day life. That single fact is why 81 mg once a day works.
╌╌Described, with no measurement named. No measurement is named for this step, so it is drawn as an unconfirmed link.
The measurement behind this step
Anucleate platelets cannot resynthesise COX-1, so cumulative daily dosing at levels far below the anti-inflammatory range produces near-complete and sustained suppression of platelet thromboxane A2 generation. Nucleated cells recover within hours, which is why low-dose aspirin is antiplatelet without being anti-inflammatory.
Thromboxane is the signal a platelet releases to recruit other platelets to a damaged artery wall. Suppress it and the growing clump stays smaller — which prevents some heart attacks and strokes, and also means some bleeds do not stop.
╌╌Described, with no measurement named. No measurement is named for this step, so it is drawn as an unconfirmed link.
The measurement behind this step
Thromboxane A2 amplifies platelet activation and causes vasoconstriction. Its suppression is measured as serum thromboxane B2 at trough. The therapeutic effect and the haemorrhagic effect are the same pharmacology observed at different sites, which is why no dose separates them.
At high dose it becomes an ordinary anti-inflammatory, with ordinary costs
The gram-level doses used for pain and inflammation also block the enzyme in the stomach lining and everywhere else. That is the aspirin people took for headaches for a century, and it is the reason it has been superseded for that job.
╌╌Described, with no measurement named. No measurement is named for this step, so it is drawn as an unconfirmed link.
The measurement behind this step
Anti-inflammatory activity requires sustained inhibition of COX-2 and of COX-1 in nucleated cells, which needs doses roughly thirty to forty times the antiplatelet dose. Acetylated COX-2 is not inert: it stops producing prostaglandin H2 and begins producing 15R-HETE, the precursor of aspirin-triggered lipoxins.
In someone who has already had a heart attack, aspirin cuts serious vascular events from about 8.2% a year to 6.7%. In a healthy seventy-year-old, it changes cardiovascular events not at all and raises major bleeding by 38%.
──Measured in people. Written by a person from the study named beside the step. Not signed off as a reviewed claim.
The measurement behind this step
Secondary prevention, 16 trials: 6.7% against 8.2% per year (p<0.0001). ASPREE primary prevention, 19,114 participants: cardiovascular hazard ratio 0.95 (0.83 to 1.08), major haemorrhage hazard ratio 1.38 (1.18 to 1.62, p<0.001), all-cause mortality hazard ratio 1.14 (1.01 to 1.29). The pharmacology is identical in both populations; only the baseline event rate differs.
Measured and kept: secondary prevention, and the acute treatment of a heart attack. Withdrawn: routine primary prevention in healthy adults, and all paediatric use during viral illness.
╌╌Described, with no measurement named. No measurement is named for this step, so it is drawn as an unconfirmed link.
The measurement behind this step
USPSTF 2022: initiating aspirin for primary prevention at 60 and over has no net benefit; at 40 to 59 with 10-year risk of 10% or more the net benefit is small and the decision individual. Reye’s syndrome surveillance: 555 reported paediatric cases in 1980, no more than 36 a year since 1987, salicylate detectable in 82% of cases, case fatality 31%.
No suggested links are held for this record, so nothing is hidden from this path.
What we know
The record describes 6 steps from taking it to an effect in a person.
How we know it
Each step names the study behind it in the technical detail beside it.
What this does not prove
A change inside the body is a reason to look. It is not a result in a person.
Why it matters
A reader can see exactly where the chain stops being measured in people.
What we still do not know
No reviewed claim binds any of these steps to a named population.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Felt, measured, or meaningful
Three different things that get called the same word. Registered studies measured all three, and mixing them is how a blood test becomes a health claim.
Felt
Things a person could notice without a test.
quality of life questionnaire core 30
Measured
Things only a test, a scale or a device shows.
serum thromboxane b2
aim 1 change in flow mediated dilation
urinary albumin excretion
reduction in blood pressure
reduction in heart rate
Meaningful
Things that change how a life goes, not only a number.
disease free survival
progression free survival
clinical progression free survival
overall survival
any stroke at 90 days
stroke severity
mortality
myocardial infarction
incidence of stroke by one year
A registered study says what someone planned to measure. It does not say what they found. A number moving is not the same as a life going better. The two are shown apart here.
Felt, but not shown to help. A person notices a change. No study showed it leads anywhere good.
Measured, but not felt. A number moves. The person notices nothing. Both can be true.
Measured, but not shown to matter. A number moves in the good direction. Nobody showed that lives went better.
Matters, but takes years. The result that counts may take longer than anyone would keep watching.
Names that fit none of the three (25)
major cardiovascular events
cancer excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer
biological response prostate specific antigen level
cancer progression as measured by ultrasound
acute and late toxicity during the study
symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage
major systemic hemorrhage
mri selected arm complete brain reperfusion
non mri selected arm substantial clinical recovery
colorectal acf treated sulindac aspirin or ursodiol
cardiovascular events
first occurrence of any serious vascular event
first occurrence of any major bleed
amplitude of the vasomotor response to stimuli
serious adverse events
adverse events
nitric oxide formation from baseline to 3 months
1 or more adenomas
prostate specific antigen response
bleeding time
These are harms, study-process measures, or names the rules did not recognise. They are shown rather than dropped.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Were people like you studied?
RNAWiki cannot tell whether a study fits you. It can show who was in it, and where the result stops carrying.
Who was studied
People similar to this profile were included.
People with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, for whom the case remains strong; and a very large number of people taking it for prevention who may no longer be advised to start it today. Not children or teenagers during viral illness, because of Reye’s syndrome.
Who is missing from the studies
Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
Where the result stopped carrying
Primary prevention in the healthy elderly: no cardiovascular benefit, 38% more major haemorrhage, 14% higher all-cause mortality
Primary prevention at moderate risk: no difference in the composite, with gastrointestinal bleeding doubled
Primary prevention in diabetes: the vascular endpoint was met and the bleeding excess cancelled it
Paediatric antipyretic use, withdrawn entirely after the Reye’s syndrome association
The cancer-prevention claim, which reversed direction between populations and doses
This is a scope explorer, not a diagnosis engine.
It shows who was studied so you can see whether people similar to you were included.
RNAWiki cannot tell whether a study fits you. It can show who was in it.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Why it might seem to do nothing
A real effect and a noticed effect are different things. These are the recorded reasons the two come apart.
It was studied for a different goal
The studies measured something else entirely.
On this record: Some registered studies measured things that match no goal on this page.
It was studied in different people
The people in the studies were not much like the reader.
On this record: Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
The evidence may simply be wrong
Small early studies often do not hold up.
On this record: RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
Other reasons RNAWiki checked and found nothing for (10)
A different form was studied
The studied form is not the form on the shelf. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
There was nothing to correct
Where a level is already normal, topping it up may change nothing. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Something else had to happen too
In the studies it was paired with training, a diet or another treatment. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
The change is too small to feel
A real change can still sit below what a person notices. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Day-to-day swing hides it
Sleep, food, stress and time of day move most numbers more than this would. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Not enough time yet
The studies ran longer than the person has waited. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
It was not taken as studied
Missed days change the result, and studies count them. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Something else changed at the same time
Two changes at once cannot be told apart afterwards. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
The product may not be what it says
Contents of a sold product are not always what the label states. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
No recorded reason
RNAWiki has nothing stored that would explain it. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
None of these is a reason to take more. Taking more is not a step this page ever suggests.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What taking it involves
The recorded facts about getting hold of it and using it. Nothing here is a suggestion about what you should do.
How it is supplied
Prescription only
❝ Quoted from a source
Where this came from
Copied from a source RNAWiki stored, with the source named.
Read from the recorded approval status.
No source is stored against this line.
Form and route
Oral immediate-release, enteric-coated, chewable and extended-release tablets, and rectal suppositories; low-dose (typically 75-100 mg) for antiplatelet use and gram-level doses for analgesia
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
The form and route recorded on this substance.
No source is stored against this line.
Who oversees it
RNAWiki has not recorded a supervision or regulatory status for this substance.
❝ Quoted from a source
Where this came from
Copied from a source RNAWiki stored, with the source named.
No register row and no identity class settled the question.
No source is stored against this line.
What is in the pack
Absorbed rapidly from the stomach and upper small intestine, with a plasma half-life for the parent molecule of only about 15 to 20 minutes before hydrolysis to salicylic acid. The pharmacological effect is entirely disconnected from that half-life because platelet inhibition is irreversible and lasts the platelet’s seven-to-ten-day lifespan.
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
Recorded notes on how this is sold. The rest of the recorded wording: Enteric coating reduces gastric contact but also slows and can reduce absorption, which matters when a rapid effect is wanted — chewing an immediate-release tablet is the standard approach in a suspected acute coronary syndrome.
No source is stored against this line.
Where it is registered
Regulatory records are listed in the technical disclosure at the foot of this page.
# Counted from records
Where this came from
A count of rows RNAWiki holds. It describes our records, not your body.
Register entries are stored per jurisdiction and shown with their dates.
No source is stored against this line.
Why people stop
Not recorded.
∅ Nothing recorded
Where this came from
RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.
No record of why people stopped taking it is stored for this substance.
No source is stored against this line.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What can go wrong
Sorted by where each line came from. A regulator's label and a report somebody sent in are not the same kind of fact.
·Worth asking a clinician aboutWritten into the record from the studies named on this page
Bleeding is the dominant risk and it cannot be reversed by stopping the drug; only new platelets restore function. Major haemorrhage rose 38% against placebo in healthy older adults and gastrointestinal bleeding roughly doubled at moderate risk. Contraindicated in children and teenagers with viral illness because of Reye’s syndrome. Cross-reactive bronchospasm occurs in aspirin-sensitive asthma and can be fatal. Ibuprofen taken before aspirin abolishes the antiplatelet effect. Risk of bleeding is additive with anticoagulants, with other NSAIDs and with SSRIs.
Nobody counted how many people took this and were fine, so this cannot be turned into a rate.
These are reports people sent to a regulator. They do not show the medicine caused the reaction.
Nobody counted how many people took the medicine and reported nothing.
The same event can be reported more than once, and many reports are incomplete.
News coverage, lawsuits and new warnings change how often people report.
A count is not a rate and not a risk.
ASA appears in spontaneous reports to regulators. Across the 10 most-reported reaction terms, 123 reaction mentions were counted. One report can name several reactions.
The recorded terms (10)
anaemia — 29 reaction mentions
acute kidney injury — 12 reaction mentions
pancreatitis acute — 12 reaction mentions
pulmonary fibrosis — 12 reaction mentions
interstitial lung disease — 11 reaction mentions
cerebral haemorrhage — 10 reaction mentions
melaena — 10 reaction mentions
epistaxis — 9 reaction mentions
hyperkalaemia — 9 reaction mentions
renal failure acute — 9 reaction mentions
open-targets-adr · recorded 2026-06-24 · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Over a long time. No completed tested study window is recorded, so long-term effects are not established by the registry record.
Groups the studies covered thinly. Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Does the exact form matter?
Evidence belongs to the exact thing that was tested. A different salt, a different mixture or a different preparation is a different question.
The form that was studied
Oral immediate-release, enteric-coated, chewable and extended-release tablets, and rectal suppositories; low-dose (typically 75-100 mg) for antiplatelet use and gram-level doses for analgesia
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
The form used in the studies cited on this page.
No source is stored against this line.
What is sold
The pharmacological effect is entirely disconnected from that half-life because platelet inhibition is irreversible and lasts the platelet’s seven-to-ten-day lifespan.
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
Recorded notes on which forms are sold. The rest of the recorded wording: Enteric coating reduces gastric contact but also slows and can reduce absorption, which matters when a rapid effect is wanted — chewing an immediate-release tablet is the standard approach in a suspected acute coronary syndrome.
No source is stored against this line.
What is recorded as being sold
822 products list this as an active ingredient in the United States drug directory. 471 of them contain it and nothing else.
FDA National Drug Code directory · 72090-007 · read 2026-08-29
They are sold as capsule, capsule, coated, capsule, extended release, crystal, granule and granule, effervescent, taken oral, rectal and topical.
FDA National Drug Code directory · 72090-007 · read 2026-08-29
The regulator's established pharmacologic class for it is anti-inflammatory agents, cyclooxygenase inhibitors [moa] and decreased platelet aggregation [pe].
FDA National Drug Code directory · 72090-007 · read 2026-08-29
735 published labels name it as an active ingredient. 412 of them describe this substance alone, which is where its own label text on this page comes from.
US prescribing information · 7f0f8b3c-c226-4a3a-af46-a708f345e4f5 · read 2026-08-29
Those labels are classed as human otc drug and human prescription drug.
US prescribing information · 7f0f8b3c-c226-4a3a-af46-a708f345e4f5 · read 2026-08-29
747 marketed supplement labels list this ingredient, classed as multi-vitamin and mineral (mvm) and other combinations.
Those labels carry all other, nutrient and structure/function claims. A claim of that kind is written by the manufacturer and is not assessed by any regulator, so its presence says nothing about whether it is true.
Recorded price in US: 0.01641–0.02558 USD per one unit as the pricing file counts it — a tablet, capsule, patch or single item, across 15 priced products whose strengths and pack forms differ, as of 2026-08-26, paid by retail pharmacies buying the product, as surveyed by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. It is not a list price, an insurance price, or what anyone pays at a counter..
Recorded source · 2026-08-26 · read 2026-08-28
Evidence carries across two names for one substance. It does not carry across a salt, a mirror form or a mixture.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What you could measure
This one is decided with a clinician, so this section holds questions to ask rather than a plan to run.
RNAWiki could not confidently classify this substance, so no self-experiment plan is offered.
Questions worth asking
Which of the trials of ASA studied people like me?
What was measured, and for how long?
Was the result a laboratory value or a health outcome?
What would we watch for, and when would we stop?
Tracking can show whether something changed for you. It cannot show what caused it.
RNAWiki records evidence. It does not say whether this substance is right for you.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Claims that go past the evidence
Things said about this substance that sound reasonable, and the exact step that is missing between the evidence and the claim.
✗Goes past the evidence
That a daily aspirin is a sensible default for a healthy adult — three randomised trials totalling 47,140 participants found no net benefit
Why it sounds right. It follows from something real on this page: a body step, an animal result or a related finding.
The missing step. Nobody measured this in people for this use, or the study that did measure it did not show it.
What would change this
A study in people, for this exact use, measuring this exact thing, that a reviewer signs off.
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
✗Goes past the evidence
That people at higher cardiovascular risk can be selected for prophylaxis, when the main risk factors for coronary disease are also risk factors for bleeding
Why it sounds right. It follows from something real on this page: a body step, an animal result or a related finding.
The missing step. Nobody measured this in people for this use, or the study that did measure it did not show it.
What would change this
A study in people, for this exact use, measuring this exact thing, that a reviewer signs off.
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
✗Goes past the evidence
That aspirin prevents cancer as a general proposition — the effect is demonstrated at 600 mg in Lynch syndrome carriers and reversed in direction in healthy older adults on 100 mg
Why it sounds right. It follows from something real on this page: a body step, an animal result or a related finding.
The missing step. Nobody measured this in people for this use, or the study that did measure it did not show it.
What would change this
A study in people, for this exact use, measuring this exact thing, that a reviewer signs off.
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
✗Goes past the evidence
That the antiplatelet effect can be judged from the plasma level of a drug with a 15-to-20-minute half-life
Why it sounds right. It follows from something real on this page: a body step, an animal result or a related finding.
The missing step. Nobody measured this in people for this use, or the study that did measure it did not show it.
What would change this
A study in people, for this exact use, measuring this exact thing, that a reviewer signs off.
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What nobody knows yet
Open questions, each with why it is open and what would close it.
How fast does the body clear it?
The sources RNAWiki checked hold nothing for this field.
Why it matters. Without this, nothing on this page can say how long anything lasts.
What would answer it
A stored source that records it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing populations
Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing long-term data
No completed tested study window is recorded.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
No reviewed conclusion
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing interaction studies
No interaction was found in the registers checked. Not finding one is not the same as showing there is none.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Formulation uncertainty
Several salts, forms or products of ASA are recorded. Results from one form may not transfer to another.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Mechanism not reviewed
No reviewed mechanism story exists for this substance.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Check any of this yourself
Every line above traced back to the study it came from. This is the technical layer, and the vocabulary changes here.
Every line above can be traced to the study named beside it. Follow the link and read it.
Three randomised trials in one year removed routine primary prevention
In plain words
A daily aspirin for healthy adults was standard advice for a generation. In 2018, three large randomised trials reported — in healthy over-seventies, in people at moderate risk, and in people with diabetes — and none of them found a net benefit. In 2022 the US Preventive Services Task Force recommended against starting it at 60 and over.
What was measured
Cardiovascular composite and major bleeding across 47,140 randomised primary-prevention participants in three trials
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
ASPREE randomised 19,114 community-dwelling adults aged 70 and over (65 and over for black and Hispanic participants in the United States) with no cardiovascular disease, dementia or disability, to 100 mg enteric-coated aspirin or placebo, median follow-up 4.7 years. Cardiovascular disease occurred at 10.7 against 11.3 events per 1,000 person-years, hazard ratio 0.95 (95% CI 0.83 to 1.08); major haemorrhage at 8.6 against 6.2, hazard ratio 1.38 (1.18 to 1.62, p<0.001). ARRIVE randomised 12,546 people at moderate estimated risk to 100 mg or placebo over a median 60 months: primary endpoint 4.29% against 4.48% (hazard ratio 0.96, 0.81 to 1.13, p=0.60), gastrointestinal bleeding 0.97% against 0.46% (hazard ratio 2.11, 1.36 to 3.28, p=0.0007). ASCEND randomised 15,480 people with diabetes and no evident cardiovascular disease over a mean 7.4 years: serious vascular events 8.5% against 9.6% (rate ratio 0.88, 0.79 to 0.97, p=0.01) but major bleeding 4.1% against 3.2% (rate ratio 1.29, 1.09 to 1.52, p=0.003), with the trial concluding that the absolute benefits were largely counterbalanced by the bleeding hazard. The 2022 USPSTF statement concluded with moderate certainty that initiating aspirin for primary prevention at 60 or over has no net benefit, and made it an individual decision with small net benefit at 40 to 59 with 10-year risk at or above 10%.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
ASPREE found more deaths on aspirin than on placebo, driven by cancer
In plain words
The healthy-elderly trial found a higher all-cause death rate on aspirin than on placebo — 12.7 against 11.1 per thousand person-years — and the excess was mostly cancer deaths. The investigators called it unexpected and said it should be interpreted with caution.
What was measured
All-cause and cancer-specific mortality per 1,000 person-years, aspirin against placebo, in 19,114 healthy older adults
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
This entry records a failure.
From the source
Among the 19,114 ASPREE participants there were 1,052 deaths over a median 4.7 years. All-cause mortality was 12.7 events per 1,000 person-years on aspirin against 11.1 on placebo, hazard ratio 1.14 (95% CI 1.01 to 1.29). Cancer was the major contributor, accounting for 1.6 excess deaths per 1,000 person-years; cancer-related death occurred in 3.1% of the aspirin group against 2.3% of placebo, hazard ratio 1.31 (1.10 to 1.56). This runs directly against a substantial prior literature suggesting aspirin reduces cancer incidence and mortality, and the authors said so, writing that in the context of previous studies the result was unexpected and should be interpreted with caution. Two honest readings coexist: this was a secondary endpoint with post hoc cause-of-death exploration in a trial not designed for it, and it is nevertheless the largest randomised mortality dataset in healthy older adults that exists. ASCEND, over a mean 7.4 years in 15,480 diabetic participants, found no difference in gastrointestinal tract cancer (2.0% against 2.0%) or in all cancers (11.6% against 11.5%).
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
In people who already have vascular disease, the case is unambiguous
In plain words
The argument is only about healthy people. In those who have already had a heart attack or stroke, pooled individual data from 16 trials show serious vascular events falling from 8.2% a year to 6.7% — a much larger absolute benefit than any bleeding cost.
What was measured
Annual rate of serious vascular events, total stroke and coronary events in 16 secondary prevention trials
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
The Antithrombotic Trialists’ Collaboration pooled individual participant data from 16 secondary prevention trials — 17,000 individuals at high average risk, 43,000 person-years, 3,306 serious vascular events. Aspirin allocation gave serious vascular events at 6.7% against 8.2% per year (p<0.0001), total stroke 2.08% against 2.54% (p=0.002) and coronary events 4.3% against 5.3% (p<0.0001), with a non-significant increase in haemorrhagic stroke. The proportional reductions were similar in men and women. This is the indication that survives every reanalysis, and the reason the primary-prevention retreat is not an argument for stopping aspirin in someone who has established disease. Separately, ADAPTABLE randomised 15,076 patients with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease to 81 mg or 325 mg daily and found no significant difference in the composite of death, myocardial infarction or stroke (7.28% against 7.51%, hazard ratio 1.02, 0.91 to 1.14) — though 41.6% of those assigned 325 mg switched dose, which limits what the comparison can carry.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
The people most likely to benefit are the same people most likely to bleed
In plain words
The old advice assumed you could target aspirin at people whose heart risk was high enough to justify the bleeding. The pooled data say the two risks travel together: the things that make a heart attack likely also make a bleed likely, so the targeting does not separate them.
What was measured
That people at high cardiovascular risk can be selected for aspirin prophylaxis on the assumption their bleeding risk is independent — an assumption the pooled data contradict
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
In the six primary prevention trials pooled by the Antithrombotic Trialists’ Collaboration — 95,000 individuals, 660,000 person-years, 3,554 serious vascular events — aspirin gave a 12% proportional reduction in serious vascular events (0.51% against 0.57% per year, p=0.0001), almost entirely from a fifth reduction in non-fatal myocardial infarction (0.18% against 0.23%, p<0.0001). The net effect on stroke was not significant (0.20% against 0.21%, p=0.4) and vascular mortality did not differ at all (0.19% against 0.19%, p=0.7). Major gastrointestinal and extracranial bleeds rose from 0.07% to 0.10% per year (p<0.0001). The sentence that matters for practice is the collaboration’s own: the main risk factors for coronary disease were also risk factors for bleeding. That is why a risk-stratification strategy does not rescue primary prevention — moving up the cardiovascular risk scale moves you up the bleeding scale at the same time.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
Reye’s syndrome removed aspirin from childhood, and the case count followed within years
In plain words
Aspirin was the standard children’s fever medicine. After the association with a rare fatal encephalopathy was recognised in 1980, warnings were issued and reported cases fell from 555 a year to fewer than 36 — and stayed there.
What was measured
Annual reported Reye’s syndrome cases before and after salicylate warnings, salicylate detection rate and case fatality
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
National surveillance in the United States recorded 1,207 cases of Reye’s syndrome in people under 18 between December 1980 and November 1997. Reported cases peaked at 555 in children in 1980 and there have been no more than 36 per year since 1987. Antecedent illness was reported in 93% and detectable blood salicylate in 82%; the overall case fatality rate was 31%, highest in children under five (relative risk 1.8, 95% CI 1.5 to 2.1) and in those with a serum ammonia above 45 µg/dL (relative risk 3.4, 1.9 to 6.2). The decline tracked the warnings closely enough that this is among the cleanest natural experiments in pharmacovigilance — and because Reye’s syndrome is now very rare, the surveillance authors note that any child suspected of it should be investigated for the treatable inborn metabolic disorders that mimic it. Aspirin remains contraindicated in children and teenagers with viral illness, and its role as a paediatric antipyretic is gone entirely.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
The cancer story goes both ways, and the dose and population decide which
In plain words
Aspirin genuinely prevents colorectal cancer in people with an inherited predisposition, at a high dose, over years. In healthy older adults on a low dose, the largest randomised trial found more cancer deaths, not fewer. Both results are real and they are about different questions.
What was measured
Colorectal cancer incidence in Lynch syndrome carriers at 600 mg daily, against cancer mortality in healthy older adults at 100 mg daily
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
CAPP2 randomised 861 carriers of Lynch syndrome to 600 mg aspirin daily or placebo for up to four years. At a mean 55.7 months, 48 participants had developed 53 primary colorectal cancers — 18 of 427 on aspirin against 30 of 434 on placebo. Intention-to-treat time-to-first-cancer gave a hazard ratio of 0.63 (95% CI 0.35 to 1.13, p=0.12); Poisson regression accounting for multiple primaries gave an incidence rate ratio of 0.56 (0.32 to 0.99, p=0.05); per protocol among those completing two years of intervention, hazard ratio 0.41 (0.19 to 0.86, p=0.02). Against that, ASPREE in 19,114 healthy older adults on 100 mg found cancer-related death in 3.1% against 2.3% on placebo (hazard ratio 1.31, 1.10 to 1.56), and ASCEND in 15,480 diabetic participants on 100 mg over 7.4 years found no difference in gastrointestinal tract cancer (2.0% against 2.0%) or all cancers (11.6% against 11.5%). The honest summary is that a high-dose, high-genetic-risk, long-duration chemoprevention result does not transfer to a low-dose, average-risk, older population, and the field has stopped treating "aspirin prevents cancer" as a single claim.
This order is fixed in code and does not count clicks or time on the page.
What is not here
4 questions this page could not answer
These sections were prepared and left out because there was nothing to put in them. They are listed rather than hidden, so the gaps in this record are visible.
How long anything takes — found nothing in the sources checked.
What it may clash with — found nothing in the sources checked.
Other ways to the same goal — found nothing in the sources checked.
What changed on this page — found nothing in the sources checked.
The record as stored
The full record, for auditing
Everything above is built from what is below. This layer keeps the technical vocabulary, record identifiers and every stored row, so a reader who wants to check the page can.
The older medicine-wide conclusion held in this record
Written for a clinical reader, and about the medicine as a whole rather than about one indication, population and set of trials. RNAWiki does not treat it as a programme conclusion and no reviewer has signed it off in that form. It is here word for word because it is what the record holds.
The only NSAID that inactivates its enzyme permanently, which is why 81 mg once a day suppresses platelets for a week — worth 6.7% against 8.2% serious vascular events per year in people who already have vascular disease, and not worth it in people who do not: in 19,114 healthy elderly adults it produced a cardiovascular hazard ratio of 0.95, a major-haemorrhage hazard ratio of 1.38 and an all-cause mortality hazard ratio of 1.14.
Recorded evidence blocks (11)
Q1
What did ASA's largest trial (39876 people) and its longest (32 years) measure?
39876 people in ASA's largest registered study, 32 years in its longest registered window, measuring acomposite of mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction and nonfatal stroke. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
71 phase3, 70 phase4, 49 phase2, 35 na, 29 phase1, 5 na or unstated, 4 early phase1; NCT00135226; 2037-07-31; no ageing endpoint recorded. Last human test completed 2022, NCT00055731.
Interpretation These counts include studies where ASA was a comparison treatment, a background treatment or an exposure in an observational study, and the longest window may be a planned end date. Trial roles have not yet been classified for this record.
908 mice; cohorts C2004, C2014; cohort rows are the workbook's own printed values; no median, percent change or survival statistic is derived from the per-animal data
Show the evidence
ITP cohort
C2004
aspirin; 21; 4.0 months; f, m; ITP_C2004_Lifespan.xlsx
C2014
aspirin; 200; 11.0 months; f, m; ITP_C2014_Lifespan.xlsx
C2014
aspirin; 60; 11.0 months; f, m; ITP_C2014_Lifespan.xlsx
Could one person measure ASA's effect on major cardiovascular events?
Major cardiovascular events: measured in ASA's trials.
Interpretation major cardiovascular events is the recorded endpoint.
Show the evidence
biomarkers
major cardiovascular events; 2026-09-01
cancer excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer; 2026-09-01
disease free survival; 2026-09-01
progression free survival; 2026-09-01
biological response prostate specific antigen level; 2026-09-01
cancer progression as measured by ultrasound; 2026-09-01
14 more recorded rows
biomarkers
clinical progression free survival; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
overall survival; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
acute and late toxicity during the study; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
quality of life questionnaire core 30; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
major systemic hemorrhage; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
mri selected arm complete brain reperfusion; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
non mri selected arm substantial clinical recovery; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
colorectal acf treated sulindac aspirin or ursodiol; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
serum thromboxane b2; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
any stroke at 90 days; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
stroke severity; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
cardiovascular events; 2026-09-01
biomarkers
aim 1 change in flow mediated dilation; 2026-09-01
human trials at or under30
50
Not recorded for this substance
a recorded half-life
smallest human trial
0; NCT00265408; PHASE1; the smallest recorded human enrolment at or below 30; the registry states no direction of its result; WITHDRAWN
Q7
Which of 1 or more adenomas, acute and late toxicity during the study and adverse events did ASA's trials measure?
1 or more adenomas, acute and late toxicity during the study and adverse events lead 40 outcome terms across ASA's trials. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
Interpretation progression free survival, biological response prostate specific antigen level, cancer progression as measured by ultrasound, clinical progression free survival, overall survival and acute and late toxicity during the study follow.
Show the evidence
major cardiovascular events
1
cancer excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer
1
disease free survival
1
progression free survival
1
biological response prostate specific antigen level
1
cancer progression as measured by ultrasound
1
14 more recorded rows
clinical progression free survival
1
overall survival
1
acute and late toxicity during the study
1
quality of life questionnaire core 30
1
symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage
1
major systemic hemorrhage
1
mri selected arm complete brain reperfusion
1
non mri selected arm substantial clinical recovery
1
colorectal acf treated sulindac aspirin or ursodiol
Number of Participants With First Occurrence of Any Serious Vascular Event (SVE); To evaluate the effects of awakening vs. bedtime 100 mg/day ASA administration in subjects with impaired fasting glucose or type 2 diabetes on primary prevention of…; latest 2037-07-31
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT00135226
"ASCEND: A Study of Cardiovascular Events iN Diabetes"; n 15480; "Number of Participants With First Occurrence of Any Serious Vascular Event (SVE)"; 2037-07-31
NCT00725127
"Chronotherapy with Low-dose Aspirin for Primary Prevention"; n 3200; "To evaluate the effects of awakening vs. bedtime 100 mg/day ASA administration in subjects with impaired fasting glucose or type 2 diabetes on primary prevention of cardiovascular, cerebrovascular and renal fatal, and non-fatal events."; 2026-06-30
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q9
Which 118 trials of ASA posted no result?
Posted no result
118 of 118 completed trials
Registrations
NCT00000491, NCT00000496, NCT00000510, NCT00000520, NCT00000500 and NCT00000469, and 112 more
Completion dates
oldest 1979-08; newest 2022-12-31
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT00000491
1979-08
NCT00000496
1982-12
NCT00000510
1988-09
NCT00000520
1989-11
NCT00000500
1996-12
NCT00000469
1998-08
14 further recorded trials
NCT00000527
1998-11
NCT00697151
2000-06
NCT00637988
2003-06
NCT00105209
2003-12
NCT01464944
2004-04
NCT00020189
2004-08
NCT01464983
2004-08
NCT00129805
2004-09
NCT00007683
2004-12
NCT01465009
2005-03
NCT01361399
2005-05-28
NCT00882388
2005-06
NCT00054938
2005-12
NCT00405613
2005-12
Q10
At the median, ASA's trials enrolled 120 people — anything larger?
Median enrolment
120
Largest enrolment
39876
Registered trials counted
233
Q11
What do 123 spontaneous reports say about ASA — and not say?
These are reports people sent to a regulator. They do not show the medicine caused the reaction. Nobody counted how many people took the medicine and reported nothing. The same event can be reported more than once, and many reports are incomplete. News coverage, lawsuits and new warnings change how often people report. A count is not a rate and not a risk.
ASA appears in spontaneous reports to regulators. Across the 10 most-reported reaction terms, 123 reaction mentions were counted: anaemia 29; acute kidney injury 12; pancreatitis acute 12; pulmonary fibrosis 12. open-targets-adr · CHEMBL1697753 · 2026-06-24
Show the evidence
anaemia
29
acute kidney injury
12
pancreatitis acute
12
pulmonary fibrosis
12
interstitial lung disease
11
cerebral haemorrhage
10
4 more recorded rows
melaena
10
epistaxis
9
hyperkalaemia
9
renal failure acute
9
recorded 2026-06-24 · last checked 2026-09-04
Where it is registeredIdentifiers, relations and other names
ClinicalTrials.gov — US Government work · Europe PMC — metadata only, under the recorded legal gate · NIA ITP via the JAX Mouse Phenome Database · Open Targets 26.06 — CC0 · derived from this page's own recorded fields; no external licence · mixed register set; per-register licences in docs/specs/corpus-20k-sources.md
✗ required summary fields resolved: 5 required field(s) not terminal: Why people use it, Best-supported result, Most important common problem, Biggest unanswered question, Human evidence
✓ public claims reviewed: 0 reviewed claim(s); drafts are never rendered
✓ source coverage passed: 8 source rows
✓ no critical contamination: no quarantine open
✓ canonical metadata passed: slug and display name present
✓ no raw internal fields: enforced by the copy-contract test over the rendered page
This is a record of evidence. It is not medical advice, and it does not say this substance suits you. Nothing here says any substance on RNAWiki is appropriate for a child.