Effects of a Polypill, Aspirin, and the Combination of Both on Cognitive and Functional Outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Importance: Vascular risk factors are associated with cognitive decline but studies addressing individual risk factors have not demonstrated an effect of risk factor management on the preservation of cognition. Few trials have examined the effect of vascular risk factor management on function. Objective: To determine if a polypill could reduce cognitive and functional decline in people with risk factors but without manifest cardiovascular disease. Design, Setting, and Participants: The International Polycap Study 3 (TIPS-3) was a 2 × 2 × 2 factorial randomized clinical trial. Hospital and community-based centers in 8 countries recruited and followed up participants between July 30, 2012, and September 30, 2020. A total of 5713 individuals were randomly assigned to treatment groups, and 2098 people 65 years or older at intermediate risk of cardiovascular disease completed a cognitive assessment and were included in the analyses. Interventions: Polypill (antihypertensives and a statin), aspirin, or a combination of both treatments. Main Outcomes and Measures: Cognitive and functional assessments completed at baseline, 2 years, and study end. The primary outcome was the effect of a polypill compared with placebo and a polypill plus aspirin compared with double placebo on the composite outcome of the proportion of participants in each group who experienced a substantive decrease (>1.5 SD change) in cognitive or functional abilities. Results: Of the 2389 study participants older than 65 years, a total of 2098 (88%; mean [SD] age, 70.1 [4.5] years; 1266 female individuals [60%]) completed the baseline and follow-up assessment. A total of 1796 participants (86%) had hypertension, and 680 participants (32%) had impaired fasting plasma glucose levels. Mean (SD) baseline systolic blood pressure was 146.1 (17.7) mm Hg, and mean (SD) low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level was 124.3 (40.7) mg/dL and decreased by 5.7 mm Hg and 24 mg/dL, respectively, among those assigned to the polypill group. During a 5-year follow-up, there were no significant differences between treatment groups in the number of participants who experienced substantive cognitive decline (356 assigned polypill, 328 assigned placebo) or dementia (2 assigned polypill, 4 assigned placebo). Functional decline was reduced during follow-up for those assigned to polypill compared with placebo (mean [SD] country-standardized adjusted follow-up Standard Assessment of Global Everyday Activities [SAGEA] scores, 0.06 [0.03] vs 0.15 [0.03]; P = .01) and polypill plus aspirin compared with double placebo (mean [SD] country-standardized adjusted follow-up SAGEA scores, 0.01 [0.04] vs 0.14 [0.04]; P = .01). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial of patients 65 years or older with vascular risk factors, a polypill, with or without aspirin, was not associated with reduced cognitive outcomes but was associated with reduced functional decline.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".