Back

Clinical outcomes of early aspirin versus non-aspirin NSAID use in adults hospitalized with influenza: A retrospective study

Chan-Colenbrander, S. Y.; Wang, Q.

2026-08-10 infectious diseases
10.64898/2026.08.05.26359840 medRxiv
Show abstract

Seasonal influenza remains a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Although neuraminidase inhibitors improve outcomes, influenza-related deaths persist. We evaluated the impact of early aspirin (ASA) and non-aspirin nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) use on outcomes in adults hospitalized with influenza. This retrospective study included adults admitted to the University of Minnesota Medical Center from 2016 to 2018. Continuous variables were summarized as medians with interquartile ranges (IQRs) and categorical variables as counts and percentages. Group comparisons used Wilcoxon rank-sum, Chi-square, or Fishers exact tests. Analyses included case-control comparisons, assessments by vaccination status, and subgroup analyses by early ASA or NSAID use. Among 2,816 patients, 320 had laboratory-confirmed influenza, with vaccination less common among cases. Unvaccinated patients had higher rates of intensive care unit (ICU) admission (23.6% vs. 11.1%; P = 0.003) and ventilatory support (15.0% vs. 6.1%; P = 0.009). In vaccinated patients, early ASA use was associated with older age and higher in-hospital mortality, whereas early NSAID use was associated with no in-hospital deaths, better one- and three-year survival (P < 0.001), and fewer, though not statistically significant, cardiovascular complications. In unvaccinated patients, ASA use was associated with lower three-year survival (59.1% vs. 79.2%; P = 0.013), while NSAID use was associated with fewer ICU admissions and no cardiovascular or renal complications. In both vaccinated and unvaccinated adults hospitalized with influenza, early NSAID use was associated with improved survival and fewer complications, whereas ASA use was associated with worse outcomes.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.