**Author details**

*Drug Repurposing - Hypothesis, Molecular Aspects and Therapeutic Applications*

>70 kg [62, 74].

little mind to their risk category [75].

decrease in the overall frequency of CVD.

physical exercise, has become popular [79].

2005–2015 for CVD diminished from 6231.9 to 5179.7 [78].

prevention relies upon the level of profound risk in the people [81].

was <90 kg. On the other hand, aspirin (≥325 mg) had the contrary interaction with body weight, diminishing cardiovascular occasions exclusively among those

In spite of the debate over the security and efficacity of aspirin, low-dose of the medicine has been broadly utilized for the primary prevention of CVD. As indicated by the investigation of National Health and Nutrition Examination study information, 22.5% of patients without a mitigated CVD were delegated as high risk, and 40.9% of them were advised to take aspirin by their health care professional. Likewise, 26.0% of individuals at low risk were advised to take the medicine paying

Recently, questions have been raised about the administration of aspirin medicine for primary avoidance of CVD. Specifically, there are worries that GI bloodletting and hemorrhagic stroke, side-effects that can appear in adults utilizing aspirin, are expanded [76]. Whether the advantages of aspirin in the avoidance of CVD exceed the dangers related with side-effects is at the core of the discussion. One of the significant explanations behind the change in perspective about aspirin use is a

As per European CVD measurements in 2017 distributed by the European Heart Network, CVD mortality and the age-standardized pervasiveness pace of CVD are currently falling in most European nations. Besides, from 1975 through to 2019, mortality rate from CVD have fallen in US men and women [77]. Globally, the age-standardized disability adjusted life-years (DALY) rates (per 100,000) in

The considerable decrease of CVD death and frequency is because of improved prevention treatments, which deal with the principle risk components of CVD, for example, smoking, physical idleness, dyslipidemia, and hypertension. Moreover, the adjustment of overall routine of life, for example, weight reduction or regular

Moreover, current prescription use, for example, statins, new anticoagulation agents, and hypertensive medications, has added to lessening the CVD chance for the whole populace [80]. The extent of the risk decrease by aspirin in CVD primary

A few examinations have demonstrated that if a patient's danger of CVD increments (above 1% every year), the advantage of administering aspirin medicine as primary prevention is additionally expanded. Hence, the overall CVD risk decrease brought about by another preventive methodology appears to lessen the primary prevention of aspirin for CVD contrasted with previously. The way that the cardiovascular occasion rates for all patients who took an interest in the recent published Aspirin to Reduce Risk of Initial Vascular Events (ARRIVE) clinical investigation was lower than anticipated additionally underpins this hypothesis [62]. Rather than the ongoing diminishing in the effectiveness of aspirin for the primary counteraction of CVD, the bleeding danger related with aspirin medicine still exists [82].

In numerous investigations, it is notable that the application of low-dose aspirin was related with an essentially expanded risk of significant bleeding occasions. It is flawed whether the utilization of aspirin medicine for CVD primary prevention will have a critical impact when contrasted with the danger of aspirin in the current time. Ongoing patterns have seen that the utilization of aspirin for primary prevention of CVD is reducing in the United States. In this way, it is important to consider whether it is suitable to proceed with aspirin for the primary avoidance of CVD in

Numerous hypotheses have been taken into account regarding why low-dose aspirin no longer seems effective in primary prevention. These encompass a reducing return for efficacy with regards to contemporary consideration (e.g., smoking

**36**

every patient [83].

Deepak Kumar Dash1 , Vishal Jain2 , Anil Kumar Sahu1 , Rajnikant Panik1 and Vaibhav Tripathi1 \*

1 Royal College of Pharmacy, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, India

2 University Institute of Pharmacy, Pt. Ravishankar Shukla University, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, India

\*Address all correspondence to: vaibhu.07@gmail.com

© 2020 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
