Stratifying the risk of NSAID-related upper gastrointestinal clinical events: results of a double-blind outcomes study in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

Peptic ulcer and bleeding events associated with rofecoxib in a 3-year colorectal adenoma chemoprevention trial

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Our aim was to establish the incidence of symptomatic upper gastrointestinal ulcers, ulcer perforation, ulcer obstruction, or bleeding episodes (PUBs) associated with the use of selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors at standard clinical doses compared with placebo. We report here on the PUB outcomes associated with the use of rofecoxib 25 mg in a 3-year, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial designed to determine the effect of rofecoxib on the risk of recurrent neoplastic polyps of the colon.

METHODS

A total of 2587 patients with a history of colorectal adenomas underwent randomization to 25 mg/day of rofecoxib or to placebo. Investigator-reported PUBs were adjudicated by an external blinded committee. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards techniques were used to estimate incidence and relative risks of PUBs in an intention-to-treat analysis.

RESULTS

Patients assigned to rofecoxib had a higher incidence of confirmed PUBs than those randomized to placebo (.88 vs .18 events per 100 patient-years; relative risk, 4.9; 95% confidence interval, 1.98-14.54). The incidence of confirmed complicated PUBs (ulcer perforation, obstruction, or bleeds) was low, but was numerically higher in the rofecoxib than in the placebo group (.23 vs .06 events per 100 patient-years; relative risk, 3.8; 95% confidence interval, .72-37.46; P = .14). Rofecoxib increased the incidence of confirmed PUBs vs placebo in both low-dose aspirin users and nonusers.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with a history of colorectal adenomas, the long-term use of 25 mg/day of rofecoxib was associated with an increased risk of clinically relevant upper gastrointestinal events when compared with placebo.

Long-term benefit of radon spa therapy in the rehabilitation of rheumatoid arthritis: a randomised, double-blinded trial

This study investigates the effects of radon (plus CO2) baths on RA in contrast to artificial CO2 baths in RA rehabilitation using a double-blinded trial enrolling 134 randomised patients of an in-patient rehabilitative programme (further 73 consecutive non-randomised patients are not reported here). The outcomes were limitations in occupational context/daily living (main outcome), pain, medication and further quantities. These were measured before the start, after the end of treatment and quarterly in the year thereafter. Repeated-measures analysis of covariance (RM-ANCOVA) of the intent-to-treat population was performed with group main effects (GME) and group x course interactions (G x C) reported. Hierarchically ordered hypotheses ensured the adherence of the nominal significance level. The superiority of the radon treatment was found regarding the main outcome (RM-ANCOVA until 12 months: p(GME) = 0.15, p(G x C) = 0.033). Consumption of steroids (p(GME) = 0.064, p(G x C) = 0.025) and NSAIDs (p(GME) = 0.035, p(G x C) = 0.008) were significantly reduced. The results suggest beneficial long-term effects of radon baths as adjunct to a multimodal rehabilitative treatment of RA.

Inappropriate Prevention of NSAID-Induced Gastrointestinal Events Among Long-Term Users in the Elderly

Although use of NSAIDs and aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid) is well known to be associated with gastrointestinal (GI) complications and potential mortality, these medications continue to be widely prescribed in the elderly. Age is a significant risk factor for NSAID-induced GI events; indeed, patients >75 years of age carry the highest risk and are similar in this respect to patients with a history of peptic ulcer. Prevention of NSAID-induced gastropathy is indicated in patients at risk. It is accepted that patients >60 years of age taking NSAIDs should participate in prevention strategies such as co-therapy with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) or misoprostol, or use of cyclo-oxygenase (COX)-2 selective NSAIDs (also called coxibs). Although up to 33% of subjects with no risk factors who receive NSAIDs over-utilise GI preventive therapies, under-utilisation of gastroprotective therapy is more prevalent among those with risk factors, of which the most frequent is age. At least half of those at risk do not receive appropriate preventive therapy, either because they do not receive co-therapy with PPIs or misoprostol or are not treated with COX-2 selective NSAIDs, or because they receive co-therapy with antacids or histamine H(2) receptor antagonists, which are not effective. Adherence to the prescribed preventive therapy is an additional problem for those who are prescribed a PPI or misoprostol. Over 30% of patients are non-adherent and the lowest rate of non-adherence is associated with the first NSAID prescription, which increases the risk of ulcer bleeding compared with those who are fully adherent. Predictors of nonadherence include long-term use of NSAIDs and a high average daily dose of NSAIDs. Predictors of adherence include a history of upper gastrointestinal events, anticoagulant use, rheumatological disease and use of low-dose salicylates, among others. Another important aspect is self-medication; this is common in the elderly, who also have several risk factors for GI complications, and may be a factor in over one-third of all NSAID-related complications. In summary, aging is a key risk factor for GI complications in patients taking NSAIDs. Appropriate prevention strategies should be used in the elderly and those at risk; special attention should be paid to compliance and self-medication.

Impact of adherence to concomitant gastroprotective therapy on nonsteroidal-related gastroduodenal ulcer complications

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The clinical impact of nonadherence to gastroprotective agents (GPAs) coprescribed with anti-inflammatory therapies has not been evaluated. In a large, commercial, managed-care database, we retrospectively characterized the use of GPAs among patients receiving nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (ns-NSAIDs) or cyclooxygenase-2-selective inhibitors (coxibs) and determined the impact of nonadherence on the likelihood of gastroduodenal ulcer complications.

METHODS

Analyses identified the populations of patients with concomitant histamine-2 receptor antagonist or proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy and determined adherence with the prescribed therapy with respect to the duration of anti-inflammatory treatment. Multivariate regression analyses modeled the association between adherence with concomitant protective therapy and the likelihood of upper gastrointestinal (GI) complications including peptic ulcer disease, ulcer, and/or upper-GI bleed.

RESULTS

Among 144,203 patients newly prescribed anti-inflammatory therapies, 1.8% received concomitant GPA treatment (ns-NSAIDs, 1.4% vs coxibs, 2.6%; P < .0001). The likelihood of GPA use increased with the presence of risk factors: age older than 65 years (odds ratio [OR], 1.40; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3-1.5) and prior history of peptic ulcer disease (OR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.8-3.3), esophagitis/gastroesophageal reflux (OR, 3.8; 95% CI, 3.5-4.1), ulcer/upper-GI bleed (OR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.2-1.5), or gastritis (OR, 2.5; 95% CI, 2.2-2.8). Of patients receiving concomitant PPI therapy, 68% had adherence rates of 80% or more. A significantly higher risk of upper-GI ulcers/complications was observed in ns-NSAID patients with adherence rates of less than 80% compared with adherence rates of 80% or more (OR, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.0-5.6), but no such relationship was observed among patients who took coxibs.

CONCLUSIONS

Few patients receive concomitant GPA therapy when prescribed anti-inflammatory treatment, although use increased with the presence of risk factors. Adherence to concomitant therapy is paramount to reducing GI events among ns-NSAID users and educational efforts should be undertaken to promote use of and adherence to GPA therapy among these patients.

Is ranitidine therapy sufficient for healing peptic ulcers associated with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug use?

Long-term use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) increases the risk of serious gastroduodenal events. To minimise these risks, patients often require concomitant acid-suppressive therapy. We conducted a literature review of clinical trials examining use of ranitidine 150 mg twice daily to heal gastroduodenal ulcers (GU) in NSAID recipients. Seven studies were identified. After 8 weeks' treatment with ranitidine, GU healing rates ranged from 50% to 74% and rates of duodenal ulcer (DU) healing ranged from 81% to 84%. Ranitidine was more effective when NSAIDs were discontinued (healing rates reaching 95% and 100%, respectively). The ulcer healing rate with sucralfate was similar to that of ranitidine. However, proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy was associated with significantly greater rates of both GU and DU healing than ranitidine; 8-week GU rates were 92% and 88% with esomeprazole 40 mg and 20 mg, respectively (vs. 74% with ranitidine, p < 0.01). For omeprazole, 8-week healing rates were 87% with omeprazole 40 mg and 84% with omeprazole 20 mg (vs. 64% for ranitidine, p < 0.001), and for lansoprazole the corresponding values were 73-74% and 66-69% for the 30 mg and 15 mg doses, respectively (vs. 50-53% for ranitidine, p < 0.05). In the PPI study reporting DU healing the values were 92% for omeprazole 20 mg (vs. 81% for ranitidine, p < 0.05) and 88% for omeprazole 40 mg (p = 0.17 vs. ranitidine). NSAID-associated GU are more likely to heal when patients receive concomitant treatment with a PPI rather than ranitidine.

Primer: managing NSAID-induced ulcer complications--balancing gastrointestinal and cardiovascular risks

Ulcer complications associated with the use of NSAIDs, in high-risk patients, are often caused by a failure to identify patients' risk factors, concomitant use of aspirin or multiple NSAIDs, and underutilization of gastroprotective agents. Current data suggest that cyclo-oxygenase 2 (COX2) inhibitors and some nonselective NSAIDs increase the risk of myocardial infarction. Physicians must, therefore, take into account both the gastrointestinal and the cardiovascular risks of individual patients when prescribing NSAIDs. In patients with a low cardiovascular risk, NSAIDs can be prescribed according to the level of gastrointestinal risk. Patients with a moderate gastrointestinal risk (one or two risk factors) should receive a COX2 inhibitor or an NSAID plus a PPI or misoprostol. Patients with more than two gastrointestinal risk factors or prior ulcer complications require the combination of a COX2 inhibitor and a PPI. Patients with a high cardiovascular risk (e.g. coronary heart disease or an estimated 10-year cardiovascular risk greater than 10%) should receive prophylactic aspirin and combination therapy with a PPI or misoprostol irrespective of the presence of gastrointestinal risk factors. Naproxen is the preferred NSAID because it is not associated with excess cardiovascular risk. Patients with a high cardiovascular risk and a very high gastrointestinal risk should avoid using NSAIDs or COX2 inhibitors.

Risks versus benefits of cyclooxygenase-2-selective nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs

PURPOSE

A summary of the basic science underlying the current controversies regarding cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2)-selective nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), including data on their cardiovascular safety, their gastrointestinal (GI) benefits, cost-effectiveness, physician-prescribing trends, and recommendations for prescribing these agents is presented.

SUMMARY

A number of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have reported that COX-2-selective NSAIDs increase cardiovascular events, although there appear to be gradations of risks among the COX-2-selective NSAIDs. In addition, traditional NSAIDs may increase the risk for cardiovascular events, complicating the interpretation of RCTs that use traditional NSAIDs as comparators. Selective inhibitors of COX-2-selective NSAIDs are effective antiinflammatory and analgesic drugs with improved upper-GI safety compared to traditional NSAIDs. Data on the cost-effectiveness of COX-2-selective NSAIDs indicate that they should be limited to patients at high risk for upper-GI adverse effects. However, they had been increasingly used in patients with lower GI risks until recent events reversed that trend. Circumstances under which COX-2-selective NSAIDs may be appropriate are in patients at high GI risk and in patients who did not respond to multiple traditional NSAIDs. The national spotlight in the United States on NSAID-related adverse events and recent lawsuits against health care providers prescribing COX-2-selective NSAIDs further highlights the need for provider-patient communication and risk disclosure. The relative cardiovascular risks of NSAIDs are similar in magnitude to other currently prescribed therapies.

CONCLUSION

Health care providers must consider the efficacy, GI and cardiovascular risks, concomitant medications, and costs when determining the appropriateness of COX-2-selective NSAID therapy.

Assessment of coxib utilization by rheumatologists for nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug gastroprotection prior to the coxib market withdrawals

OBJECTIVE

To examine cyclooxygenase 2 inhibitor (coxib) utilization by rheumatologists for patients receiving nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) prior to the coxib market withdrawals.

METHODS

A prospective study of patients with rheumatoid arthritis enrolled in the Consortium of Rheumatology Researchers of North America registry was performed.

RESULTS

Of 1,833 patients receiving prescription NSAIDs, 1,380 (75.3%) received gastroprotection, defined as either coxib monotherapy and/or gastroprotective agent (GPA) cotherapy, and 1,207 (65.8%) received coxibs. The distribution of gastroprotective strategies included 860 (46.9%) patients who were prescribed coxib monotherapy, 347 (18.9%) prescribed dual coxib plus GPA cotherapy, 173 (9.4%) prescribed a nonselective NSAID (NS-NSAID) plus GPA cotherapy, and 453 (24.7%) prescribed an NS-NSAID without GPA cotherapy. For patients with 0, 1, and > or =2 identifiable gastrointestinal (GI) risk factors, coxib prescribing rates as a proportion of NSAID agents were 64.1%, 66.4%, and 68.6%, respectively; among dual aspirin/NSAID users, coxib prescribing rates were 66.2%, 78.3%, and 68.5% of NSAID prescriptions, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The majority of NSAID users were prescribed a gastroprotective strategy, primarily attributable to coxib utilization. Coxib utilization rates were consistently high across all levels of GI risk, including patients without identifiable risk factors. These data indicate that rheumatologists broadly adopted the coxib class of NSAIDs in a nonselective manner with respect to underlying GI risk and concomitant aspirin use. As novel therapeutic classes are introduced, early evaluation of prescribing patterns using arthritis registries can determine the appropriateness of prescribing patterns and may improve patient outcomes.

[Upper gastrointestinal events associated with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs usage. An unsolved problem]

Before nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are indicated, risk factors such as age, the use of other drugs potentially harmful to the gastrointestinal tract, smoking, and concomitant use of aspirin should be evaluated, to select the most appropriate option for each patient and determine the need for gastroprotective therapy. Because of the possibility of cardiovascular risk posed by COX-2 selective NSAIDs, cardiovascular risk factors should also be analyzed in each patient before starting treatment of this type, mainly bearing in mind that the protective effect of COX-2 selective NSAIDs is substantially reduced in patients taking aspirin.

Quel est l’impact des complications cardiovasculaires et rénales sur le rapport bénéfice/risque digestif des AINS?

Long-term studies of NSAIDs have demonstrated cardiovascular toxicity which poses a general problem of the benefit risk between the relief of the patient's symptoms and the risk of digestive and cardiovascular toxicity. The digestive complications and the risk factors associated with the ingestion of NSAIDs have been defined by numerous studies but the prevention of this digestive toxicity can be attempted. The benefit-risk ratio caused by the digestive and cardiovascular toxicities of the NSAIDs and COX-2 inhibitors must be evaluated for each individual before starting a treatment. For a treatment of short duration in patients with a low risk of digestive and cardiovascular complications, the risk of digestive toxicity must be taken into consideration first and the COX-2 inhibitors are favoured. For a treatment of long duration the risk must be evaluated with the greatest care. In the case of cardiovascular risk factors, the cardiovascular risk must be evaluated and the treatment must be prescribed at the lowest dose for the shortest duration. In patients with very high risk of digestive and cardiovascular complications, since the digestive and cardiovascular extra-mortality associated with the ingestion of NSAIDs or COX-2 inhibitors is high, it is advised to abandon this type of long-term treatment.

Effects of chronic therapy with non-steroidal antiinflammatory drugs on gastric permeability of sucrose: a study on 71 patients with rheumatoid arthritis

AIM

To evaluate the gastric permeability after both acute and chronic use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and to assess the clinical usefulness of sucrose test in detecting and following NSAIDs- induced gastric damage mainly in asymptomatic patients and the efficacy of a single pantoprazole dose in chronic users.

METHODS

Seventy-one consecutive patients on chronic therapy with NSAIDs were enrolled in the study and divided into groups A and B (group A receiving 40 mg pantoprazole daily, group B only receiving NSAIDs). Sucrose test was performed at baseline and after 2, 4 and 12 wk, respectively. The symptoms in the upper gastrointestinal tract were recorded.

RESULTS

The patients treated with pantoprazole had sucrose excretion under the limit during the entire follow-up period. The patients without gastroprotection had sucrose excretion above the limit after 2 wk, with an increasing trend in the following weeks (P = 0.000). A number of patients in this group revealed a significantly altered gastric permeability although they were asymptomatic during the follow-up period.

CONCLUSION

Sucrose test can be proposed as a valid tool for the clinical evaluation of NSAIDs- induced gastric damage in both acute and chronic therapy. This technique helps to identify patients with clinically silent gastric damages. Pantoprazole (40 mg daily) is effective and well tolerated in chronic NSAID users.

NSAID-induced gastrointestinal damage: Current clinical management and recommendations for prevention

Gastrointestinal toxicity is a common adverse effect of traditional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and patients at risk should receive prevention therapies. Selective cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors (coxibs) are safer to the gastrointestinal tract than traditional NSAIDs. Current prevention strategies in patients who need NSAIDs should also take into account the presence of cardiovascular risk factors, as coxibs and probably most traditional NSAIDs increase the incidence of serious cardiovascular events. Patients without risk factors should be treated with traditional NSAIDs, whereas patients at risk may receive cotherapy with a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) or misoprostol, or a coxib alone. However, patients with a previous bleeding ulcer should receive the combination of a coxib plus a PPI, and Helicobacter pylori should be tested for and treated if present. Coxib and NSAID therapy should be prescribed with caution in patients with increased cardiovascular risk and should be prescribed at the lowest possible dose and for the shortest period of time. These patients will probably be treated with low-dose aspirin or other antiplatelet agents, which puts them at increased risk of upper gastrointestinal complications. The risk of gastrointestinal toxicity with combined therapy of aspirin and coxib may be lower than that with traditional NSAIDs plus aspirin, but all these patients may benefit from PPI cotherapy. When the lower gastrointestinal tract is of concern, coxib instead of NSAID therapy should be considered. Coxib therapy has better gastrointestinal tolerance than traditional NSAIDs and PPI therapy is effective both in the treatment and prevention of NSAID-induced dyspepsia and should be considered in patients who develop dyspepsia during NSAID or coxib therapy.

Estudio de prescripción-indicación de inhibidores de la bomba de protones

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the adaptation of Proton Pump Inhibitors (PPI) prescriptions to the indications in the literature. To determine which doctors, patients and prescriptions characteristics are related to a correct prescription and to measure their relative importance.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Cross-sectional observational study of prescription indication in an Urban Primary Care Center. Simple Random Sampling was used from primary care center patients PPIs prescriptions between July and December of 2003. Non-electronic prescriptions (OMI-AP program) were excluded from the sample. 412 PPI prescriptions were necessary as sample size to obtain a 95% confidence with a 4.7% precision and a 50% expected proportion. Simple random sampling techniques were used.

RESULTS

Prescription was correct under adequacy criteria in 36.4% of the cases. The effect of the "hiatal hernia" and "user activity status" variables showed the major impact on results with an OR: 0.361 and 1.672 respectively. NSAID treated patients PPIs prescriptions matched adequacy criteria in 79.5% of the cases. "Prescription source" and "User activity status" variables gave the highest impact with an OR: 2.5 and 4.52, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The high percentage of non-adequate prescriptions together with the differences found between primary and specialized levels of attention, could suggest lack of knowledge of PPIs prophylactic indications and lack of coordination between different levels of attention that could be solved by creating common performing protocols.

Review article: acid-related disease--what are the unmet clinical needs?

Proton pump inhibitors have dramatically improved the management options available for patients with acid-related disorders. In patients with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, currently available proton pump inhibitors provide an excellent outcome for the majority; however, they do not provide optimal pH control in many. Proton pump inhibitors co-therapy reduces, but does not eliminate, the risk of gastrointestinal ulcers and complications in patients taking non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, while in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding, it may be difficult to reach and maintain the current therapeutic target of intragastric pH of 6-7. This article reviews the effectiveness of current antisecretory therapy in these three acid-related diseases and areas of unmet clinical need. The potential role of a proton pump inhibitor with an extended duration of action and enhanced acid control from a single daily dose, particularly improved control at night, is discussed. Finally, therapy that could be administered without regard to time of day and/or food intake would offer dosing flexibility and thus have a positive effect on patients' compliance.

The impact of low-dose aspirin on endoscopic gastric and duodenal ulcer rates in users of a non-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug or a cyclo-oxygenase-2-selective inhibitor

BACKGROUND

The effect of low-dose aspirin on endoscopic ulcer incidence in cyclo-oxygenase-2-selective inhibitor or non-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug users remains controversial.

AIM

To compare prospectively the incidence of endoscopic ulcers in healthy subjects receiving low-dose aspirin plus celecoxib or naproxen.

METHODS

In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, 1-week study, subjects (50-75 years) were randomized to receive aspirin 325 mg o.d. plus either celecoxib 200 mg o.d., naproxen 500 mg b.d., or placebo. Baseline and end of study endoscopies were performed. The primary end point was incidence of one or more gastric and duodenal ulcers.

RESULTS

A lower incidence of gastric and duodenal ulcers was seen in celecoxib/aspirin-treated subjects (19%) vs. naproxen/aspirin (27%; RR: 0.63, 95% CI: 0.44-0.92). Both naproxen/aspirin and celecoxib/aspirin groups demonstrated a higher incidence of gastric and duodenal ulcers vs. placebo/aspirin (8%; RR: 3.7, 95% CI: 1.8-7.6 and RR: 2.6, 95% CI: 1.2-5.8, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Fewer endoscopic ulcers were observed in patients treated with celecoxib/aspirin vs. naproxen/aspirin. However, celecoxib/aspirin was associated with a significantly higher incidence of gastric and duodenal ulcers than aspirin alone. Further studies are required to determine the generalizability of these findings in the aspirin users and to determine the appropriate strategy to minimize risk in susceptible patients.

GI Risk and Risk Factors of NSAIDs

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are the most widely used drugs in the United States. Ulcers are found at endoscopy in 15% to 30% of patients using NSAIDs regularly. The annual incidence of upper gastrointestinal (GI) complications such as bleeding with regular NSAID use is approximately 1.0% to 1.5%, whereas the annual rate of upper GI clinical events (complicated plus symptomatic uncomplicated ulcers) is approximately 2.5% to 4.5%. Upper GI symptoms such as dyspepsia also occur in many patients taking NSAIDs--at a relative risk of about 1.5 to 2 compared with that in patients without NSAID use. Important risk factors for upper GI clinical events include older age, prior history of upper GI events, use of corticosteroids or anticoagulants, and high-dose or multiple NSAIDs (including NSAID plus low-dose aspirin). Lower GI clinical events such as bleeding may also occur with NSAIDs, although they are less common and less well studied than upper GI events. The decision to employ a protective strategy to decrease NSAID-associated GI clinical events is based on risk stratification. Strategies employed include the use of non-NSAID analgesics, use of lowest effective dose of NSAID, use of medical cotherapy (eg, proton pump inhibitor, misoprostol), or use of coxibs.

Nonsteroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs Versus Selective COX-2 Inhibitors in the Upper Gastrointestinal Tract

There are enough basic data supporting the use of coxibs with regard to the upper GI tract in patients with the need for continuous treatment of joint pain. The clinical studies available clearly show that coxibs induce fewer lesions and complications in volunteers and in patients when compared with NSAIDs. However, in Helicobacter pylori- positive patients the advantage seems less clear. The combination of NSAID plus PPI is not worse with regard to duodenal ulcers and recurrent clinical complications and is more cost effective than the use of coxibs. Similarly, with the concomitant use of aspirin even in low doses no major advantage of coxibs has been demonstrated. The combination of coxibs and PPI in high-risk patients needs to be studied. It is unclear at the moment how important are the changes in the lower GI tract. Considering the current controversy regarding cardiovascular events, there is no major reason to prefer coxibs to conventional NSAID plus PPI in patients needing long-term treatment.

Prevention and treatment of NSAID-induced gastroduodenal injury

NSAIDs increase the risk of gastrointestinal (GI) complications. Those at risk should be considered for alternatives to NSAID therapy, modifications of risk factors, and prevention strategies with co-therapy with gastroprotective agents (proton-pump inhibitors or misoprostol) or COX-2 selective inhibitors (coxibs). Since coxibs, and probably other nonselective NSAIDs, may increase the risk of cardiovascular events, prevention strategies must take into account both GI and cardiovascular risk factors. All NSAIDs and coxibs should be prescribed at the lowest possible dose and for the shortest period of time. In patients with GI risk factors but no cardiovascular risk, coxibs or NSAIDs plus PPI or misoprostol are valid options. Patients with a history of ulcer bleeding should receive coxib plus PPI therapy and should be tested and treated for Helicobacter pylori infection. Most patients with increased cardiovascular risk will be treated with antiplatelet agents. It is not known whether co-therapy with low-dose aspirin will reduce the incidence of cardiovascular events, but it will further increase GI risk. It is currently unclear whether the risk of developing upper GI events with coxib plus aspirin is lower than it is with NSAIDs plus aspirin. However, all these patients should benefit from PPI co-therapy. Helicobacter pylori eradication should be considered as an additional therapeutic option when we want to further reduce the GI risk in specific patients. When the lower GI tract is of concern, coxib rather than NSAID therapy should be considered as the first option. Coxib therapy has better GI tolerance than NSAIDs, but patients with peptic ulcers or dyspepsia during NSAID/coxib treatment need PPI co-therapy.

Intragastric acid control in non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug users: comparison of esomeprazole, lansoprazole and pantoprazole

BACKGROUND

Studies to date have not directly compared the pharmacodynamic efficacies of different proton pump inhibitors in controlling intragastric acidity in patients treated with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.

AIM

To compare acid suppression with once-daily esomeprazole 40 mg, lansoprazole 30 mg and pantoprazole 40 mg in patients receiving non-selective or cyclo-oxygenase-2-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug therapy.

METHODS

In this multicentre, open-label, comparative, three-way crossover study, adult patients (n = 90) receiving non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were randomized to one of six treatment sequences. At the study site, patients were administered esomeprazole 40 mg, lansoprazole 30 mg and pantoprazole 40 mg for 5 days each, with a washout period of > or =10 days between each treatment. Twenty-four-hour pH testing was performed on day 5 of each dosing period.

RESULTS

The mean percentage of time during the 24-h pH monitoring period that gastric pH was >4.0 was significantly greater with esomeprazole (74.2%) compared with lansoprazole (66.5%; P < 0.001) and pantoprazole (60.8%; P < 0.001), and significantly greater with esomeprazole (P < 0.05) than with the comparators regardless of whether using non-selective vs. cyclo-oxygenase-2-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.

CONCLUSIONS

At the doses studied, esomeprazole treatment provides significantly greater gastric acid suppression than lansoprazole or pantoprazole in patients receiving non-selective or cyclo-oxygenase-2-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.

Prevention of ulcers by esomeprazole in at-risk patients using non-selective NSAIDs and COX-2 inhibitors

OBJECTIVES

Proton pump inhibitors reduce ulcer recurrence in non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) users, but their impact in at-risk ulcer-free patients using the current spectrum of prescribed agents has not been clearly defined. We assessed esomeprazole for ulcer prevention in at-risk patients (> or = 60 yr and/or ulcer history) taking NSAIDs, including COX-2 inhibitors. Such studies are particularly relevant, given that concerns regarding adverse cardiovascular outcomes among COX-2 inhibitor users may prompt re-evaluation of their use.

METHODS

We conducted two similar double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, multicenter studies; VENUS (United States) and PLUTO (multinational). A total of 844 and 585 patients requiring daily NSAIDs, including COX-2 inhibitors were randomized to receive esomeprazole (20 or 40 mg) or placebo, daily for 6 months.

RESULTS

In the VENUS study, the life table estimated proportion of patients who developed ulcers over 6 months (primary variable, intent-to-treat population) was 20.4% on placebo, 5.3% on esomeprazole 20 mg (p < 0.001), and 4.7% on esomeprazole 40 mg (p < 0.0001). In the PLUTO study, the values were 12.3% on placebo, 5.2% with esomeprazole 20 mg (p = 0.018), and 4.4% with esomeprazole 40 mg (p = 0.007). Significant reductions were observed for users of both non-selective NSAIDs and COX-2 inhibitors. Pooled ulcer rates for patients using COX-2 inhibitors (n = 400) were 16.5% on placebo, 0.9% on esomeprazole 20 mg (p < 0.001) and 4.1% on esomeprazole 40 mg (p= 0.002). Esomeprazole was well tolerated and associated with better symptom control than placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

For at-risk patients, esomeprazole was effective in preventing ulcers in long-term users of NSAIDs, including COX-2 inhibitors.

A COX-2-specific inhibitor plus a proton-pump inhibitor: is this a reasonable approach to reduction in NSAIDs' GI toxicity?

The two prevailing approaches to decrease risks of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-associated gastrointestinal (GI) events are the use of a COX-2 inhibitor or co-therapy with a proton-pump inhibitor (PPI). A major limitation of each approach is that, in patients at the highest risk for NSAID-induced ulcers, neither treatment is effective when used as a stand-alone strategy. An important question is whether combination therapy with a COX-2 inhibitor plus a PPI has improved GI safety compared to a traditional NSAID plus a PPI. This study evaluated high GI risk patients who were taking, along with their NSAID or COX-2 inhibitor, either the PPI, esomeprazole, or the placebo. It confirms that our current approach of adding PPIs to reduce NSAIDs' ulcer risks is an effective strategy. However, this study did not show a safety advantage for using a COX-2 inhibitor instead of a traditional NSAID in high GI risk patients who take PPIs. Thus, there continues to be no prospective data to support a GI benefit of COX-2 inhibitor plus a PPI over traditional NSAID plus a PPI in high-risk patients.

A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, active-comparator, placebo-controlled, parallel-group comparison of the incidence of endoscopic gastric and duodenal ulcer rates with valdecoxib or naproxen in healthy subjects aged 65 to 75 years

BACKGROUND

Compared with nonselective NSAIDs, cyclooxygenase (COX)-2-selective inhibitors have been associated with a lower incidence of gastroduodenal ulcers (in short-term endoscopic studies) and ulcer complications (in long-term trials).

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the effects of valdecoxib 20 mg BID and naproxen 500 mg BID, administered for 6.5 days, on the upper gastrointestinal (UGI) mucosa of healthy older subjects (aged 65-75 years) as assessed by UGI endoscopy.

METHODS

In this multicenter, double-blind, active-comparator, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study, eligible subjects who were free of NSAID or COX-2-selective inhibitor use for 2 weeks and who had normal UGI mucosa (mucosal grading score of 0, based on endoscopic evaluation of both the stomach and duodenum) were randomized. Serologic testing for Helicobacter pylori antibodies was conducted at baseline. No antiulcer medications were permitted. The primary end point was the incidence of gastroduodenal ulcers (gastric or duodenal mucosal grading score of 7, as indicated by any lesion with unequivocal depth > or =3 mm in diameter) after 6.5 days of blinded treatment with valdecoxib, naproxen, or placebo. Secondary end points were incidence of gastric ulcers, duodenal ulcers, and gastroduodenal erosions/ulcers, and the incidence of > or =11 gastroduodenal erosions/ulcers. All documented adverse events were self-reported by subjects or were observed by investigators.

RESULTS

Sixty-one patients were randomized to receive valdecoxib, 60 to naproxen, and 60 to placebo. Mean (SD) subject age was 68.8 (3.25) years in the valdecoxib group, 68.6 (2.76) years in the naproxen group, and 68.6 (3.14) years in the placebo group (P = NS). In the valdecoxib and naproxen groups, 47.5% and 58.3% of subjects were female, respectively, compared with 56.7% of the placebo group (P = NS). Valdecoxib and placebo were associated with significantly lower incidences of gastroduodenal ulcers than naproxen (1.6% [1 gastroduodenal ulcer/61 patients] and 1.7% [1/59], respectively, vs 22.0% [13/59]; P < 0.001). Compared with naproxen, both valdecoxib and placebo were associated with significantly lower incidences of gastric (1.6% [1/61] and 1.7% [1/59] vs 15.3% [9/59]; both, P < 0.03) and duodenal ulcers (0% [0/61] and 0% [0/59] vs 8.5% [5/59]; both,P < 0.03). In all cases, the incidence of ulcers with valdecoxib was not significantly different from placebo. Results were similar for any erosions/ulcers, and when analyzed by H pylori status. The number of adverse events was low in each group.

CONCLUSION

In these healthy older subjects (aged 65-75 years), valdecoxib 20 mg BID was associated with a significantly lower rate of gastroduodenal, gastric, and duodenal ulcers than naproxen 500 mg BID, even after 6.5 days of therapy.

Autoimmune disorders: gastrointestinal manifestations and endoscopic findings

The gastrointestinal tract can be involved in many autoimmune disorders, and women are affected more than men in most of the disease processes discussed. As this article outlines, gastrointestinal manifestations can be either part of the clinical presentation or complications of treatment. Depending on the disease process and the severity of symptoms, gastrointestinal evaluation and treatment can have an important role in the management of these diseases.

Prevention of anti-inflammatory drug-induced gastrointestinal damage: benefits and risks of therapeutic strategies

Patients who take non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) may develop serious gastrointestinal (GI) side effects in both the upper and lower GI tract. Those at risk should be considered for prevention with misoprostol, proton pump inhibitor (PPI) or COX-2 selective inhibitor (coxib) therapy. A coxib or an NSAID+PPI combination is considered to have comparable GI safety profiles, but evidence from direct comparison is limited. PPIs are effective in the prevention of upper GI events in endoscopy trials and in a few, small, outcome trials in patients at risk. Coxibs have been evaluated in endoscopic ulcer studies and clinical outcome trials, and shown to significantly reduce the risk of upper GI ulcer and complications. Moreover, unlike PPIs, coxibs significantly reduce toxicity in the lower GI tract compared with NSAIDs. Coxibs and possibly some NSAIDs also increase the risk of developing serious cardiovascular events, an effect which may depend on the drug, dose and duration of therapy. It is not known whether concomitant low-dose aspirin use, which occurs in more than 20% of patients, will reduce the incidence of cardiovascular events, although concomitant aspirin increases the risk of developing serious GI events in patients taking either an NSAID or a coxib. Such patients may require additional PPI co-therapy. Current prevention strategies with an NSAID+PPI, misoprostol or a coxib must be considered in the individual patient with GI and cardiovascular risk factors. A PPI+coxib is indicated in those at highest risk (e.g. previous ulcer bleeding). PPI therapy must be considered for the treatment and prevention of NSAID-induced dyspepsia.

NSAID-associated adverse effects and acid control aids to prevent them: a review of current treatment options

NSAIDs are central to the clinical management of a wide range of conditions. However, NSAIDs in combination with gastric acid, which has been shown to play a central role in upper gastrointestinal (GI) events, can damage the gastroduodenal mucosa and result in dyspeptic symptoms and peptic lesions such as ulceration.NSAID-associated GI mucosal injury is an important clinical problem. Gastroduodenal ulcers or ulcer complications occur in up to 25% of patients receiving NSAIDs. However, these toxicities are often not preceded by indicative symptoms. Data obtained from the Arthritis, Rheumatism, and Aging Medical Information System have shown that 50-60% of NSAID-associated peptic ulcer cases can remain clinically silent and do not present until complications occur. Therefore, prophylactic treatment to prevent GI complications may be necessary in a substantial proportion of NSAID users, especially those in groups associated with a high risk of developing these complications. Use of cyclo-oxygenase (COX)-2 selective NSAIDs, also known as 'coxibs', substantially reduces the incidence of upper GI toxicities seen with non-selective NSAIDs. However, there are concerns regarding the cardiovascular safety of coxibs. For this reason, the US FDA recommends minimal use of coxibs and only when strictly necessary. Additionally, rofecoxib has been removed from the US market and sales of valdecoxib have been suspended. Furthermore, upper GI toxicities still occur in patients receiving coxibs. Therefore, cotherapies are required to prevent and/or heal upper GI effects associated with NSAID use. Effective prophylactic and treatment strategies include misoprostol, histamine H(2) receptor antagonists and proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). The key role that gastric acid plays in upper GI adverse events among NSAID users suggests that it is important to choose the most effective agent for acid control to alleviate symptoms, heal mucosal erosions and improve the reduced quality of life in this patient population. PPIs provide effective acid suppression, which is essential to avoid GI mucosal injury, and they are, therefore, capable of dramatically decreasing the morbidity and mortality associated with this disorder. Since many serious GI complications are not heralded by any previous symptoms, physicians need to be aware of risk factor profiles that predispose patients to serious GI problems. Physicians also need to initiate the appropriate preventative acid suppressive therapy to minimise the burden of NSAID-associated GI adverse effects.

Systematic review: coxibs, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or no cyclooxygenase inhibitors in gastroenterological high-risk patients?

Selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors have been marketed as alternatives of conventional, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs with the purpose of reducing/eliminating the risk of ulcer complications. Unexpectedly, randomized-controlled trials revealed that long-term use of coxibs, such as rofecoxib, significantly increased the risk of myocardial infarction and stroke, while the use of valdecoxib was associated with potentially life-threatening skin reactions. Subsequently, rofecoxib and valdecoxib were withdrawn from the market. Although more strict precautions for other coxibs, such as celecoxib, etoricoxib, lumiracoxib and parecoxib, may be accepted/recommended by regulatory agencies, a critical review of published data suggests that their use may not be justified - even in high-risk patients - taking benefits, costs and risks into consideration. Clinicians should, therefore, never prescribe coxibs to patients with cardiovascular risk factors, and should only reluctantly prescribe coxibs to patients with a history of ulcer disease or dyspepsia to overcome persistent pain due to, e.g. rheumatoid arthritis or osteoarthritis. Instead, they should consider using conventional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in combination with a proton pump inhibitor or a prostaglandin analogue, especially for patients with increased cardiovascular risks, i.e. established ischaemic heart disease, cerebrovascular disease and/or peripheral arterial disease, or alternatively acetaminophen. An evidence-based algorithm for treatment of a chronic arthritis patient with one or more gastrointestinal risk factors is presented.

Review article: the role of antisecretory therapy in the management of non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Non-variceal, upper gastrointestinal bleeding accounts for 300,000 hospitalizations annually in the US and the risk of rebleeding and mortality remain high. The aim of this study was to review the incidence and causes of non-variceal upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage, criteria for early discharge, risk stratification and intravenous vs. oral proton-pump inhibitor use. Peptic ulcer disease accounts for 45% of all admissions for upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Clinical and endoscopic predictors of adverse outcome have been identified. The Rockall scoring system identifies patients who can be considered for early discharge after endoscopy. Evidence supports the use of intravenous proton-pump inhibitor therapy for patients with bleeding ulcers associated with high-risk stigmata. Patients who are clinically stable and in whom upper endoscopy has shown an ulcer with a clean base or a flat pigmented spot have a low risk for rebleeding and may be discharged early on oral proton-pump inhibitor therapy. Proton-pump inhibitor treatment reduces ulcer rebleeding but does not affect overall mortality. In the US, most patients with ulcer bleeding have low-risk stigmata, and thus, can be treated with oral proton-pump inhibitors and discharged early.

NSAIDs and gastrointestinal complications: new clinical challenges

The use of NSAIDs is associated with significant risk of upper gastrointestinal ulcer, bleeding, perforation and stricture. NSAIDs vary in their analgesic and anti-inflammatory properties; choice of NSAID, dosage and duration are the cornerstone of rationale therapy. Proton pump inhibitors are widely used to reduce the risk of serious events, despite the paucity of data that indicates that they are effective for this indication. The existing recommendations for prevention of gastrointestinal toxicity are reviewed in this article, in light of new clinical challenges posed by the emerging data regarding competing cardiovascular risk. Strategies are proposed for common clinical prescribing dilemmas, new clinical risk groups are identified and preventative strategies for these special populations are recommended.

Adoption of celecoxib and rofecoxib: a nationwide database study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Cyclooxygenase 2-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs, coxibs) are recommended primarily for patients at high risk of gastrointestinal bleeding, most of them being elderly. Our objective was to describe and analyse patient- and physician-related factors affecting the adoption of celecoxib and rofecoxib 2 years after their launch in Finland.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of the nationwide Prescription Register. Physicians who had issued at least 200 reimbursed prescriptions in 2002 (n = 12 033, 80% of working-age Finnish physicians) were involved in the analysis.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Excluding patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), almost one-fifth (18%) of NSAIDs prescriptions were for coxibs. In patients with RA the share was 25%. The share of coxib prescriptions of all NSAIDs increased with age of the patient. Over one half (58%) of coxib prescriptions were issued for patients under 65 years of age. Specialists in physical and rehabilitation medicine were the fastest adopters of coxibs: one-third of their NSAID prescriptions in 2002 were for coxibs. Primary care physicians were the most conservative both in adopting and favouring coxibs.

CONCLUSIONS

Coxibs have gained the status of standard prescription NSAIDs within a few years. Their use should be restricted to patients who could benefit most from the use. Routine prescribing of expensive new drugs increases the drug bill without additional health gain.

Prevalence and incidence of gastroduodenal ulcers during treatment with vascular protective doses of aspirin

BACKGROUND

Aspirin is valuable for preventing vascular events, but information about ulcer frequency is necessary to inform risk-benefit decisions in individual patients.

AIM

To determine ulcer prevalence and incidence in a population representative of those given aspirin therapy and evaluate risk predictors.

METHODS

Patients taking aspirin 75-325 mg daily were recruited from four countries. Exclusions included use of gastroprotectant drugs or other non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. We measured point prevalence of endoscopic ulcers, after quantitating dyspeptic symptoms. Incidence was assessed 3 months later in those eligible to continue (no baseline ulcer or reason for gastroprotectants).

RESULTS

In 187 patients, ulcer prevalence was 11% [95% confidence interval (CI) 6.3-15.1%]. Only 20% had dyspeptic symptoms, not significantly different from patients without ulcer. Ulcer incidence in 113 patients followed for 3 months was 7% (95% CI 2.4-11.8%). Helicobacter pylori infection increased the risk of a duodenal ulcer [odds ratio (OR) 18.5, 95% CI 2.3-149.4], as did age >70 for ulcers in stomach and duodenum combined (OR 3.3, 95% CI 1.3-8.7).

CONCLUSIONS

Gastroduodenal ulcers are found in one in 10 patients taking low-dose aspirin, and most are asymptomatic; this needs considering when discussing risks/benefits with patients. Risk factors include older age and H. pylori (for duodenal ulcer).

Celecoxib compared with lansoprazole and naproxen to prevent gastrointestinal ulcer complications

PURPOSE

Selective cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors cause significantly fewer peptic ulcers than conventional nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in patients at low risk or high risk for peptic ulcers. On the other hand, proton pump inhibitor co-therapy has also been shown to be effective in preventing relapse of peptic ulcers in high-risk patients using nonselective NSAIDs. We compared the efficacy of a selective COX-2 inhibitor with that of proton pump inhibitor co-therapy in the reduction in the incidence of ulcer relapse in patients with a history of NSAID-related peptic ulcers.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

For this study, we recruited 224 patients who developed ulcer complications after NSAID use. We excluded patients who required concomitant aspirin treatment and who had renal impairment. After healing of ulcers and eradication of Helicobacter pylori, patients were randomly assigned to treatment with celecoxib 200 mg daily (n = 120) or naproxen 750 mg daily and lansoprazole 30 mg daily (n = 122) for 24 weeks. The primary endpoint was recurrent ulcer complications.

RESULTS

During a median follow-up of 24 weeks, 4 (3.7%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.0%-7.3%) patients in the celecoxib group, compared with 7 patients (6.3%, 95% CI 1.6%-11.1%) in the lansoprazole group, developed recurrent ulcer complications (absolute difference -2.6%; 95% CI for the difference -9.1%-3.7%). Celecoxib was statistically non-inferior to lansoprazole co-therapy in the prevention of recurrent ulcer complications. Concomitant illness (hazard ratio 4.72, 95% CI 1.24-18.18) and age 65 years or more (hazard ratio 18.52, 95% CI 2.26-142.86) were independent risk factors for ulcer recurrences. Significantly more patients receiving celecoxib (15.0%, 95% CI 9.7-22.5) developed dyspepsia than patients receiving lansoprazole (5.7%, 95% CI 2.8-11.4. P = .02).

CONCLUSIONS

Celecoxib was as effective as lansoprazole co-therapy in the prevention of recurrences of ulcer complications in subjects with a history of NSAID-related complicated peptic ulcers. However, celecoxib, similar to lansoprazole co-therapy, was still associated with a significant proportion of ulcer complication recurrences. In addition, more patients receiving celecoxib developed dyspepsia than patients receiving lansoprazole and naproxen.

Should we eradicate Helicobacter pylori infection in patients receiving nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or low-dose aspirin?

Whether Helicobacter pylori infection alters the risk of ulcer disease in patients receiving nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or low-dose aspirin is one of the most controversial topics in peptic ulcer research. This is an important management issue, particularly in countries where peptic ulcer disease is common and the prevalence of H. pylori infection is high. Current evidence shows that H. pylori infection increases the ulcer risk associated with NSAIDs or low-dose aspirin. Eradication of H. pylori reduces the subsequent risk of endoscopic and complicated ulcers in patients who are about to start long-term NSAIDs. Among patients with H. pylori infection and a history of ulcer bleeding who continue to use low-dose aspirin, 1 week of eradication therapy prevents recurrent ulcer bleeding. Failure of eradication and concomitant use of NSAIDs, however, account for most cases of recurrent bleeding with low-dose aspirin. The apparent protective effect of H. pylori in long-term NSAIDs users reported in some studies was actually the weeding out of susceptible patients who were intolerant to NSAIDs. There is no convincing evidence that eradication of H. pylori has any clinically important adverse effect on the healing and prevention of ulcers in NSAIDs users.

Role of Helicobacter pylori eradication in aspirin or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug users

Helicobacter pylori (H pylori) infection and the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) including aspirin at any dosage and formulation represent well-established risk factors for the development of uncomplicated and complicated peptic ulcer disease accounting for the majority of such cases. Although the interaction between H pylori and NSAID/aspirin use in the same individuals was questioned in some epidemiological studies, it has now become widely accepted that they are at least independent risk factors for peptic ulcer disease. According to data from randomized intervention trials, naive NSAID users certainly benefit from testing for H pylori infection and, if positive, H pylori eradication therapy prior to the initiation of NSAID. A similar strategy is also suggested for naive aspirin users, although the efficacy of such an approach has not been evaluated yet. Strong data also support that chronic aspirin users with a recent ulcer complication should be tested for H pylori infection and, if positive, receive H pylori eradication therapy after ulcer healing, while they appear to benefit from additional long-term therapy with a proton pump inhibitor (PPI). A similar approach is often recommended to chronic aspirin users at a high risk of ulcer complication. H pylori eradication alone does not efficiently protect chronic NSAID users with a recent ulcer complication or those at a high-risk, who certainly should be treated with long-term PPI therapy, but H pylori eradication may be additionally offered even in this setting. In contrast, testing for H pylori or PPI therapy is not recommended for chronic NSAID/aspirin users with no ulcer complications or those at a low risk of complications.

NSAID-induced peptic ulcers and Helicobacter pylori infection: implications for patient management

The conflicting data about the influence of Helicobacter pylori infection on the ulcer risk in patients receiving NSAIDs can be accounted for by the heterogeneity of study designs and the diversified host response to H. pylori. Factors that will affect the outcome include the choice of H. pylori diagnostic tests, previous ulcer complications, concurrent use of acid suppressants, NSAID-naive versus long-term users, low-dose aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid) versus non-aspirin NSAIDs and whether the result was derived from a pre-specified endpoint or post hoc subgroup analysis. Current evidence suggests that H. pylori eradication reduces the ulcer risk for patients who are about to start receiving NSAIDs but not for those who are already on long-term NSAID therapy. Since treatment with a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) worsens H. pylori-associated corpus gastritis, H. pylori should be tested for, and eradicated if present, before starting long-term prophylaxis with PPIs. Patients with H. pylori infection and a history of ulcer complications who require NSAIDs should receive concomitant PPIs or misoprostol after curing the infection. Among patients receiving low-dose aspirin, who have H. pylori infection and previous ulcer complications, long-term treatment with a PPI further reduces the risk of complicated ulcers if H. pylori eradication fails or if patients use concomitant non-aspirin NSAIDs. Current data on the gastric safety of COX-2 selective NSAIDs in H. pylori-infected patients are conflicting. Limited data suggest that the gastroduodenal sparing effect of rofecoxib is negated by H. pylori infection in patients who have had prior upper gastrointestinal events. In light of potential cardiovascular risk with COX-2 selective NSAIDs, it is important to weigh the potential adverse effects against the benefits for an individual patient.

A regional audit of the use of COX-2 selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in rheumatology clinics in the West Midlands, in relation to NICE guidelines

OBJECTIVES

Whilst all non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) can cause adverse gastrointestinal events, COX-2-selective inhibitors (COX-2) may have improved gastrointestinal safety compared with non-selective NSAIDs (NSNSAIDs). In 2001, the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) published guidance on the use of the COX-2 agents celecoxib, rofecoxib, meloxicam and etodolac for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and osteoarthritis (OA). This study aimed to audit the appropriateness of NSAID use in relation to NICE guidance in rheumatology out-patients.

METHODS

Questionnaires were completed for all patients attending clinics in 18 rheumatology units in the West Midlands over a 2-week period. Data collected included patient demographics, NSAID type, indications, duration of use (> or =3 months was considered prolonged), and concomitant prescription of corticosteroids, warfarin and gastroprotective agents.

RESULTS

Data were collected on 2846 patients; 1164 (41%) were taking NSAIDs (791 NSNSAIDs, 373 COX-2). Of the 1164 NSAID users, 753 (65%) had a diagnosis of RA or OA (483 NSNSAIDs, 270 COX-2). Overall, 37% of NSAID prescriptions were appropriate. Of the NSNSAID users, 92% had at least one risk factor for adverse gastrointestinal events and were therefore inappropriately treated. Prolonged use (in 89%) and age > or =65 yr (in 23%) were the most frequent risk factors identified. Of the COX-2 users, 97% had one or more risk factors and were appropriately treated. Analysis of the RA/OA subgroup revealed similar findings. Thirty-six per cent were taking NSAIDs appropriately; 97% of NSNSAID use was inappropriate and 97% of COX-2 use was appropriate treatment. In the whole cohort, gastroprotective agents were used in 26% of NSNSAID users, 56% of gastroprotective agents being proton pump inhibitors.

CONCLUSIONS

Ninety-two per cent of patients attending rheumatology clinics who were taking NSNSAIDs should have been prescribed a COX-2-selective agent in relation to NICE guidance. Duration of use and age > or =65 yr emerged numerically as the most important risk factors. Significant numbers of patients taking NSNSAIDs may be at risk from adverse gastrointestinal events and clinicians may wish to review their prescribing patterns. Conversely, 97% of patients taking COX-2 agents were treated appropriately. Although practice overall conformed poorly with NICE guidance, NSAID prescribing also needs to be considered in the context of recent concerns regarding the cardiovascular risks of COX-2 agents.

Treatment costs to prevent or treat upper gastrointestinal adverse events associated with NSAIDs

The widespread use of nonselective NSAIDs and cyclo-oxygenase (COX)-2 inhibitors has a substantial impact on healthcare budgets worldwide. The cost of their gastrointestinal (GI) adverse effects is a major component of their direct cost and has received much attention in the literature. Published studies have often differed in their methodologies and results. It is important for decision makers to understand the reasons for these differences in order to make informed decisions. We conducted a literature review to summarise data that evaluate the direct costs of NSAID-related GI adverse effects worldwide. This resulted in 789 articles from which 29 studies met the inclusion criteria and were fully reviewed. Of these 29, the 9 studies that assessed the cost of COX-2 inhibitors were all based on decision economic models, compared with only 7 of the remaining 20 studies, which assessed the cost of nonselective NSAIDs. In most studies, the perspective was that of the healthcare payer and the costs assessed were reimbursement costs. Costs of GI events almost doubled between regular users and non-users of nonselective NSAIDs and were much higher in high-dose versus low-dose users. The ratio of the total cost of nonselective NSAIDs to their acquisition cost reported in all studies varied from 1.36 to 2.12. Both of these numbers were reported in one single study assessing several different NSAIDs in France. Thus, the GI adverse events attributable to nonselective NSAIDs are substantial, and their costs often exceed the cost of the nonselective NSAID itself.The acquisition cost of the COX-2 inhibitors was the main driver of their total cost. The GI adverse effects with the COX-2 inhibitors added 10-20% to their acquisition cost in North America, while this increase was about 50% in some European countries. Decision analysis models showed that the direct costs of COX-2 inhibitors were lower than those of nonselective NSAIDs in patients at risk of NSAID gastropathy but higher in patients at no to low risk of gastropathy. Thus, from an economic perspective, the healthcare system would benefit from treating patients at risk of NSAID gastropathy with COX-2 inhibitors, but not those at no to low risk.

Minimizing complications from nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs: Cost-effectiveness of competing strategies in varying risk groups

OBJECTIVE

To appraise the cost-effectiveness of competing therapeutic strategies in patient cohorts eligible for aspirin prophylaxis with varying degrees of gastrointestinal (GI) and cardiovascular risk.

METHODS

Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses were performed to evaluate 3 competing strategies for the management of chronic arthritis: 1) a generic nonselective nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug (NSAID(NS)) alone; 2) NSAID(NS) plus a proton pump inhibitor (PPI); and 3) a cyclooxygenase 2-selective inhibitor (coxib) alone. Cost estimates were from a third-party payer perspective. The outcomes were incremental cost per ulcer complication avoided and incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Sensitivity analysis was performed to evaluate the impact of varying patient GI risks and aspirin use.

RESULTS

In average-risk patients, the NSAID(NS) + PPI strategy costs an incremental 45,350 US dollars per additional ulcer complication avoided and 309,666 US dollars per QALY gained compared with the NSAID(NS) strategy. The coxib strategy was less effective and more expensive than the NSAID(NS) + PPI strategy. Sensitivity analysis revealed that the NSAID(NS) + PPI strategy became the dominant approach in patients at high risk for an NSAID adverse event (i.e., patients taking aspirin with > or =1 risk factor for a GI complication).

CONCLUSION

Generic nonselective NSAIDs are most cost-effective in patients at low risk for an adverse event. However, the addition of a PPI to a nonselective NSAID may be the preferred strategy in patients taking aspirin or otherwise at high risk for a GI or cardiovascular adverse event.

Is no NSAID a good NSAID? Approaches to NSAID-associated upper gastrointestinal disease

Upper gastrointestinal disease induced by use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) remains a major problem that affects a broad segment of the population, given the frequent use of these drugs by prescription and over the counter. The emergence of the cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 selective inhibitors (coxibs) has introduced a new option that may result in less upper gastrointestinal disease. Recent large studies have demonstrated this advantage, with the caveat that concurrent use of low-dose aspirin may mitigate this benefit. Unfortunately, the relatively high cost of the coxibs makes them not cost-effective unless confined to certain higher-risk populations. Finally, even newer versions of NSAIDs, such as nitric oxide (NO)-releasing aspirin and the COX-inhibiting NO donors, are potential alternatives to traditional NSAIDs with less upper gastrointestinal toxicity.

Proton-pump inhibitors reduce the risk of uncomplicated peptic ulcer in elderly either acute or chronic users of aspirin/non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs

BACKGROUND

Although administration of gastroprotective drugs may reduce the risk of peptic ulcers associated with the chronic use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or aspirin, no consensus exists as to whether this co-therapy is effective for short-term prevention, particularly in old age.

AIM

To evaluate the risk of peptic ulcer associated with acute and chronic non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or aspirin therapy in elderly subjects, and the influence of antisecretory treatment on this risk.

METHODS

The study included 676 elderly non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or aspirin users and 2435 non-users who consecutively underwent upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. The use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and/or aspirin as well as antisecretory drugs (H2-blockers and proton-pump inhibitors) was evaluated by a structured interview. Diagnosis of gastric and duodenal ulcer as well as Helicobacter pylori infection were carried out by endoscopy and histological examination of the gastric mucosa.

RESULTS

About 47.3% of patients were acute and 52.7% chronic users of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or aspirin. The risk of peptic ulcer, adjusted for age, gender, H. pylori infection and antisecretory drug use was higher in acute (gastric ulcer: odds ratio, OR = 4.47, 95% CI: 3.19-6.26 and duodenal ulcer: OR = 2.39, 95% CI: 1.73-3.31) than chronic users (gastric ulcer: OR = 2.80, 95% CI: 1.97-3.99 and duodenal ulcer: OR = 1.68, 95% CI: 1.22-2.33). Proton-pump inhibitor treatment was associated with a reduced risk of peptic ulcer in both acute (OR = 0.70, 95% CI: 0.24-2.04) and chronic (OR = 0.32, 95% CI: 0.15-0.67) non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs/aspirin users. Conversely, concomitant treatment with H2-blockers was associated with a significantly higher risk of peptic ulcer both in acute (OR = 10.9, 95% CI: 3.87-30.9) and chronic (OR = 6.26, 95% CI: 2.56-15.3) non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs/aspirin users than non-users. Proton-pump inhibitor treatment resulted in an absolute risk reduction of peptic ulcer by 36.6% in acute and 34.6% in chronic non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs/aspirin users; indeed, the number needed to treat to avoid one peptic ulcer in elderly non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs/aspirin users was three both in acute and chronic users.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that proton-pump inhibitor co-treatment is advisable in symptomatic elderly patients who need to be treated with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and/or aspirin for a short period of time.

Risks of clinically significant upper gastrointestinal events with etodolac and naproxen: a historical cohort analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Etodolac is a generic nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID). Previous in vitro studies have shown that etodolac is a selective inhibitor of cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 with selectivity in between that of other COX-2 inhibitors such as celecoxib and rofecoxib. However, there are no outcomes data assessing clinically significant upper gastrointestinal (CSUGI) events with etodolac.

METHODS

A historical cohort study was performed at the Dallas Veterans Affairs Medical Center in which 16,286 veteran patients (5596 patient-years) received etodolac or naproxen during a 3-year period without concurrent use of other ulcerogenic drugs other than low-dose aspirin. The primary outcome was the CSUGI event rate of the etodolac and naproxen groups without concomitant low-dose aspirin.

RESULTS

The incidence of CSUGI events was .78% and .24% for naproxen and etodolac, respectively. In the NSAID-naive subset, the incidence of CSUGI events was .99% and .24% for naproxen and etodolac, respectively. Compared with naproxen, etodolac was associated with a reduction in upper gastrointestinal events, corresponding to an odds ratio of .39 (95% confidence interval, .20-.76; P = .006). Concomitantly used low-dose aspirin increased event rates with naproxen 2-fold and etodolac 9-fold. Hence, there was no significant difference in gastrointestinal event rates between etodolac and naproxen when low-dose aspirin was taken concomitantly.

CONCLUSIONS

Etodolac is a generic COX-2 selective inhibitor that reduces CSUGI events compared with the nonselective NSAID naproxen. However, concomitant use of low-dose aspirin negates the gastrointestinal safety advantages of etodolac.

Predicting the risk for gastrointestinal toxicity in patients taking NSAIDs: the Gastrointestinal Toxicity Survey

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are among the most widely used drugs in the world, but their use is often associated with adverse gastrointestinal (GI) events that may be life threatening in some patients. Development of simple questionnaires for predicting GI events in individuals taking NSAIDs may help to prevent use of these drugs in high-risk patients. The present study was undertaken to test a new questionnaire designed to identify patients at high risk for NSAID-associated GI events--the Gastrointestinal Toxicity Survey (NSAID Induced) (GITS [NI]). In this study, results for GITS (NI) were compared with those for an established questionnaire, the Stanford Calculator of Risk for Events (SCORE), in a small cohort of 400 patients. Feasible generalized least squares (FGLS) and multinomial logistic (MNL) regression were used to perform the comparison. The overall correlation between results for GITS (NI) responses and the total score for the SCORE questionnaire was 0.962 (P < .0001). The agreement between the 2 instruments with respect to their ability to predict the same risk for NSAID-induced GI events was similar for both FGLS and MNL. For 4 levels of risk, the agreement was approximately 80% between the 2 instruments. For 3 levels of risk, the agreement was approximately 90%. This study showed that results obtained with GITS (NI) are highly correlated with those from SCORE and that GITS (NI) may provide physicians with information that will help them avoid administering NSAIDs to patients who are at high risk for adverse GI reactions.

Risk of Upper Gastrointestinal Injury and Events in Patients Treated With Cyclooxygenase (COX)-1/COX-2 Nonsteroidal Antiinflammatory Drugs (NSAIDs), COX-2 Selective NSAIDs, and Gastroprotective Cotherapy

Numerous studies using varying methodologies and outcome measures have examined the gastrointestinal risks of aspirin and nonaspirin nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug (NSAID) use. Despite the large volume of literature, clarity regarding the key risk factors and their quantitative importance is lacking. We performed a comprehensive review of the literature to summarize the incidence of gastrointestinal injury in populations with varying risk characteristics using agents that inhibit both isoforms of cyclooxygenase and those that selectively inhibit only cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2).Although risk estimates vary, the risk of serious gastrointestinal complications in NSAID users is approximately 2.5 to 4.5 times that of nonusers. The risk of NSAID-related gastrointestinal bleeding is augmented by concomitant low-dose aspirin and could approach double the risk of NSAID use alone. The preponderance of evidence shows that the risk of NSAID-related gastrointestinal bleeding is reduced approximately 50% with a coxib as compared with traditional NSAID. The relative risk of hospitalization resulting from upper gastrointestinal bleeding for patients treated with a nonselective NSAID was 4.4 (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.3-8.5) and 1.9 (95% CI, 1.0-3.5) when compared with celecoxib and rofecoxib, respectively. Aspirin increases the risk of NSAID-related gastrointestinal bleeding in patients taking COX-2 selective inhibitors, with odds ratios ranging from 5.8 to 7.7; however, it is unknown whether this risk is greater than the risk from aspirin alone. The risks from both traditional NSAIDs and COX-2 inhibitors are increased in the elderly, patients on anticoagulation, and patients with prior gastrointestinal events.Gastroprotective agents have been found to significantly reduce the risk for gastrointestinal injury in patients receiving NSAID therapy, especially those receiving concurrent low-dose cardioprotective doses of aspirin. Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and misoprostol both reduce the incidence of gastric and duodenal ulcers, as well as recurrence of ulcer complications in patients receiving NSAIDs. The relative risk for gastric ulcers ranged from 0.17 to 0.38, whereas for duodenal ulcers, the range was 0.11 to 0.28. Although misoprostol is slightly more effective in preventing gastric ulcers in these patients, PPIs are better tolerated. Although NSAIDs appear safe in "low-risk" populations, our review suggests that the use of gastroprotective cotherapy should be considered in patients at higher risk of NSAID-related upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

Economic analysis of strategies in the prevention of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug-induced complications in the gastrointestinal tract

BACKGROUND

It is unclear what the best therapeutic approach is in patients who require non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. In clinical practice, choice of prescriptions are often based on drug costs.

AIM

To evaluate costs per upper gastrointestinal bleeding avoided with different prevention strategies.

METHODS

Two major strategies have been considered (coxibs vs. non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs plus generic/brand gastroprotective agent). The number of patients needed to treat to prevent a bleeding event, the cost of the drug and duration of treatment were used to estimate costs.

RESULTS

Based on hospitalization costs of a bleeding event, no therapeutic strategy is cost-effective in patients without risk factors. All strategies (including omeprazole + coxib) are cost-effective in patients with bleeding ulcer history. With other risk factors, all strategies are cost-effective but prevention of events is twice as expensive in patients <75 years of age. No strategy shows superiority unless the cheapest generics are prescribed or a 50% reduction in the incidence of lower gastrointestinal complications with coxibs is confirmed.

CONCLUSIONS

Current prevention strategies to reduce serious non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug-associated gastrointestinal events are only cost-effective in patients with risk factors. No strategy shows superiority, but coxib strategy would be more cost-effective if it were associated with a reduction of events of the lower gastrointestinal tract.