Celecoxib versus omeprazole and diclofenac in patients with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis (CONDOR): a randomised trial

Over-the-counter ibuprofen and risk of gastrointestinal bleeding complications: a systematic literature review

BACKGROUND

Exposure to over-the-counter (OTC) ibuprofen and other OTC non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) is substantial. Although the literature on gastrointestinal (GI) safety of NSAID therapy is extensive, the risk profiles of OTC and prescription dosing are seldom separated, and few studies provide risks specific to OTC ibuprofen.

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a literature review to evaluate the risk of GI bleeding events related to OTC ibuprofen use.

METHODS

Published clinical trials, observational studies, and meta-analyses of OTC ibuprofen use, defined as up to 1200 mg/day or stated as 'over the counter,' reporting endpoints of incidence rates and proportions of GI bleeding events (e.g., GI bleeding-related hospitalizations and deaths) were identified via MEDLINE through 2010. Data from these studies were summarized.

RESULTS

Twenty studies (nine observational, ten clinical trials, one meta-analysis) reporting incidence rates and proportions of a GI bleeding-related event associated with OTC or OTC-specific doses of ibuprofen were included. The frequency of a GI-related hospitalization was <0.2% for patients on OTC-comparable doses. Incidence rates among those using OTC-comparable doses ranged from 0 to 3.19 per 1000 patient-years. The incidence of a GI bleeding-related event increased with age and the use of concomitant medications, and there was a general, though not always statistically significant, ibuprofen dose-response relationship. The relative risk of any GI bleeding-related event ranged from 1.1 to 2.4 for users of OTC-specific doses of ibuprofen compared to non-users.

CONCLUSIONS

Studies reported low incidence of GI bleeding events with use of OTC ibuprofen. Few published studies that specifically investigated OTC ibuprofen use were identified. Varying methodologies and definitions of exposure and outcomes prevented direct comparison of many results. Only studies that used the methods herein described were identified. Further research evaluating the risk of GI bleeding events in patients taking OTC-specific ibuprofen use may be useful.

A comparison of the therapeutic efficacy of diclofenac in osteoarthritis: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

Diclofenac is a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) commonly prescribed for pain relief in osteoarthritis (OA). The relative efficacy of diclofenac compared to other pain relief medications used in OA (e.g., alternative NSAIDs, cyclooxygenase type 2 [COX-2] inhibitors) is uncertain. The objective of this systematic review is to compare the current evidence on efficacy of diclofenac versus other pain relief medications.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

A systematic literature search was carried out for randomised, well controlled clinical trials comparing the efficacy of diclofenac with other pain relief medications in OA (reviews, meta-analyses and n = 1 trials were excluded). The databases searched were EMBASE, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, and Ovid MEDLINE Daily Update. Articles were included from 1999 onwards. Retrieved articles were discussed by comparator medication.

RESULTS

Of the 263 articles identified in the literature search, 37 were eventually included in this review. These were comparisons with the selective COX-2 inhibitors etoricoxib, celecoxib, lumiracoxib and rofecoxib; comparisons with the NSAIDs aceclofenac, dexketoprofen, etodolac, lornoxicam, meloxicam, nabumetone and nimesulide; and comparisons to acetaminophen, tramadol, diacerein, oxaceprol, oral hydrolytic enzyme therapies, Chinese herbal remedies and castor oil supplementation. Overall, in the majority of the trials at therapeutic doses diclofenac provided similar efficacy to comparator treatments; and in general diclofenac was able to support its position as a reference medication of choice for OA trials.

CONCLUSIONS

The efficacy of diclofenac is largely unchallenged in that it remains as effective as newer pain relief medications employed in OA. A review of the available data demonstrates that diclofenac continues to provide physicians with a benchmark pharmacological treatment for OA.

The cost-effectiveness of celecoxib vs diclofenac in the treatment of osteoarthritis in the UK; an update to the NICE model using data from the CONDOR trial

OBJECTIVES

The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) health economic model for assessing the cost-effectiveness of celecoxib plus a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) compared to diclofenac plus PPI in the treatment of osteoarthritis has been updated using new adverse event (AE) risks from the CONDOR trial. In light of this new information, this study aimed to evaluate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of celecoxib plus PPI compared to diclofenac plus PPI.

METHODS

NICE developed a health economic model as part of their 2008 multiple technology assessment of treatments for osteoarthritis. The model was adapted for this study to update the relative risks of adverse events, using data from the CONDOR trial.

RESULTS

Using the AE data from the CLASS trial alone, celecoxib plus PPI has an ICER of £9538 per QALY when compared to diclofenac plus PPI. When the AE data from CONDOR alone is used, this ICER decreases to £4773 per QALY. Using the pooled data from both trials, celecoxib plus PPI has an ICER of £9377 per QALY compared to diclofenac plus PPI.

DISCUSSION

The results suggest that when new AE risks are used, celecoxib plus PPI remains a cost-effective treatment for OA when compared to diclofenac plus PPI. However, this analysis is limited by the short time horizon, and additional AEs that have not been considered.

A turbulent decade for NSAIDs: update on current concepts of classification, epidemiology, comparative efficacy, and toxicity

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) represent a diverse class of drugs and are among the most commonly used analgesics for arthritic pain worldwide, though long-term use is associated with a spectrum of adverse effects. The introduction of cyclooxygenase-2-selective NSAIDs early in the last decade offered an alternative to traditional NSAIDs with similar efficacy and improved gastrointestinal tolerability; however, emerging concerns about cardiovascular safety resulted in the withdrawal of two agents (rofecoxib and valdecoxib) in the mid-2000s and, subsequently, in an overall reduction in NSAID use. It is now understood that all NSAIDs are associated with some varying degree of gastrointestinal and cardiovascular risk. Guidelines still recommend their use, but little is known of how patients use these agents. While strategies and guidelines aimed at reducing NSAID-associated complications exist, there is a need for evidence-based algorithms combining cardiovascular and gastrointestinal factors that can be used to aid treatment decisions at an individual patient level.

Acid-NSAID/aspirin interaction in peptic ulcer disease

The presence of gastric acid plays a critical role in the mechanisms of NSAIDs/aspirin-associated gastric and duodenal mucosal injury and ulceration. The role of gastric acid and its relationship to NSAIDs/aspirin in mucosal damage, ulcer and ulcer complications continues to be an important concern because of the increasing worldwide use of NSAIDs and aspirin. Acid suppression continues to be an important prevention strategy for NSAID-associated gastric and duodenal ulcer and ulcer complications. While a coxib or an NSAID and PPI in combination are considered to have comparable safety profiles, the evidence from direct comparisons in high-risk patients is limited, and the cardiovascular safety of coxibs and NSAIDs remains a concern especially in patients with a high risk of cardiovascular disease. An evaluation of individual gastrointestinal and cardiovascular risks and benefits, selection of the most appropriate NSAID and dose for each particular patient should always be emphasized. Twice daily PPI is more appropriate to protect a patient who is taking NSAIDs twice daily. PPI co-therapy is still recommended in patients receiving dual antiplatelet treatment, although conflicting results have been reported about adverse drug interactions between PPIs and clopidogrel.

Epidemiology and role of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs in causing gastrointestinal bleeding

This article outlines the epidemiology and role of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in causing gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding. The morbidity and mortality associated with NSAID-induced GI bleeding are discussed, and the mechanisms of NSAID-related GI injury, the potency of various NSAIDs, new NSAIDs associated with a decrease in GI pathology, dual-acting antiinflammatory drugs, hydrogen sulfide-releasing NSAIDs, lipoxygenase/cyclooxygenase, phospholipid NSAIDs, and the comprehensive effects of NSAIDs on the GI tract are described.

Meta-analysis: cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors are no better than nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs with proton pump inhibitors in regard to gastrointestinal adverse events in osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVE

To compare cyclooxygenase-2 (Cox-2) inhibitors alone with NSAIDs plus proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) in preventing gastrointestinal adverse events: upper gastrointestinal (UGI) adverse events and gastrointestinal symptoms in Osteoarthritis and Rheumatoid arthritis.

METHODS

PubMed, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, ISI Web of Knowledge, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, and reference lists of relevant papers for articles published 1990-2010.12 were searched. The related data matching standards set for this study were extracted. Statistical analyses were carried out using RevMan (5.0) software.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis of six randomized controlled trials with a total of 6219 patients revealed that there was no difference in the UGI adverse events between Cox-2 inhibitors and nonselective NSAIDs with concurrent use of PPIs [relative risk (RR) 0.61, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.34-1.09]. There was no significant difference in gastrointestinal symptoms (RR 1.10, 95% CI: 0.88-1.39) and the cardiovascular adverse events (RR 1.67, 95% CI: 0.78-3.59) between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Cox-2 inhibitors are no better than nonselective NSAIDs with PPIs in regard to UGI adverse events, gastrointestinal symptoms and cardiovascular adverse events in Osteoarthritis and Rheumatoid arthritis. On the basis of the current evidence and the combined wishes of the patient, clinicians should carefully consider and weigh both gastrointestinal and cardiovascular risk before selecting NSAID plus PPIs or Cox-2 inhibitors.

Haemoglobin decreases in NSAID users over time: an analysis of two large outcome trials

BACKGROUND

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) have been associated with clinically significant decreases in haemoglobin dependent and independent of acute bleeding events.

AIM

To evaluate the incidence and time to a clinically meaningful decrease in haemoglobin in two double-blind, prospective randomised clinical trials comparing NSAIDs in patients with osteoarthritis (OA) or rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

In CLASS, patients with OA/RA who were aged ≥ 18 years and required continuous NSAID treatment were included; patients who were Helicobacter pylori positive and/or using aspirin were not excluded. In contrast, in the CONDOR trial, comparing celecoxib alone to diclofenac sustained release (plus omeprazole), patients were aged ≥ 60 years or ≥ 18 years with a history of gastroduodenal ulcer and were H. pylori negative; aspirin or other anti-platelet users were excluded. To make a parallel post hoc analysis we limited our study to 6 months and the populations to only the non-aspirin users in CLASS and those patients receiving either celecoxib or diclofenac. A decrease in haemoglobin of ≥ 2 g/dL defined the primary end point.

RESULTS

At 6 months, in the CLASS and CONDOR trials, 1.9% and 2.0% of patients treated with celecoxib and 3.3% and 5.7% of patients treated with diclofenac developed a ≥ 2 g/dL decrease in haemoglobin, respectively, [CLASS: odds ratio (OR) 1.80 (95% confidence interval (CI), 1.22-2.65) and CONDOR: OR 2.93 (95% CI, 2.06-4.15), respectively].

CONCLUSION

IN these two large, independent trials, clinically-meaningful decreases in haemoglobin ≥ 2 g/dL occurred in a relatively similar fashion over time despite differences in trial designs.

Combination therapy versus celecoxib, a single selective COX-2 agent, to reduce gastrointestinal toxicity in arthritic patients: patient and cost-effectiveness considerations

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are widely used for treating symptoms of rheumatologic diseases, such as osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis. Knowing their side effects and the way to minimize them is a medical responsibility. To reduce NSAID-related risk, clinicians should choose a gastroprotective strategy. This may include coprescribing a traditional NSAID with a proton pump inhibitor or a high-dose histamine 2-receptor antagonist (H₂RA), or using a cyclo-oxygenase (COX)-2 selective inhibitor or a COX-2 with a proton pump inhibitor. Assessing each patient’s risk (cardiovascular and gastrointestinal) is a priority in order to decide the best intervention to minimize toxicity. In this article, we review some of the common interventions for reducing the gastrointestinal side effects of NSAIDs.

Exposure to cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors and risk of cancer: nested case-control studies

BACKGROUND

Selective cyclooxygenase-2 (COX2) inhibitors are widely used as analgesics and it is unclear whether its long-term use affects cancer risk.

METHODS

A series of nested case-control studies using the QResearch primary care database. Associations of COX2 inhibitor use with risk of all cancers and 10 common site-specific cancers were estimated using conditional logistic regression adjusted for comorbidities, smoking status, socioeconomic status, and use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, aspirin and statins.

RESULTS

A total of 88,125 cancers, diagnosed between 1998 and 2008, matched with up to five controls, were analysed. Use of COX2 inhibitors for more than a year was associated with a significantly increased risk of breast cancer (odds ratio (OR) 1.24, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08-1.42) and haematological malignancies (OR 1.38, 95% CI 1.12-1.69) and a decreased risk of colorectal cancer (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.63-0.92). There were no other significant associations.

CONCLUSION

Prolonged use of COX2 inhibitors was associated with an increased risk of breast and haematological cancers and decreased risk of colorectal cancer. These findings need to be confirmed using other data sources.

Osteoarthritis: an update with relevance for clinical practice

Osteoarthritis is thought to be the most prevalent chronic joint disease. The incidence of osteoarthritis is rising because of the ageing population and the epidemic of obesity. Pain and loss of function are the main clinical features that lead to treatment, including non-pharmacological, pharmacological, and surgical approaches. Clinicians recognise that the diagnosis of osteoarthritis is established late in the disease process, maybe too late to expect much help from disease-modifying drugs. Despite efforts over the past decades to develop markers of disease, still-imaging procedures and biochemical marker analyses need to be improved and possibly extended with more specific and sensitive methods to reliably describe disease processes, to diagnose the disease at an early stage, to classify patients according to their prognosis, and to follow the course of disease and treatment effectiveness. In the coming years, a better definition of osteoarthritis is expected by delineating different phenotypes of the disease. Treatment targeted more specifically at these phenotypes might lead to improved outcomes.

Osteoarthritis year 2010 in review: pharmacological therapies

This review highlights a selection of original studies related to the treatment of osteoarthritis in 2010.

Antiplatelet drug interactions

Both laboratory studies in healthy volunteers and clinical studies have suggested adverse interactions between antiplatelet drugs and other commonly used medications. Interactions described include those between aspirin and ibuprofen, aspirin and other nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and the thienopyridine, clopidogrel, and drugs inhibiting CYP2C19, notably the proton pump inhibitors (PPI) omeprazole and esomeprazole. Other interactions between thienopyridines and CYP3A4/5 have also been reported for statins and calcium channel blockers. The ibuprofen/aspirin interaction is thought to be caused by ibuprofen blocking the access of aspirin to platelet cyclo-oxygenase. The thienopyridine interactions are caused by inhibition of microsomal enzymes that metabolize these pro-drugs to their active metabolites. We review the evidence for these interactions, assess their clinical importance and suggest strategies of how to deal with them in clinical practice. We conclude that ibuprofen is likely to interact with aspirin and reduce its anti-platelet action particularly in those patients who take ibuprofen chronically. This interaction is of greater relevance to those patients at high cardiovascular risk. A sensible strategy is to advise users of aspirin to avoid chronic ibuprofen or to ingest aspirin at least 2 h prior to ibuprofen. Clearly the use of NSAIDs that do not interact in this way is preferred. For the clopidogrel CYP2C19 and CYP3A4/5 interactions, there is good evidence that these interactions occur. However, there is less good evidence to support the clinical importance of these interactions. Again, a reasonable strategy is to avoid the chronic use of drugs that inhibit CYP2C19, notably PPIs, in subjects taking clopidogrel and use high dose H2 antagonists instead. Finally, anti-platelet agents probably interact with other drugs that affect platelet function such as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, and clinicians should probably judge patients taking such combination therapies as at high risk for bleeding.

NSAID-induced gastrointestinal and cardiovascular injury

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review recent publications related to NSAID-induced adverse effects on the gastrointestinal and cardiovascular systems.

RECENT FINDINGS

This paper explores novel mechanisms of NSAID-induced gastrointestinal injury, highlights new composite endpoints evaluating adverse events of NSAIDs in the entire gastrointestinal tract, and combines published data to establish evidence-based guidance on the best use of NSAIDs to achieve optimal clinical outcomes whilst minimizing cardiovascular and gastrointestinal injuries.

SUMMARY

NSAIDs can induce peptic ulcers via epithelial cell membrane disruption and the renin angiotensin system, independent of the cyclooxygenase (COX) pathways, whereas mast cells and bile acid sensors may have a protective effect on NSAID-induced gastrointestinal damage. Patients with arthritis treated with a COX-2 inhibitor are less likely to develop upper and lower gastrointestinal complications than those who are treated with diclofenac plus a proton pump inhibitor (PPI). PPI therapy is recommended in patients receiving dual antiplatelet treatment but observational studies show that clopidogrel users taking PPIs have an increased risk of cardiovascular events. Until further reliable controlled data are available, this potential, but currently unproven, clinical interaction can be minimized by widely separating the dosing of clopidogrel and PPI. Histamine-2 antagonists may be an alternative to PPI for the prevention of peptic ulcers in patients taking low-dose aspirin.

Jekyll and Hyde: the role of the microenvironment on the progression of cancer

It is now recognized that the host microenvironment undergoes extensive change during the evolution and progression of cancer. This involves the generation of cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAFs), which, through release of growth factors and cytokines, lead to enhanced angiogenesis, increased tumour growth and invasion. It has also been demonstrated that CAFs may modulate the cancer stem cell (CSC) phenotype, which has therapeutic implications. The altered fibroblast phenotype also contributes to the development of an altered extracellular matrix (ECM), with synthesis of ECM isoforms rarely found in normal tissues, including tenascin-C isoforms and the fibronectin EDA isoform. There is also emerging evidence of how the tensile strength of the tumour-associated ECM may be modified and lead to altered signalling in tumour cells. The hypoxic environment of the tumour stimulates angiogenesis and also impacts on other aspects of cell signalling, including the c-met pathway and lysyl oxidase-mediated signalling, which can directly promote tumour cell invasion. The inflammatory infiltrate associated with many solid tumours also modulates tumour function, having both anti- and pro-tumour effects. All of these components of the microenvironment provide potential targets for therapeutic attack, with a number of molecules already in clinical trials. It is also becoming evident that characterizing the tumour microenvironment can provide important prognostic and predictive information about tumours, independent of the tumour cell phenotype.

Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug-related injury to the gastrointestinal tract: clinical picture, pathogenesis, and prevention

Increasing life expectancy in developed countries has led to a growing prevalence of arthritic disorders, which has been accompanied by increasing prescriptions for nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). These are the most widely used agents for musculoskeletal and arthritic conditions. Although NSAIDs are effective, their use is associated with a broad spectrum of adverse reactions in the liver, kidney, cardiovascular system, skin, and gut. Gastrointestinal (GI) side effects are the most common. The dilemma for the physician prescribing NSAIDs is, therefore, to maintain the antiinflammatory and analgesic benefits, while reducing or preventing GI side effects. The challenge is to develop safer NSAIDs by shifting from a focus on GI toxicity to the increasingly more appreciated cardiovascular toxicity.