Endoscopic ulcers are neither meaningful nor validated as a surrogate for clinically significant upper gastrointestinal harm

Predictive value of gastrointestinal symptoms and patient risk factors for NSAID-associated gastrointestinal ulcers defined by endoscopy? Insights from a pooled analysis of two naproxen clinical trials

OBJECTIVE

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are widely used to treat pain and rheumatic conditions. To facilitate patient management, we determined the predictive value of gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms and risk factors for the development of NSAID-associated GI injuries.

METHODS

Post-hoc analysis of pooled data from naproxen treatment arms of two identical, randomized, double-blind, controlled phase 3 trials in arthritis patients at risk of GI adverse events. Endoscopic incidence of GI ulcers at baseline, and 1, 3, and 6 months was employed as a surrogate parameter for GI injury. For GI symptom analysis, Severity of Dyspepsia Assessment questionnaire was used. For GI risk factor analysis, the high risk factors: previous GI injury, concomitant selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors or corticosteroids, ulcer history, concomitant low-dose aspirin, and age >65 years were employed.

RESULTS

Data of 426 naproxen patients were analyzed. Distribution of GI symptoms between patients with and without ulcer was similar; about one third of patients developing an ulcer reported no GI pain symptoms. GI symptoms experienced under naproxen treatment were thus not indicative of GI injury. The proportion of patients developing an ulcer increased with the number of risk factors present, however, about a quarter of patients without any of the analyzed risk factors still developed an ulcer.

CONCLUSION

GI symptoms and the number of risk factors are not reliable predictors of NSAID-induced GI injury to decide which patients need gastroprotection and will lead to a large group of patients with GI injuries. A preventive rather than reactive approach should be taken.

Lymphocytic gastritis and its relationships with other gastrointestinal disorders

BACKGROUND

Lymphocytic gastritis (LyG) is a histopathologic finding of unknown clinical relevance.

AIMS

To explore the clinical epidemiology of LyG and its associations with Helicobacter pylori (Hp) infection, coeliac disease (CD) and microscopic colitis (MC) METHODS: In a cross-sectional study, the demographic, clinical, and histopathologic data of patients with and without LyG were compared. Between 2008 and 2020, 1.5 million patients with endoscopic biopsies of the gastroduodenal mucosa were extracted from a database. LyG diagnoses were reviewed to collect detailed information regarding its topographic distribution within the stomach. In a large subgroup of 400 000 patients, tissue samples from the colon were also available.

RESULTS

Of 1 481 336 patients, 341 had LyG with Hp and 2697 had Hp-negative LyG (with an overall prevalence of 0.21%). In patients with Hp-negative LyG, 450 (17%) had corpus-predominant LyG, 1068 antrum-predominant LyG (40%), and 1179 pangastric LyG (44%). LyG was more common in males and in subjects aged 50-70 years. There was no significant ethnic variation. Anaemia, diarrhoea, and weight loss were more common in patients with than without LyG. In 35% and 19% of patients, LyG was associated with CD and MC, respectively. All 72 patients with Hp-positive LyG and 280 of 310 patients with Hp-negative LyG with follow-up biopsies became free of LyG within a year.

CONCLUSIONS

Most cases of LyG may represent a self-limited expression, frequently associated with other GI conditions, such as Hp infection, CD, and MC. In most patients, LyG is likely to resolve within a year after its initial diagnosis.

Systematic review with network meta-analysis: comparative effectiveness and safety of strategies for preventing NSAID-associated gastrointestinal toxicity

BACKGROUND

Many strategies are used to prevent nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-associated gastrointestinal toxicity, but the comparative effectiveness remains unclear.

AIM

To evaluate the comparative effectiveness of clinical strategies for preventing gastrointestinal toxicity induced by NSAIDs.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library (from their inception to May 2015) were searched for randomised controlled trials comparing the risk of gastrointestinal adverse events in patients taking nonselective NSAIDs, selective cyclooxygenase(COX)-2 inhibitors or nonselective NSAIDs/COX-2 inhibitors plus gastroprotective agents [proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), histamine-2 receptor antagonists, misoprostol]. Both pairwise meta-analysis and Bayesian network meta-analysis were performed.

RESULTS

Analyses were based on 82 trials including 125 053 participants. Network meta-analysis demonstrated that selective COX-2 inhibitors + PPIs [Risk ratio (RR), 95% Credible Interval (CrI): ulcer complications 0.07, 0.02-0.18], selective COX-2 inhibitors (RR, 95% CrI: ulcer complications 0.25, 0.15- 0.38; symptomatic ulcer 0.12, 0.04-0.30), nonselective NSAIDs + PPIs (RR, 95% CrI: ulcer complications 0.28, 0.18-0.41; symptomatic ulcer 0.11, 0.04-0.23), nonselective NSAIDs + misoprostol (RR, 95% CrI: ulcer complications 0.47, 0.24-0.81; symptomatic ulcer 0.41, 0.13-1.00) were associated with significantly lower risk of clinical gastrointestinal events compared with nonselective NSAIDs. For all effectiveness endpoints, selective COX-2 inhibitors + PPIs was associated with the lowest absolute event probability and the highest rank, followed by selective COX-2 inhibitors and thirdly by nonselective NSAIDs + PPIs.

CONCLUSION

The combination of selective COX-2 inhibitors plus PPIs provides the best gastrointestinal protection, followed by selective COX-2 inhibitors, and thirdly by nonselective NSAIDs plus PPIs.

Toward More GI-Friendly Anti-Inflammatory Medications

OPINION STATEMENT

Despite the introduction 20-30 years ago of potent inhibitors of gastric acid secretion and anti-inflammatory drugs that preferentially inhibit cyclo-oxygenase (COX)-2, the GI adverse effects of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) remain a significant clinical concern and a considerable economic burden. Inhibitors of acid secretion and selective COX-2 inhibitors reduce damage only in the proximal GI tract (stomach and proximal duodenum), but NSAIDs produce injury and bleeding throughout the GI tract. The small intestinal damage caused by NSAIDs is common, difficult to diagnose, and there are no proven-effective preventative or curative therapies. There is also emerging evidence that proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and histamine H2-receptor antagonists (H2RAs) exacerbate NSAID-induced small intestinal injury. A new approach to solve this clinical problem is to deliver an endogenous, cytoprotective "rescue molecule" together with a COX inhibitor. Hydrogen sulfide (H2S) is a naturally produced, potent protective agent in the GI tract. H2S-releasing NSAIDs have been synthesized and extensively tested in laboratory animals and humans. They exhibit improved anti-inflammatory activity over the parent NSAID, while causing negligible damage in the GI tract.

Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Monodrug Therapies for Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Associated With Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: A Network Meta-analysis

A wide array of drugs are available for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), but the evidence for the comparative effectiveness is controversial.The objective of this study is to evaluate the comparative effectiveness and safety of monodrug therapies for BPH.Data sources are MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library.We included randomized controlled trials that compared α-blockers, 5-alpha reductase inhibitors (5ARIs), muscarinic receptor antagonists (MRAs), phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor (PDE5-Is), or placebo for the treatment of BPH.Comparative effectiveness and safety were pooled by both traditional meta-analysis and network meta-analysis. Summary effect size was calculated as mean difference (MD) and relative risk (RR), together with the 95% confidence intervals (CIs).This study included 58,548 participants from 124 trials in total. When compared with placebo, α-blockers, 5ARIs, and PDE5-Is reduced International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) by -1.35 to -3.67 points and increased peak urinary flow rate (PUF) by -0.02 to 1.95 mL/s, with doxazosin (IPSS: MD, -3.67[-4.33 to -3.02]; PUF: MD, 1.95[1.61 to 2.30]) and terazosin (IPSS: MD, -3.37 [-4.24 to -2.50]; PUF: MD, 1.21[0.74 to 1.66]) showing the greatest improvement. The improvement in the IPSS was comparable among tamsulosin, alfuzosin, naftopidil, silodosin, dutasteride, sildenafil, vardenafil, and tadalafil. The incidence of total adverse events and withdraws due to adverse events were generally comparable among various agents.In conclusion, α-blockers, 5ARIs, and PDE5-Is are effective for BPH, with doxazosin and terazosin appearing to be the most effective agents. Drug therapies for BPH are generally safe and well-tolerated, with no major difference regarding the overall safety profile.

Fixed-dose ibuprofen/famotidine: a review of its use to reduce the risk of gastric and duodenal ulcers in patients requiring NSAID therapy

A fixed-dose combination of the nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) ibuprofen and the histamine H(2) receptor antagonist famotidine (ibuprofen/famotidine; DUEXIS(®)) is now available for the symptomatic treatment of arthritic symptoms and to reduce the risk of upper gastrointestinal (GI) ulcers in patients who require ibuprofen therapy. The gastroprotective efficacy of oral ibuprofen/famotidine 800/26.6 mg three times daily in patients requiring NSAID therapy for inflammatory conditions and/or pain was evaluated in two 24-week, well-designed trials (REDUCE-1 and -2). According to the post-adjudication analysis of these studies, ibuprofen/famotidine significantly reduced the life table estimated rate of gastric ulcers (primary endpoint of REDUCE-1) but not upper GI ulcers (i.e. gastric or duodenal ulcers) [primary endpoint of REDUCE-2] compared with ibuprofen alone. When life table estimated rates of secondary endpoints were assessed, significantly fewer recipients of the fixed-dose combination than of ibuprofen alone developed upper GI ulcers or duodenal ulcers in REDUCE-1, whereas the between-group difference in gastric ulcers and duodenal ulcers was considered to be nonsignificant in REDUCE-2 because of hierarchical testing. However, in a prespecified pooled analysis of REDUCE-1 and -2, the rate of upper GI ulcers as well as each of the upper GI ulcer components was significantly lower with ibuprofen/famotidine than with ibuprofen. Ibuprofen/famotidine was generally well tolerated, with a tolerability profile consistent with those established for the individual agents.

Risk factor profiles, drug usage, and prevalence of aspirin-associated gastroduodenal injuries among high-risk cardiovascular Japanese patients: the results from the MAGIC study

BACKGROUND

Low-dose aspirin is widely used for the prevention of cardiovascular events. The prevalence of gastroduodenal injuries and the risk factor profile including gastroprotective drug therapy needs to be clarified in Japanese patients taking daily aspirin for cardioprotection.

METHODS

This Management of Aspirin-induced Gastro-Intestinal Complications (MAGIC) study was conducted with a prospective nationwide, multicenter, real-world registry of Japanese patients at high-risk of cardiovascular diseases who were taking regular aspirin (75-325 mg) for 1 month or more. All patients underwent endoscopic examination for detection of gastroduodenal ulcer and mucosal erosion. The risk factor profiles including the concurrent drug therapy were compared for those patients with gastroduodenal problems and those without.

RESULTS

Gastroduodenal ulcer and erosion were detected in 6.5, and 29.2% of the 1,454 patients receiving aspirin, respectively. H. pylori infection was associated with an increased risk for ulcer: OR 1.83 (1.18-2.88 p = 0.0082). Risk of erosion was lower with enteric-coated aspirin than with buffered aspirin: odds ratio (OR) 0.47 (0.32-0.70, p = 0.0002). Patients receiving proton pump inhibitors had lower risks for both gastroduodenal ulcer and erosion: OR 0.34 (0.15-0.68, p = 0.0050) and 0.32 (0.22-0.46, p < 0.0001), respectively. However, those receiving histamine 2-receptor antagonists had reduced risks for erosion but not for ulcer: OR 0.49 (0.36-0.68, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Gastroduodenal ulcer and erosion are common in Japanese patients taking low dose aspirin for cardioprotection. Proton pump inhibitors reduce the risk of gastroduodenal mucosal injury.

Endoscopic ulcers as a surrogate marker of NSAID-induced mucosal damage

The characteristic of a biomarker that makes it a useful surrogate is the ability to identify a high risk of clinically important benefits or harms occurring in the future. A number of definitions or descriptions of surrogate definition have been put forward. Most recently the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences in the USA has put forward an evaluation scheme for biomarkers, looking at validation (assay performance), qualification (assessment of evidence), and utilisation (the context in which the surrogate is to be used). This paper examines the example of endoscopy as a surrogate marker of NSAID-induced mucosal damage using the Institute of Medicine criteria. The article finds extensive evidence that the detection of endoscopic ulcers is a valid marker. The process of qualification documents abundant evidence showing that endoscopic ulcers and serious upper gastrointestinal damage are influenced in the same direction and much the same magnitude by a variety of risk factors and interventions. Criticisms of validation and qualification for endoscopic ulcers have been examined, and dismissed. Context is the key, and in the context of serious NSAID-induced upper gastrointestinal harm, endoscopic ulcers represent a useful surrogate. Generalisability beyond this context is not considered.

Mechanisms, prevention and clinical implications of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug-enteropathy

This article reviews the latest developments in understanding the pathogenesis, detection and treatment of small intestinal damage and bleeding caused by nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). With improvements in the detection of NSAID-induced damage in the small intestine, it is now clear that this injury and the associated bleeding occurs more frequently than that occurring in the stomach and duodenum, and can also be regarded as more dangerous. However, there are no proven-effective therapies for NSAID-enteropathy, and detection remains a challenge, particularly because of the poor correlation between tissue injury and symptoms. Moreover, recent studies suggest that commonly used drugs for protecting the upper gastrointestinal tract (i.e., proton pump inhibitors) can significantly worsen NSAID-induced damage in the small intestine. The pathogenesis of NSAID-enteropathy is complex, but studies in animal models are shedding light on the key factors that contribute to ulceration and bleeding, and are providing clues to the development of effective therapies and prevention strategies. Novel NSAIDs that do not cause small intestinal damage in animal models offer hope for a solution to this serious adverse effect of one of the most widely used classes of drugs.

Rofecoxib and clinically significant upper and lower gastrointestinal events revisited based on documents from recent litigation

INTRODUCTION

On the basis of published data, it is widely believed and cited that rofecoxib use is associated with approximately a 50% reduction in significant gastrointestinal (GI) complications such as bleeding.

METHODS

Data made available as part of litigation, including the Vioxx Gastrointestinal Outcomes Research trial and an Alzheimer's study, allow a reassessment of the reported benefits of rofecoxib in terms of a significant reduction in complicated GI events and in lower GI bleeding.

RESULTS

During the review process of the Vioxx Gastrointestinal Outcomes Research study, it was suggested that rofecoxib might have little benefit, with regard to GI toxicity, for patients with rheumatoid arthritis not treated with corticosteroids. Reanalysis of the original Merck data set showed 9 complicated confirmed events in the rofecoxib group compared with 10 in the naproxen group among corticosteroid nonusers and 7 versus 27 among corticosteroid users so that the difference between rofecoxib and naproxen in the occurrence of confirmed complicated perforations, ulcers or bleeds seemed to be entirely because of the effects within corticosteroid users. The claim that serious lower GI events were 54% lower with the use of the selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor rofecoxib was stated to be based on an assessment blinded to treatment allocation. In fact, the choice did not represent the original blinded analysis that showed a nonsignificant difference, but rather was based on an assessment after treatment allocation was disclosed.

CONCLUSION

Examination and reanalysis of unpublished data regarding rofecoxib has failed to confirm a safety advantage of rofecoxib over traditional nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in terms of complicated upper or lower GI events.

Clinical trial: endoscopic evaluation of naproxen etemesil, a naproxen prodrug, vs. naproxen - a proof-of-concept, randomized, double-blind, active-comparator study

BACKGROUND

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are associated with upper gastrointestinal mucosal injury. Naproxen etemesil is a lipophilic, non-acidic, inactive prodrug of naproxen that is hydrolysed to pharmacologically active naproxen once absorbed. We hypothesized that with lesser topical exposure to naproxen from the prodrug, there would be reduced gastroduodenal mucosal injury compared with naproxen.

AIM

To compare the degree of endoscopic mucosal damage of naproxen etemesil vs. naproxen.

METHODS

This multicentre, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy trial compared oral naproxen etemesil 1200 mg twice daily (n = 61) with naproxen 500 mg twice daily (n = 59) for 7.5 days in 120 healthy subjects (45-70 years; mean 51 years; 58% female) with baseline total modified gastroduodenal Lanza score ≤ 2 (no erosions/ulcers) on endoscopy. The primary endpoint was mean total modified gastroduodenal Lanza score on day 7. A secondary endpoint was incidence of gastric ulcers.

RESULTS

The day 7 mean total modified gastroduodenal Lanza score was 2.8 ± 1.7 for naproxen etemesil vs. 3.5 ± 2.0 for naproxen (P = 0.03), and significantly fewer naproxen etemesil-treated subjects (3.3%) developed gastric ulcers compared with naproxen-treated subjects (15.8%) (P = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

In this first proof-of-concept study, naproxen etemesil was associated with significantly lower gastroduodenal mucosal injury compared with naproxen after 7 days of exposure (

CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER

NCT00750243).

Clinical trial: the incidence of NSAID-associated endoscopic gastric ulcers in patients treated with PN 400 (naproxen plus esomeprazole magnesium) vs. enteric-coated naproxen alone

BACKGROUND

Gastroprotective co-therapy may reduce the risk of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-associated gastric ulcers, but adherence is suboptimal.

AIM

To compare the incidence of gastric ulcers with PN 400 [enteric-coated (EC) naproxen 500 mg and immediate-release esomeprazole 20 mg], or EC naproxen.

METHODS

Two randomized, double-blind, multicentre studies (PN400-301, PN400-302). Patients [stratified by low-dose aspirin (< or =325 mg) use] aged > or =50 years or 18-49 years with a history of ulcer, received PN 400 BID (301, n = 218; 302, n = 210) or EC naproxen 500 mg BID (301, n = 216; 302, n = 210) for 6 months. The primary endpoint was the cumulative incidence of endoscopic gastric ulcers.

RESULTS

The cumulative incidence of gastric ulcers was significantly lower with PN 400 vs. EC naproxen (301: 4.1% vs. 23.1%, P < 0.001; 302: 7.1% vs. 24.3%, P < 0.001). PN 400 was associated with a lower combined incidence of gastric ulcers vs. EC naproxen in low-dose aspirin users (n = 201) (3.0% vs. 28.4%, P < 0.001) and non-users (n = 653) (6.4% vs. 22.2%, P < 0.001). The incidence of, and discontinuations due to, upper gastrointestinal (UGI) AEs was significantly lower with PN 400 relative to EC naproxen (P < 0.01, both studies).

CONCLUSIONS

PN 400 significantly reduces the incidence of gastric ulcers, regardless of low-dose aspirin use, in at-risk patients, and is associated with improved UGI tolerability relative to EC naproxen (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00527782).

Prevention of chronic NSAID induced upper gastrointestinal toxicity

BACKGROUND

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are important agents in the management of arthritic and inflammatory conditions, and are among the most frequently prescribed medications in North America and Europe. However, there is overwhelming evidence linking these agents to a variety of gastrointestinal (GI) toxicities.

OBJECTIVES

To review the effectiveness of common interventions for the prevention of NSAID induced upper GI toxicity.

SEARCH STRATEGY

A literature search was conducted, according to the Cochrane methodology for identification of randomized controlled trials in electronic databases, including MEDLINE from 1966 to January 2000, Current Contents for 6 months prior to January 2000, Embase to Febuary 1999, and a search of the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register from 1973 to 1999. Recent conference proceedings were reviewed and content experts and companies were contacted.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) of prostaglandin analogues (PA), H2-receptor antagonists (H2RA) or proton pump inhibitors (PPI) for the prevention of chronic NSAID induced upper GI toxicity were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two independent reviewers extracted data regarding population characteristics, study design, methodological quality and number of patients with endoscopic ulcers, ulcer complications, symptoms, overall drop-outs, drop outs due to symptoms. Dichotomous data was pooled using Revman V3.1. Heterogeneity was evaluated using a chi square test.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-three RCTs met the inclusion criteria. All doses of misoprostol significantly reduced the risk of endoscopic ulcers. Misoprostol 800 ug/day was superior to 400 ug/day for the prevention of endoscopic gastric ulcers (RR=0.18, and RR=0. 38 respectively, p=0.0055). A dose response relationship was not seen with duodenal ulcers. Misoprostol caused diarrhea at all doses, although significantly more at 800ug/day than 400ug/day (p=0.0012). Misoprostol was the only prophylactic agent documented to reduce ulcer complications. Standard doses of H2RAs were effective at reducing the risk of endoscopic duodenal (RR=0.24; 95% CI: 0.10-0. 57) but not gastric ulcers(RR=0.73; 95% CI:0.50-1.09). Both double dose H2RAs and PPIs were effective at reducing the risk of endoscopic duodenal and gastric ulcers (RR=0.44; 95% CI:0.26-0.74 and RR=0.37;95% CI;0.27-0.51 respectively for gastric ulcer), and were better tolerated than misoprostol.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Misoprostol, PPIs, and double dose H2RAs are effective at preventing chronic NSAID related endoscopic gastric and duodenal ulcers. Lower doses of misoprostol are less effective and are still associated with diarrhea. Only Misoprostol 800ug/day has been directly shown to reduce the risk of ulcer complications.