Complementary studies of the gastrointestinal safety of the cyclo-oxygenase-2-selective inhibitor etoricoxib

Clinical Guidelines for Drug-Related Peptic Ulcer, 2020 Revised Edition

Korean guidelines for nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-induced peptic ulcer were previously developed in 2009 with the collaboration of the Korean College of Helicobacter and Upper Gastrointestinal Research and Korean Society of Gastroenterology. However, the previous guidelines were based mainly upon a review of the relevant literature and expert opinion. Therefore, the guidelines need to be revised. We organized a guideline Development Committee for drug-related peptic ulcer under the auspices of the Korean College of Helicobacter and Upper Gastrointestinal Research in 2017 and developed nine statements, including four for NSAIDs, three for aspirin and other antiplatelet agents, and two for anticoagulants through a de novo process founded on evidence-based medicine that included a literature search and a meta-analysis, A consensus was reached through the application of the modified Delphi method. The primary target of these guidelines is adult patients undergoing long-term treatment with NSAIDs, aspirin or other antiplatelet agents and anticoagulants. The revised guidelines reflect the expert consensus and is intended to assist clinicians in the management and prevention of drug-induced peptic ulcer and associated conditions.

[Clinical Guidelines for Drug-induced Peptic Ulcer, 2020 Revised Edition]

The Korean guidelines for nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-induced peptic ulcers were previously developed under co-work with the Korean College of Helicobacter and Upper Gastrointestinal Research and Korean Society of Gastroenterology at 2009. On the other hand, the previous guidelines were based mainly on a literature review and expert opinions. Therefore, the guidelines need to be revised. In this study, a guideline development committee for drug-induced peptic ulcers was organized under the Korean College of Helicobacter and Upper Gastrointestinal Research in 2017. Nine statements were developed, including four for NSAID, three for aspirin and other antiplatelet agents, and two for anticoagulants through de novo processes based on evidence-based medicine, such as a literature search, meta-analysis, and the consensus was established using the modified Delphi method. The primary target of this guideline was adult patients taking long-term NSAIDs, aspirin, or other antiplatelet agent and anticoagulants. The revised guidelines reflect the consensus of expert opinions and are intended to assist relevant clinicians in the management and prevention of drug-induced peptic ulcers and associated conditions.

Potential Strategies in the Prevention of Nonsteroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs-Associated Adverse Effects in the Lower Gastrointestinal Tract

With the increasing use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), the incidence of lower gastrointestinal (GI) complications is expected to increase. However, unlike upper GI complications, the burden, pathogenesis, prevention and treatment of NSAID-associated lower GI complications remain unclear. To date, no cost-effective and safe protective agent has been developed that can completely prevent or treat NSAID-related lower GI injuries. Selective COX-2 inhibitors, misoprostol, intestinal microbiota modulation, and some mucoprotective agents have been reported to show protective effects on NSAID-induced lower GI injuries. This review aims to provide an overview of the current evidence on the prevention of NSAID-related lower GI injuries.

Etoricoxib-loaded bio-adhesive hybridized polylactic acid-based nanoparticles as an intra-articular injection for the treatment of osteoarthritis

Osteoarthritis is a major problem in elder people. Etoricoxib-loaded bio-adhesive hybridized nanoparticles were prepared using polylactic acid (PLA) and chitosan hydrochloride (CS-HCl) in presence of Captex®200 as a liquid oil, polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) and Tween®80 as surfactants. The study aimed to present a new intra-articular treatment of osteoarthritis with anti-inflammatory as well as bone rebuilding effects. Hybridized nanoparticles were fabricated applying the emulsion solvent evaporation technique then assessed for particle size, zeta potential, entrapment efficiency and in-vitro drug release. Furthermore, FT-IR and DSC in addition to morphological examination were done. Results revealed that the formulation composed of PLA:Captex®200 in ratio 1:2 (w/w), 1%w/v Tween®80, 0.3% w/v CS-HCl and 3%w/v PVA possessed the smallest particle size and the most sustained drug release, thus was sorted for further analyses. The selected formulation ability to interact with the negatively charged sodium fluroscein was evaluated to predict its binding with the naturally occurring hyaluronic acid in the knee joint where promising results were obtained. Results showed the cytocompatibility of the formulation when tested using MC3T3-E1 normal bone cell line, enhanced ALP activity and increased calcium ion deposition and binding. Results suggested that the presented formulation can be considered as an innovative approach for osteoarthritis.

Comparison of the Endoscopic Picture in Case of Complications of the upper Gastrointestinal Tract Caused by the Use of Antithrombotic Agents and Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs

Intaking antithrombotic funds (ATA) and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) is one of the most frequent causes of pathology in gastrointestinal (GI) tract.The purpose of the study: comparison of pathological changes of the mucous membrane in the upper GI tract, that occur against the background of ATA and NSAIDs admission.Material and methods. Endoscopic data of two groups of patients taking ATA and NSAIDS have been compared. The first group of 448 patients from the 10th Gastrointestinal Department in N.N. Burdenko Main Military Clinical Hospital was on record from 2013 to 2017. The patients had erosive ulcerous changes of gastrointestinal mucosa, occurred against the background of the ATA admission. The second group comprised 6431 patients with rheumatic diseases. They were hospitalized in the clinic of V.A. Nasonova Research Institute of Rheumatology in the period from 2007 to 2016 and took NSAIDs regularly.Results. Duodenal and gastric ulcer changes in gastric mucosa and duodenal ulcers were identified in 168 (37.5 %) patients taking ATA and in 1691 (26.3 %) patient treated with NSAIDS. Structure of pathology varied. So, against the background of ATA and NSAIDS admission, the number of acute gastric ulceration amounted to 6.5 % and 15.5 % (p < 0.001); acute ulcers duodenal was 2.9 % and 4.9 %; combined ulcerative lesions of gastric and duodenal was 2.9 % and 2.0 %; multiple erosions of gastroduodenal mucosa were 52.4 % and 15.7 % (p < 0.001); single erosion was 35. 1% and 61.6 %. The factor of ulcer history and age ≥ 65 years old increased significantly the risk of duodenal and gastric ulcer changes in patients taking ATA and NSAIDs: OR 5.182 (95% CI 2.701–9.942) and 3.24 (95% CI 2.19–5.34), 4.537 (95% CI 2.036–10.11) and 2.016 (95% CI 1.230–2.917) respectively. Intaking of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) reduced significantly the risk of complications for both ATA and NSAIDs: OR 0.329 (95% CI 0.199–0.546) and 0.317 (95% CI 0.210–0.428) respectively.Conclusion. The structure of pathology of mucous in the upper gastrointestinal tract that arose against the backdrop of ATA and NSAIDs admission is different. The first is characterized by a multiple erosion, while the second one has single acute distal gastric ulcers. The ulcerative history and advanced age of patients increase significantly the risk of complications concerning the gastroduodenal mucosa when using ATA and NSAIDs. PPI is the effective means of preventing this pathology.

Drug-induced enterocolitis: Prevention and management in primary care

Drug-induced enterocolitis is a condition diagnosed with increasing frequency. It includes a variety of morphological and functional alterations of the small and large intestine as a consequence of exposure to pharmacological active compounds. A number of factors play a key role in this condition or participate in the onset of enterocolitis, which is the result of an interplay between the effect of the drug molecule and the tolerance of the bowel to damaging insults. The patient's age, gender, dose of drug, time of exposure, pharmaceutical preparation, drug-drug and drug-food interactions, gut barrier integrity, underlying intestinal conditions, and gut microbiota composition are all involved in the occurrence and extent of the injury. This review approaches the topic from the viewpoint of primary care, and focuses on epidemiology, mechanisms of damage, protective systems and diagnostic tools. Although the first-line therapeutic measure is the discontinuation of the drug, some options for prevention and treatment are discussed.

Etoricoxib improves osteoarthritis pain relief, joint function, and quality of life in the extreme elderly

Etoricoxib is a selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor, with a lower risk of gastrointestinal toxicity compared to traditional nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). We evaluated the effectiveness and tolerability of etoricoxib in extremely elderly patients with chronic pain due to osteoarthritis (OA). A prospective, single-center, single-arm study was conducted, enrolling 19 extremely elderly men with OA (mean age 85.9, range 79-96 years), who responded inadequately to NSAIDs or other analgesics. Patients were switched to etoricoxib, 60 mg once daily for 4 weeks, without prior medication washout. Data were recorded before and after etoricoxib treatment. The primary endpoint was improvement in pain, assessed using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) after the 4-week treatment. Other endpoints included the Brief Pain Inventory Short Form (BPI-SF), Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM), Short Form 36 (SF36), and European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D). Safety and tolerability were assessed by collecting adverse events data. Pain and disability scores measured by WOMAC index were lower after treatment (pain, p ≤ 0.001; disability, p = 0.020). BPI-SF showed a significant improvement in joint function when walking and performing normal work (walking, p = 0.021; normal work, p = 0.030). SF36 scores improved for 7 out of 11 items after etoricoxib treatment (#1, p = 0.032; #4, p = 0.026; #5, p = 0.017; #6, p = 0.008; #7, p = 0.009; #8, p = 0.013; and #10, p = 0.038). EQ-5D showed a significant improvement in visual analogue scale scores (p = 0.036). TSQM results demonstrated a higher patient perception of overall satisfaction. No adverse events were reported. Pain relief, joint function, quality of life, and treatment satisfaction improved significantly in elderly patients with OA after etoricoxib administration.

Safety of Etoricoxib, Celecoxib, and Nonselective Nonsteroidal Antiinflammatory Drugs in Ankylosing Spondylitis and Other Spondyloarthritis Patients: A Swedish National Population-Based Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

Safety data regarding the use of etoricoxib and other nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in ankylosing spondylitis (AS) and other spondyloarthritis (SpA) patients are rather limited. Our objective was to estimate and compare rates of gastrointestinal, renovascular, and cardiovascular adverse events in patients exposed to etoricoxib, celecoxib, or nonselective NSAIDs or totally unexposed to NSAIDs.

METHODS

We performed a national register-based cohort study on patients with AS or SpA (n = 21,872) identified in the Swedish national patient register from 1987-2009. Treatment exposure was assessed time dependently based on the prescription drug register from 2006-2009, adjusting for sociodemographics and comorbidities derived from national population-based registers.

RESULTS

Exposure to etoricoxib, celecoxib, and nonselective NSAIDs was 7.6%, 3.9%, and 71.2%, respectively. No major risk differences for serious cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, or renal adverse events were seen among the 3 exposure groups. Patients unexposed to NSAIDs had more baseline comorbidities and an increased relative risk for congestive heart failure events during the study period (2.0, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.3-3.2). The relative risk for atherosclerotic events was nonsignificant when compared to the nonselective NSAID group (1.0, 95% CI 0.7-1.5), while the relative risk for gastrointestinal events was lower for unexposed patients (0.5, 95% CI 0.4-0.7).

CONCLUSION

Overall, serious adverse events related to nonselective NSAIDs, etoricoxib, and celecoxib were similar and in the range of what would be expected in a group of SpA patients. Patients unexposed to NSAIDs had considerably more baseline comorbidities and increased risk for congestive heart failure, reflecting a selection of patients being prescribed NSAIDs in clinical practice.

Network Meta-Analysis Comparing Relatively Selective COX-2 Inhibitors Versus Coxibs for the Prevention of NSAID-Induced Gastrointestinal Injury

Currently 2 difference classes of cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 inhibitors, coxibs and relatively selective COX-2 inhibitors, are available for patients requiring nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) therapy; their gastroprotective effect is hardly directly compared. The aim of this study was to compare the gastroprotective effect of relatively selective COX-2 inhibitors with coxibs. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library (from their inception to March 2015) were searched for potential eligible studies. We included randomized controlled trials comparing coxibs (celecoxib, etoricoxib, parecoxib, and lumiracoxib), relatively selective COX-2 inhibitors (nabumetone, meloxicam, and etodolac), and nonselective NSAIDs with a study duration ≥ 4 weeks. Comparative effectiveness and safety data were pooled by Bayesian network meta-analysis. The primary outcomes were ulcer complications and symptomatic ulcer. Summary effect-size was calculated as risk ratio (RR), together with the 95% confidence interval (CI). This study included 36 trials with a total of 112,351 participants. Network meta-analyses indicated no significant difference between relatively selective COX-2 inhibitors and coxibs regarding ulcer complications (RR, 1.38; 95% CI, 0.47-3.27), symptomatic ulcer (RR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.09-3.92), and endoscopic ulcer (RR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.37-2.96). Network meta-analyses adjusting potential influential factors (age, sex, previous ulcer disease, and follow-up time), and sensitivity analyses did not reveal any major change to the main results. Network meta-analyses suggested that relatively selective COX-2 inhibitors and coxibs were associated with comparable incidences of total adverse events (AEs) (RR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.93-1.31), gastrointestinal AEs (RR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.87-1.25), total withdrawals (RR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.74-1.33), and gastrointestinal AE-related withdrawals (RR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.57-1.74). Relatively selective COX-2 inhibitors appear to be associated with similar gastroprotective effect and tolerability as coxibs. Owing to the indirectness of the comparisons, future research is required to confirm the study conclusion.

Safe prescribing of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in patients with osteoarthritis--an expert consensus addressing benefits as well as gastrointestinal and cardiovascular risks

BACKGROUND

There are several guidelines addressing the issues around the use of NSAIDs. However, none has specifically addressed the upper versus lower gastrointestinal (GI) risk of COX-2 selective and non-selective compounds nor the interaction at both the GI and cardiovascular (CV) level of either class of drugs with low-dose aspirin. This Consensus paper aims to develop statements and guidance devoted to these specific issues through a review of current evidence by a multidisciplinary group of experts.

METHODS

A modified Delphi consensus process was adopted to determine the level of agreement with each statement and to determine the level of agreement with the strength of evidence to be assigned to the statement.

RESULTS

For patients with both low GI and CV risks, any non-selective NSAID (ns-NSAID) alone may be acceptable. For those with low GI and high CV risk, naproxen may be preferred because of its potential lower CV risk compared with other ns-NSAIDs or COX-2 selective inhibitors, but celecoxib at the lowest approved dose (200 mg once daily) may be acceptable. In patients with high GI risk, if CV risk is low, a COX-2 selective inhibitor alone or ns-NSAID with a proton pump inhibitor appears to offer similar protection from upper GI events. However, only celecoxib will reduce mucosal harm throughout the entire GI tract. When both GI and CV risks are high, the optimal strategy is to avoid NSAID therapy, if at all possible.

CONCLUSIONS

Time is now ripe for offering patients with osteoarthritis the safest and most cost-effective therapeutic option, thus preventing serious adverse events which could have important quality of life and resource use implications. Please see related article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12916-015-0291-x.

NSAID-induced enteropathy: are the currently available selective COX-2 inhibitors all the same?

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) can induce intestinal mucosal damage, but the underlying mechanisms remain poorly understood. The present study investigated the effects of celecoxib, etoricoxib, indomethacin, and diclofenac on small bowel integrity in rats. Male rats were treated orally with test drugs for 14 days. Animals were processed for assessment of blood hemoglobin levels and hepatic mitochondrial functions, microscopic evaluation of small intestinal damage, Western blot analysis of cyclooxygenase-1 and -2 (COX-1, COX-2) expression, and assay of malondialdehyde (MDA), myeloperoxidase (MPO), and prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) levels in small intestine. Indomethacin and diclofenac decreased blood hemoglobin levels, whereas etoricoxib and celecoxib were without effects. Celecoxib caused a lower degree of intestinal damage in comparison with the other test drugs. Indomethacin and diclofenac, but not etoricoxib or celecoxib, reduced intestinal PGE2 levels. Test drugs did not modify intestinal COX-1 expression, although they enhanced COX-2, with the exception of celecoxib, which downregulated COX-2. Indomethacin, diclofenac, and etoricoxib altered mitochondrial respiratory parameters, although celecoxib was without effects. Indomethacin or diclofenac increased MDA and MPO levels in both jejunum and ileum. In the jejunum, etoricoxib or celecoxib did not modify such parameters, whereas in the ileum, etoricoxib, but not celecoxib, increased both MDA and MPO levels. These findings suggest that nonselective NSAIDs and etoricoxib can induce enteropathy through a topic action, whereas celecoxib lacks relevant detrimental actions. The selectivity profile of COX-1/COX-2 inhibition by test drugs and the related effects on prostaglandin production do not appear to play a major role in the pathogenesis of enteropathy.

Managing the adverse effects of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs

Conventional medical treatment for rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis includes the use of NSAIDs (traditional and selective inhibitors of cyclooxygenase [COX]-2), because they provide unmistakable and significant health benefits in the treatment of pain and inflammation. However, they are associated with an increased risk of serious gastrointestinal (GI) and cardiovascular (CV) adverse events. Both beneficial and adverse effects are due to the same mechanism of action, which is inhibition of COX-dependent prostanoids. Since CV and GI risk are related to drug exposure, a reduction in the administered dose is recommended. However, this strategy will not eliminate the hazard owing to a possible contribution of individual genetic background. Further studies will be necessary to develop genetic and/or biochemical markers predictive of the CV and GI risk of NSAIDs.

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.

Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation of Etoricoxib versus Celecoxib and Nonselective NSAIDs in the Treatment of Ankylosing Spondylitis in Norway

Objectives. To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of etoricoxib (90 mg) relative to celecoxib (200/400 mg), and the nonselective NSAIDs naproxen (1000 mg) and diclofenac (150 mg) in the initial treatment of ankylosing spondylitis in Norway. Methods. A previously developed Markov state-transition model was used to estimate costs and benefits associated with initiating treatment with the different competing NSAIDs. Efficacy, gastrointestinal and cardiovascular safety, and resource use data were obtained from the literature. Data from different studies were synthesized and translated into direct costs and quality adjusted life years by means of a Bayesian comprehensive decision modeling approach. Results. Over a 30-year time horizon, etoricoxib is associated with about 0.4 more quality adjusted life years than the other interventions. At 1 year, naproxen is the most cost-saving strategy. However, etoricoxib is cost and quality adjusted life year saving relative to celecoxib, as well as diclofenac and naproxen after 5 years of follow-up. For a willingness-to-pay ceiling ratio of 200,000 Norwegian krones per quality adjusted life year, there is a >95% probability that etoricoxib is the most-cost-effective treatment when a time horizon of 5 or more years is considered. Conclusions. Etoricoxib is the most cost-effective NSAID for initiating treatment of ankylosing spondylitis in Norway.

Heme oxygenase/carbon monoxide-biliverdin pathway may be involved in the antinociceptive activity of etoricoxib, a selective COX-2 inhibitor

The aim of this study was to assess the interaction between the heme oxygenase-1/ biliverdin/carbon monoxide (HO-1/BVD/CO) and cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) pathways in the writhing test. Mice were pretreated with 0.1, 1 or 10 mg/kg, ip etoricoxib, a selective COX-2 inhibitor, or with one of the following HO-1/BVD/CO pathway modulators: 1, 3 or 9 mg/kg, sc ZnPP IX, a specific HO-1 inhibitor, 0.3, 1 or 3 mg/kg, sc hemin, a substrate of the HO-1/BVD/CO pathway; or 0.00025, 0.025 or 2.5 μmol/kg, sc DMDC, a CO donor. Mice pretreated with etoricoxib or one of the HO-1/BVD/CO pathway modulators received an injection of acetic acid (ip) after 30 and 60 min, respectively. Next, the number of writhes was quantified between 0 and 30 min after stimulus injection. In another series of experiments, ineffective doses of etoricoxib were co-administered with hemin or DMDC and an effective dose of etoricoxib with ZnPP IX, followed by an acetic acid injection. Four hours after the acetic acid injection, levels of bilirubin, which is a product of BVD conversion by the BVD reductase enzyme, in the peritoneal lavage were determined. Hemin or DMDC reduced (p<0.05) the number of writhes, but ZnPP IX potentiated (p<0.05) the effect of acetic acid by increasing (p < 0.05) the number of writhes. The co-administration of etoricoxib with hemin or DMDC reduced (p<0.05) the number of writhes. However, the analgesic effect of etoricoxib was not observed in the presence of ZnPP IX. Pretreatment with ZnPP IX reduced bilirubin levels, but etoricoxib pretreatment significantly increased the bilirubin concentration in peritoneal exudates. The data obtained from these experiments showed that the HO-1/BVD/CO pathway was activated in the acetic acid-induced abdominal writhing model. The analgesic effect of etoricoxib was at least partially dependent on the participation of the HO-1/BVD/CO pathway.

Adverse drug reactions of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in orthopedic patients

OBJECTIVES

To identify the ADRs due to NSAIDs and to know how to monitor the drug's effect.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A descriptive study was undertaken in the Orthopedic Outpatients Department of a tertiary care teaching hospital. Hundred patients were enrolled in this study to observe the risk of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) due to NSAIDs. All the ADRs were further analyzed in relation to age and sex, type of drug and its pattern. Probability scale was used for the causality assessment of the ADRs.

RESULTS

26% of the 100 patients developed ADR due to NSAIDs. There was not much of a difference in the number of the ADRs in relation to the gender. Diclofenac was the highest prescribed drug (65 patients), followed by paracetamol (12), nimesulide (10), ibuprofen (6), piroxicam (5) and Etoricoxib (2). Diclofenac accounted for the maximum number (73%) of ADRs, followed by nimesulide (16%), paracetamol (7%), and Etoricoxib (4%).

CONCLUSION

Pharmacovigilance improves recognition of ADRs by the medical students. It allows the treating physician to identify the ADR associated with drugs, in particular, with the ones considered relatively safe and with those commonly prescribed by the medical and non-health professionals.

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.

Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug-Induced Gastroduodenal Bleeding: Risk Factors and Prevention Strategies

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are the most widely prescribed medications in the World. A frequent complication of NSAID use is gastroduodenal bleeding. Risk factors for gastroduodenal bleeding while on NSAID therapy are age, prior peptic ulcer and co-medication with anti-platelet agents, anticoagulants, glucocorticosteroids and selective serotonin-reuptake inhibitors (SSRI). Prevention strategies for at-risk patients include the use of the lowest effective dose of NSAIDs, co-therapy with proton-pump inhibitors and/or the use of a COX-2 selective agent. Treatment of Helicobacter pylori infection is beneficial for primary prophylaxis of NSAID-induced gastroduodenal bleeding in NSAID-naive patients. For patients with cardiovascular risk factors requiring NSAIDs, naproxen should be selected. In very high risk patients for both gastrointestinal and cardiovascular complications NSAID therapy should be avoided altogether.

Adverse effects of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs, aspirin and coxibs) on upper gastrointestinal tract

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are one of the most widely prescribed medication in the world. Their main benefit derives from their anti-inflammatory and analgesic effect, but the use of these agents is not innocuous since they mainly increase the risk of gastrointestinal (GI) and cardiovascular complications compared with non-NSAID users. NSAIDs injures the upper and lower gut by depleting COX-1 derived prostaglandins and causing topical injury to the mucosa. The risk of upper GI complications varies, depending on the presence of one or more risk factors. Among them, the three main risk factors are prior history of peptic ulcer, the single most important risk factor, age, the most common, and concomitant aspirin use, due to their GI and cardiovascular implications. Those individuals at-risk should be considered for alternatives to NSAID therapy and modifications of risk factors. If NSAID therapy is required, patients at risk will need prevention strategies including co-therapy of NSAID with gastroprotectants (PPI or misoprostol) or the prescription of COX-2 selective inhibitors. The probable introduction of NO-NSAIDs in the market in the near future may open a new therapeutic option for patients with hypertension who need NSAIDs.

Do COX-2 inhibitors raise blood pressure more than nonselective NSAIDs and placebo? An updated meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Both COX-2 selective inhibitors (coxibs) and nonselective (ns)-NSAIDs elevate blood pressure (BP) and this may contribute to excess cardiovascular (CV) events. A number of recent large-scale randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing coxibs (including newer agents, lumiracoxib and etoricoxib) to both ns-NSAIDs and placebo have been reported, permitting an update to earlier BP analyses of these agents.

DATA SOURCES/SYNTHESIS

Our search yielded 51 RCTs involving coxibs published before April 2008 with a total of 130 541 participants in which BP data were available. The Der Simonian and Laird random effects method for dichotomous variables was used to produce risk ratios (RR) for development of hypertension.

RESULTS

For coxibs versus placebo, there was a RR of 1.49 (1.18-1.88, P = 0.04) in the development of new hypertension. For coxibs versus ns-NSAIDs, the RR was 1.12 (0.93-1.35, P = 0.23). These results were mainly driven by rofecoxib, with a RR of 1.87 (1.63-2.14, P = 0.08) versus placebo, and etoricoxib, with a RR of 1.52 (1.39-1.66, P = 0.01) versus ns-NSAID.

CONCLUSION

On the basis of this updated meta-analysis, coxibs appear to produce greater hypertension than either ns-NSAIDs or placebo. However, this response was heterogeneous, with markedly raised BP associated with rofecoxib and etoricoxib, whereas celecoxib, valdecoxib and lumiracoxib appeared to have little BP effect. The relationship of this increased risk of hypertension to subsequent adverse CV outcomes requires further investigation and prospective RCTs.

Cost effectiveness of etoricoxib versus celecoxib and non-selective NSAIDS in the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis

To evaluate the cost effectiveness of etoricoxib (90 mg/day) relative to celecoxib (200 or 400 mg/day), and the non-selective NSAIDs naproxen (1000 mg/day) and diclofenac (150 mg/day) in the initial treatment of ankylosing spondylitis (AS) from the UK NHS perspective. A Bayesian cost-effectiveness model was developed to estimate the costs and benefits associated with initiating AS treatment with etoricoxib, celecoxib, diclofenac or naproxen. Efficacy, safety and medical resource and cost data were obtained from the literature. The obtained efficacy estimates were synthesized with a mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis. Treatment benefit and degree of disease activity, as reflected with Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI) and Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) scores, were related to QALYs and AS-specific costs (related to BASDAI). Other cost outcomes related to drug acquisition, and gastrointestinal and cardiovascular safety. Uncertainty in the source data was translated into uncertainty in cost-effectiveness estimates and therefore decision uncertainty. Costs and outcomes were discounted at 3.5% per annum. There was a >98% probability that treatment with etoricoxib results in greater QALYs than the other interventions. Over a 30-year time horizon, starting AS treatment with etoricoxib was associated with about 0.4 more QALYs than the other interventions. At 2 years there was a 77% probability that etoricoxib had the lowest cost. This increased to >99% at 30 years. Etoricoxib is expected to save 13 620 UK pounds (year 2007 values) relative to celecoxib (200/400 mg), 9957 UK pounds relative to diclofenac and 9863 UK pounds relative to naproxen. For a willingness-to-pay ceiling ratio of 20 000 UK pounds per QALY, there was a >97% probability that etoricoxib was the most cost-effective treatment. Additional analysis with different assumptions, including celecoxib 200 mg, and ignoring cost-offsets associated with improvements in disease activity, supported these findings. This economic evaluation suggests that, from the UK NHS perspective, etoricoxib is the most cost-effective initial NSAID treatment for AS patients.

Etoricoxib: a review of its use in the symptomatic treatment of osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis and acute gouty arthritis

Etoricoxib is a selective cyclo-oxygenase (COX)-2 inhibitor, approved in Europe for the symptomatic treatment of osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis and acute gouty arthritis. Etoricoxib provided similar symptomatic relief to nonselective NSAIDs in patients with these conditions, and to celecoxib in patients with osteoarthritis. The drug was associated with fewer uncomplicated upper gastrointestinal (GI) adverse events than nonselective NSAIDs, and was noninferior to diclofenac in terms of the rate of thrombotic cardiovascular (CV) events. Etoricoxib may be considered as a treatment option for patients requiring NSAID therapy, particularly those at risk of upper GI events, after careful consideration of significant risk factors for CV events (including uncontrolled hypertension). As with all NSAIDs, the potential GI and CV risks of treatment with etoricoxib should be weighed against the potential benefits in individual patients, and it should be administered at the lowest effective dose for as short a duration as possible.

Prevention of NSAID-related upper gastrointestinal toxicity: a meta-analysis of traditional NSAIDs with gastroprotection and COX-2 inhibitors

Background:

Traditional NSAIDs (tNSAIDs) and COX-2 inhibitors (COX-2s) are important agents for the treatment of a variety or arthritic conditions. The purpose of this study was to systematically review the effectiveness of misoprostol, H2-receptor antagonists (H2RAs), and proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) for the prevention of tNSAID related upper gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity, and to review the upper gastrointestinal (GI) safety of COX-2s.

Methods:

An extensive literature search was performed to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of prophylactic agents used for the prevention of upper GI toxicity, and RCTs that assessed the GI safety of the newer COX-2s. Meta-analysis was performed in accordance with accepted techniques.

Results:

39 gastroprotection and 69 COX-2 RCTs met inclusion criteria. Misoprostol, PPIs, and double doses of H2RAs are effective at reducing the risk of both endoscopic gastric and duodenal tNSAID-induced ulcers. Standard doses of H2RAs are not effective at reducing the risk of tNSAID-induced gastric ulcers, but reduce the risk of duodenal ulcers. Misoprostol is associated with greater adverse effects than the other agents, particularly at higher doses. COX-2s are associated with fewer endoscopic ulcers and clinically important ulcer complications, and have fewer treatment withdrawals due to GI symptoms than tNSAIDS. Acetylsalicylic acid appears to diminish the benefit of COX-2s over tNSAIDs. In high risk GI patients, tNSAID with a PPI or a COX-2 alone appear to offer similar GI safety, but a strategy of a COX-2 with a PPI appears to offer the greatest GI safety.

Conclusion:

Several strategies are available to reduce the risk of upper GI toxicity with tNSAIDs. The choice between these strategies needs to consider patients’ underlying GI and cardiovascular risk.

Variation in results from randomized, controlled trials: stochastic or systematic?

OBJECTIVE

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are considered the highest grade of research evidence, yet properly conducted trials investigating the same association often yield conflicting results. Our objective was to assess whether variability in treatment protocols of RCTs investigating the same topic could explain distinct patterns of outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

A review of meta-analyses identified clinical topics involving RCTs with variable pharmacologic dosing and disparate outcomes. Topics were retained if at least two pairs of trials had results suggesting contradictory yet strong exposure-outcome associations.

RESULTS

The search yielded 6 clinical topics and 58 RCTs, and individual RCTs were classified into two groups, based on low and high dosages of the intervention. Aggregate odds ratios for studies in the low- and high-dose groups were often substantially discordant. For example, odds ratios were 1.76 (95% confidence interval [CI]=1.02-3.03) for low-dose and 0.56 (95% CI=0.31-1.03) for high-dose trials evaluating low-molecular weight heparin and pulmonary embolism. In an exploratory analysis, outcomes for low- and high-dose groups in the comparison arms of trials (including patients assigned to placebo) had statistically significant differences in four of five analyzable topics, suggesting differences in patient characteristics across trials.

CONCLUSION

Conflicting results from RCTs can represent a spectrum of "real" outcomes for specific treatments. Such trials are best evaluated by considering concurrently both the validity of study design as well as the generalizability of patients and interventions involved.

Meta-analysis: incidence of endoscopic gastric and duodenal ulcers in placebo arms of randomized placebo-controlled NSAID trials

BACKGROUND

The safety of NSAIDs is often evaluated by comparison with placebo in clinical trials.

AIM

To investigate the incidence of gastric and duodenal ulcers (GDU) in placebo arms in NSAID trials over the last three decades.

METHODS

Randomized placebo-controlled trials of oral NSAIDs from 1975 to 2006 were systematically reviewed. The pooled incidence of GDU in placebo arms was calculated and compared. Meta-regression was used to identify risk factors related to the incidence of the placebo ulcer at the study level.

RESULTS

Thirty-six studies met inclusion criteria (duration of 6.5 days to 24 weeks). In total, 3.29% GDUs were reported in 36 placebo arms. The incidence of GDU in placebo arms was 0, 4.20% and 3.03% in the studies from 1975-1989, 1990-1999 and 2000-2006 respectively (P > 0.05). Eligible subjects with previous GI events and eligible subjects on co-therapy with low-lose aspirin/corticosteroids were associated with the increase in placebo ulcer incidence after adjusting for other factors.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of GDU in placebo arms has not changed significantly over the last three decades, although has decreased in the past 10 years. Studies show that previous GI events and co-therapy with low-dose aspirin/corticosteroids were associated with increasing GDU in placebo arms.

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and lower gastrointestinal complications

In addition to the upper GI tract, NSAIDs can damage the small bowel and the colon. NSAID enteropathy is frequent and may be present in more than 60% of patients taking these drugs long term. In most cases, damage is subclinical, including increased mucosal permeability, inflammation, erosions, ulceration, but other more serious clinical outcomes such as anemia, and overall bleeding, perforation, obstruction, diverticulitis and deaths have also been described. The magnitude of these serious outcomes from the lower GI tract is not well defined, but recent data suggest that they may be as frequent and severe as upper GI complications. Contrary to what happens in the upper GI tract, treatment and prevention of NSAID enteropathy is difficult, since the pathogenic mechanisms are different and not well understood. Among other options, misoprostol, antibiotics, and sulphasalazine have been proved to be effective in animal models, but they have not been properly tested in humans. Selective COX-2 inhibition is emerging as a potential alternative to tNSAIDs in the prevention of damage in the lower GI tract in rheumatologic patients. Preliminary studies in healthy volunteers have shown that these drugs are associated with no or less small bowel damage than tNSAIDs plus PPI, although their long-term effects in patients need to be properly tested. Post hoc analysis of previous outcome studies focused on complications of upper GI tract or cardiovascular events have shown contradictory results. Data from one ongoing trial comparing celecoxib versus diclofenac plus PPI and examining serious outcomes from the whole GI tract will probably provide new insights in this area.

Cardiovascular safety and gastrointestinal tolerability of etoricoxib vs diclofenac in a randomized controlled clinical trial (The MEDAL study)

OBJECTIVE

To compare cardiovascular (CV) and other safety and efficacy parameters of etoricoxib 60 and 90 mg, and diclofenac 150 mg.

METHODS

This double-blind study randomized OA patients to etoricoxib 90 mg, then to 60 mg once daily vs diclofenac 75 mg twice daily; RA patients were randomized to etoricoxib 90 mg once daily or diclofenac 75 mg twice daily. The primary endpoint was non-inferiority of etoricoxib vs diclofenac for thrombotic CV events (95% CI upper bound of hazard ratio <1.30). Other safety and efficacy parameters were evaluated in cohorts of patients based on etoricoxib dose and disease.

RESULTS

A total of 23 504 patients were randomized with mean treatment duration from 19.4 to 20.8 months. The thrombotic CV risk hazard ratio (HR) (etoricoxib to diclofenac) was 0.96 (95% CI 0.81, 1.15), consistent with non-inferiority of etoricoxib to diclofenac. The cumulative gastrointestinal (GI)/liver adverse events (AEs) discontinuation rate was significantly lower for etoricoxib than diclofenac in each patient cohort; HR (95% CI) of 0.46 (0.39, 0.54), 0.52 (0.42, 0.63) and 0.49 (0.39, 0.62) for the 60 mg OA, 90 mg OA and RA cohorts. The maximum average change in systolic blood pressure (BP) with etoricoxib was 3.4-3.6 mmHg (diastolic BP: 1.0-1.5 mmHg), while diclofenac produced a maximum average change of 0.9-1.9 mmHg (diastolic BP: 0.0-0.5 mmHg). Both agents resulted in similar efficacy regardless of etoricoxib dose.

CONCLUSION

Long-term etoricoxib use is associated with a risk of thrombotic CV events comparable with that of diclofenac. Compared with diclofenac, etoricoxib demonstrated a greater risk of renovascular AEs, but a more favourable GI/liver tolerability profile.

Myths and facts in the use of anti-inflammatory drugs

BACKGROUND

Because of the prominence of pain-related conditions and the growing complexities of clinical management we aimed to explore and attempt to dispel the several myths that surround these serious therapeutic issues.

AIMS

We aimed to provide a careful analysis of the evidence and draw factually based guidance for physicians who manage the broad range of patients with pain.

METHODS

Current myths were identified based on the authors' clinical, scientific, and academic experience. Each contributor addressed specific topics and made his own selection of primary references and systematic reviews by searching in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL databases (1990-2008) as well as in the proceedings of the major digestive and rheumatology meetings. The writing and references provided by each contributor were collectively analyzed and discussed by all authors during several meetings until the final manuscript was prepared and approved.

RESULTS

Seven major 'historical' myths that may perpetuate habits and beliefs in clinical practice were identified. Each of them was thoroughly examined and dispelled, drawing conclusions that should help guide physicians to better manage patients with pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Pain relief must be considered a human right, and patients with osteoarthritis pain should be treated appropriately with analgesic or/and anti-inflammatory drugs. The risk of gastrointestinal (GI) complications with traditional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (t-NSAIDs) is present from the first dose (with both short-term and long-term use), and strategies to prevent GI complications should be considered regardless of the duration of therapy. Compared with t-NSAIDs, coxib use is associated with a small but significant reduction of dyspepsia. While protecting the stomach, proton pump inhibitors do not prevent NSAID-induced intestinal damage. To this end, coxib therapy could be the preferred option, although further randomized studies are needed. A substantial number of patients who need NSAIDs are also taking low-dose aspirin for cardiovascular prophylaxis. From a GI perspective, the combination of aspirin plus a coxib provides a preferred option compared with aspirin plus a t-NSAID, for patients at high GI risk. As the incidence of renovascular adverse effects with t-NSAIDs and coxibs is similar, blood pressure should be monitored and managed appropriately in patients taking these drugs, although they should be avoided in those with severe congestive heart failure. Due to increased cardiovascular risk, which is dependent on the dose, duration of therapy, and base-line cardiovascular risk, both t-NSAIDs and coxibs should be used with caution in patients with underlying prothrombotic states and/or concomitant cardiovascular risk factors.

Adjunctive benefits of systemic etoricoxib in non-surgical treatment of aggressive periodontitis: short-term evaluation

BACKGROUND

This pilot study assessed the effect of short-duration treatment with etoricoxib as adjuvant therapy to scaling and root planing (SRP) on the clinical and radiographic parameters and prostaglandin E(2) (PGE(2)) levels in aggressive periodontitis.

METHODS

Subjects were randomly allocated to test or control treatment (n = 10 in each group) and submitted to SRP and treatment with etoricoxib, 120 mg/day, or placebo for 7 days. Probing depth, clinical attachment level (CAL), gingival recession, visible plaque index, bleeding on probing, linear distance (LD) from the cemento-enamel junction to the alveolar crest, and analysis of the gray levels were recorded before and 1 month after the therapies. The prostaglandin E(2) (PGE(2)) level in the gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) was measured by radioimmunoassay at the beginning of the study and 7 and 30 days after treatment.

RESULTS

No significant difference in the clinical parameters was observed between the groups at the end of the experimental period, although both groups presented significant improvement in all variables examined. There was a decrease in CAL from 5.54 +/- 0.47 mm to 3.59 +/- 0.53 mm in the test group and from 5.92 +/- 1.10 mm to 3.69 +/- 0.80 mm in the control group. A significant reduction in PGE(2) was found after 7 days of treatment. LD differed between the groups.

CONCLUSION

Etoricoxib did not promote additional improvement in the clinical parameters; however, it produced an initial reduction in the PGE(2) levels in the GCF, which could be related to the discrete improvement in the bone condition.

Evaluation of the pharmacokinetics of digoxin in healthy subjects receiving etoricoxib

AIMS

Digoxin is a commonly prescribed cardiac glycoside with a narrow therapeutic index. The aim was to investigate whether the cyclooxygenase-2 selective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug etoricoxib affects the steady-state pharmacokinetics of digoxin.

METHODS

This was a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, two-period cross-over study. In each period, 14 healthy volunteers ranging in age from 21 to 35 years received oral digoxin 0.25 mg daily and were randomized to either etoricoxib 120 mg or matching placebo tablets once daily for 10 days. Trough digoxin plasma concentrations were analysed by linear regression to examine digoxin accumulation over time.

RESULTS

The geometric mean ratios (etoricoxib/placebo) for AUC(0-24h), C(max) and urinary excretion were 1.06 (90% confidence interval 0.97, 1.17), 1.33 (1.21, 1.46) and 1.10 (1.00, 1.20), respectively. The median (range) for digoxin T(max) (h) values with etoricoxib and placebo were 0.5 (0.5, 1.5) and 1.0 (0.5, 1.5), respectively. Steady-state digoxin plasma concentrations were achieved by day 7 in each treatment period. No serious adverse experiences were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Although etoricoxib 120 mg did produce an approximately 33% increase in digoxin C(max), this increase does not appear to be clinically meaningful, as cardiotoxicity with digoxin has been associated with elevations in steady-state rather than peak concentrations. From these results, it appears that etoricoxib does not cause any changes in digoxin steady-state pharmacokinetics that would necessitate a dose adjustment.

Comparative inhibitory activity of etoricoxib, celecoxib, and diclofenac on COX-2 versus COX-1 in healthy subjects

We determined cyclo-oxygenase-1 and cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibition in healthy middle-aged subjects (41-65 years) randomly assigned to four 7-day treatment sequences of etoricoxib 90 mg every day, celecoxib 200 mg twice a day, diclofenac 75 mg twice a day, or placebo in a double-blind, randomized, 4-period crossover study. Maximum inhibition of thromboxane B(2) (cyclo-oxygenase-1 activity) in clotting whole blood on day 7 (0-24 hours postdose) was the primary endpoint. Inhibition of lipopolysaccharide-induced prostaglandin E(2) in whole blood (cyclo-oxygenase-2 activity) was assessed on day 7 (0-24 hours postdose) as a secondary endpoint. Diclofenac had significantly greater maximum inhibition of thromboxane B(2) versus each comparator (P < .001); placebo 2.4% (95% confidence interval: -8.7% to 12.3%), diclofenac 92.2% (91.4% to 92.9%), etoricoxib 15.5% (6.6% to 23.5%), and celecoxib 20.2% (11.5% to 28.1%). Prostaglandin E(2) synthesis was inhibited with a rank order of potency of diclofenac > etoricoxib > celecoxib. In summary, at doses commonly used in rheumatoid arthritis, diclofenac significantly inhibits both cyclo-oxygenase-1 and cyclo-oxygenase-2, whereas etoricoxib and celecoxib significantly inhibit cyclo-oxygenase-2 and do not substantially inhibit cyclo-oxygenase-1.

Systematic review: ulcer definition in NSAID ulcer prevention trials

BACKGROUND

In clinical trials of peptic ulcer prevention, the most appropriate definition of an ulcer remains challenging.

AIMS

To evaluate the ulcer definitions used in clinical trials of ulcer prevention among non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug users and to determine whether any specific definition is preferred.

METHODS

A systematic literature search of the PubMed, Medline and EMBASE databases was conducted. Results were limited to full papers published in English from June 1987 to June 2007 that met the following criteria: randomized, controlled non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug trials of > or =8 weeks' duration, with a primary end point of ulcer upon endoscopy.

RESULTS

Forty five publications met the inclusion criteria and were reviewed. Overall, an ulcer diameter of > or =3 mm was used in 25 publications and most included a description of ulcer depth. Of the remainder, ulcer was defined as any lesion with unequivocal/observable depth (with no lower limit for ulcer diameter; five publications) or an excavated mucosal break >3 mm (one publication), whereas nine defined a minimum ulcer size of > or =5 or >5 mm. Ulcer definition was unclear in the remaining five publications.

CONCLUSION

In clinical trials of ulcer prevention among non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug users, a gastric or duodenal lesion > or =3 mm in diameter with significant depth is the preferred definition.

Faecal blood loss with aspirin, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and cyclo-oxygenase-2 selective inhibitors: systematic review of randomized trials using autologous chromium-labelled erythrocytes

Introduction

Faecal blood loss has been measured using autologous erythrocytes labelled with radioactive chromium for several decades, using generally similar methods. We conducted a systematic review of studies employing this technology to determine the degree of blood loss associated with use of aspirin, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and cyclo-oxygenase-2 selective inhibitors (coxibs).

Methods

A systematic search of PubMed and the Cochrane Library (to December 2006) was conducted to identify randomized trials in which treatment with aspirin, NSAIDs, or coxibs was continued for at least 7 days, and with at least 7 days of washout for crossover trials. Rates of faecal blood loss associated with these agents were determined in the randomized trials identified. Comparators were placebo, active, or no treatment. Outcomes of interest were mean daily faecal blood loss, and the number or proportion of individuals recording faecal blood above 5 ml/day and above 10 ml/day.

Results

Forty-five reports of 47 trials were included, including 1,162 individuals, mostly healthy volunteers and predominantly young men. Only 136 patients (as opposed to healthy volunteers; 12%) were included, and these were mostly older people with an arthritic condition. Most NSAIDs and low-dose (325 mg) aspirin resulted in a small average increase in faecal blood loss of 1 to 2 ml/day from about 0.5 ml/day at baseline. Aspirin at full anti-inflammatory doses resulted in much higher average levels of blood loss of about 5 ml/day. Some individuals lost much more blood than average, at least for some of the time, with 5% of those taking NSAIDs having daily blood loss of 5 ml or more and 1% having daily blood loss of 10 ml or more; rates of daily blood loss of 5 ml/day or 10 ml/day were 31% and 10%, respectively, for aspirin at daily doses of 1,800 mg or greater.

Conclusion

At baseline, or with placebo, faecal blood loss is measured at 1 ml/day or below. With low-dose aspirin and some NSAIDs, average values may be two to four times this, and anti-inflammatory doses of aspirin result in much higher average losses. A small proportion of individuals respond to aspirin or NSAIDs with much higher faecal blood loss of above 5 ml/day or 10 ml/day. There are significant limitations regarding the quality and validity of reporting of these studies, such as limited size and inclusion of inappropriate participants. The potential for blood loss and consequent anaemia requires more study.

COX-2 selective inhibitors in the treatment of osteoarthritis

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy of cyclooxygenase-2 selective inhibitors (coxibs) in osteoarthritis (OA) and their gastrointestinal, cardiovascular, renovascular, and hepatic side effects compared with traditional nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and acetaminophen.

METHODS

Bibliographic database searches for randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses, and literature reviews.

RESULTS

Coxibs are comparable to traditional NSAIDs, providing moderate benefit for OA patients in pain and function versus placebo. NSAIDs, including coxibs, are superior to acetaminophen for OA, particularly in patients with moderate to severe pain. Coxibs decrease gastroduodenal ulcers (74% relative risk reduction) and ulcer complications (61% reduction) versus traditional NSAIDs. Meta-analysis of randomized trials indicates that coxibs increase the risk of myocardial infarctions approximately twofold versus placebo and versus naproxen, but do not increase the risk versus nonnaproxen NSAIDs. NSAIDs, including coxibs, commonly cause fluid retention and increase blood pressure and uncommonly induce congestive heart failure or significant renal dysfunction; risk factors include advanced age, hypertension, and heart or kidney disease. NSAIDs are a rare cause of clinical hepatotoxicity (<1 liver-related death per 100,000 NSAID users in clinical studies). Increased rates of aminotransferase elevations occur with rofecoxib (2%) and high-dose lumiracoxib (3%), and postmarketing cases of clinical liver injury with lumiracoxib have been reported recently.

CONCLUSIONS

Coxibs are as effective as traditional NSAIDs and superior to acetaminophen for the treatment of OA. Coxibs cause fewer gastrointestinal complications than traditional NSAIDs. Coxibs increase cardiovascular risk versus placebo and naproxen-but probably not versus nonnaproxen NSAIDs. Blood pressure commonly increases after initiation of selective or nonselective NSAIDs, especially in hypertensive patients.

A randomized placebo-controlled trial comparing the efficacy of etoricoxib 30 mg and ibuprofen 2400 mg for the treatment of patients with osteoarthritis

OBJECTIVE

We compared the efficacy of etoricoxib 30 mg to placebo and ibuprofen 2400 mg for the treatment of osteoarthritis (OA) of the hip and knee.

DESIGN

In this 12-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active-comparator-controlled trial, 548 patients (median age 63 years) with OA of the hip or knee were randomized to receive placebo, etoricoxib 30 mg q.d., or ibuprofen 800 mg t.i.d. Demonstration of etoricoxib's efficacy vs placebo and comparison of its efficacy to ibuprofen were assessed using three co-primary endpoints: Western Ontario and McMaster's University Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain Subscale (WOMAC-PS); WOMAC Physical Function Subscale (WOMAC-PFS); and Patient Global Assessment of Disease Status (PGADS). Each primary endpoint utilizes a 0-100 mm visual analog scale. To demonstrate comparable efficacy of etoricoxib vs ibuprofen, the 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the difference in the least squares (LS) mean change over 12 weeks for all three co-primary endpoints had to fall within +/-10 mm. Safety and tolerability data were collected throughout the study.

RESULTS

Mean baseline values for the three co-primary endpoints ranged from 62.52 to 70.14 mm. Both etoricoxib and ibuprofen demonstrated superior (P< or =0.002) efficacy for all primary endpoints. The LS mean (mm) changes (95% CI) over 12 weeks for etoricoxib and ibuprofen, respectively, compared to placebo were given as follows: WOMAC-PS: -11.66 (-16.31, -7.01) and -7.62 (-12.30, -2.94); WOMAC-PFS: -10.15 (-14.74, -5.57) and -7.23 (-11.85, -2.61); PGADS: -11.65 (-16.81, -6.50) and -8.11 (-13.30, -2.92). The efficacy of etoricoxib 30 mg was comparable to ibuprofen 2400 mg. All treatments were similarly well tolerated.

CONCLUSION

Treatment with etoricoxib 30 mg q.d. provides superior efficacy vs placebo and comparable clinical efficacy vs ibuprofen 2400 mg (800 mg t.i.d.) for the treatment of OA of the hip and knee.

Etoricoxib versus naproxen in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a prospective, randomized, comparator-controlled 121-week trial

BACKGROUND

Etoricoxib is a cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) selective inhibitor effective in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. An initial 12-week treatment study found that etoricoxib (90 mg once daily) was more effective than naproxen (500 mg twice daily) or placebo in treating rheumatoid arthritis. The present two-part extension of that study was performed to monitor tolerability and examine long-term efficacy of etoricoxib 90 mg or 120 mg compared with naproxen.

METHODS

Patients completing the initial 12-week study and those discontinuing due to lack of efficacy, were eligible for the Extension Study Part I (12-52 weeks) and assigned (2:1:2 ratio) to receive etoricoxib (90 mg or 120 mg daily) or naproxen (500 mg twice daily); these patients remained on the same therapy for Extension Study Part II (52-121 weeks). Primary outcome measures included investigator and patient assessment of disease activity, and tender and swollen joint counts.

RESULTS

Of 816 patients enrolled in the initial 12-week trial, 717 continued into the Extension Study Part I; 505 patients completed and 390 entered the Extension Study Part II, with 283 patients completing 121 weeks. Patients receiving etoricoxib (90 mg) or naproxen throughout the study experienced sustained efficacy in all outcomes, as did patients transitioning to etoricoxib (120 mg) following the initial 12-week trial. Patients transitioning from placebo to etoricoxib (90 mg) experienced rapid, sustained improvements in all outcome measures.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, etoricoxib provided sustained efficacy throughout the 121-week study, with efficacy comparable to naproxen.

In search of cyclooxygenase inhibitors, anti-Mycobacterium tuberculosis and anti-malarial drugs from Thai flora and microbes

Malaria continues to be a major infectious disease of the developing world and the problem is compounded not only by the emergence of drug resistant strains but also from a lack of a vaccine. The situation for tuberculosis (TB) infection is equally problematic. Once considered a "treatable" disease for which eradication was predicted, TB has re-emerged as highly lethal, multi-drug resistant strains after the outbreak of AIDS. Worldwide, the disease causes millions of deaths annually. Similarly, treatments for chronic inflammatory diseases such as arthritis have been impeded due to the potentially lethal side effects of the new and widely prescribed non-steroidal anti-inflammatory compounds. Thais have utilized bioresources from plants and some microorganisms for medicine for thousands of years. Because of the need for new drugs to fight malaria and TB, with radically different chemical structures and mode of actions other than existing drugs, efforts have been directed towards searching for new drugs from bioresources. This is also true for anti-inflammatories. Although Thailand is considered species-rich, only a small number of potential bioresources has been investigated. This article briefly describes the pathogenesis of 2 infectious diseases, malaria and TB, and modern medicines employed in chemotherapy. Diversities of Thai flora and fungi and their chemical constituents with antagonistic properties against these 2 diseases are described in detail. Similarly, anti-inflammatory compounds, mostly cyclooxygenase (COX) inhibitors, are also described herein to demonstrate the potential of Thai bioresources to provide a wide array of compounds for treatment of diseases of a different nature.

The effect of etoricoxib on the pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of warfarin

The effects of etoricoxib on pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic parameters of warfarin were determined in healthy men and women. Subjects titrated with warfarin to an international normalized ratio for prothrombin time of 1.4 to 1.7 during a 28-day prestudy period were randomly assigned in crossover fashion to be coadministered etoricoxib (120 mg) or matching placebo over two 21-day continuous periods. On day 21, a 24-hour pharmacokinetic profile of both S(-) and R(+) warfarin, as well as international normalized ratio values, were determined. Etoricoxib increased the international normalized ratio by 13% (90% confidence interval: 8%, 19%; P </= .001). Etoricoxib had no effect on the pharmacokinetics of S(-) warfarin but led to a modest increase in the AUC(24 h) ( approximately 10%) of R(+) warfarin. This increase in the international normalized ratio is not likely to be clinically important in most patients; however, the international normalized ratio of patients coadministered oral anticoagulants and etoricoxib should be closely monitored, particularly during initiation of therapy.

Gastrointestinal safety of cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors: a Cochrane Collaboration systematic review

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Nonselective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors (COX-2s) are used to treat a variety of arthritic and inflammatory conditions. The aim of this study was to assess the upper gastrointestinal (GI) harms of the long-term use of COX-2s, compared with nonselective NSAIDs and placebo, in arthritis sufferers.

METHODS

A systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted. Searches were conducted in (1) Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), (2) the Cochrane Collaboration Library (2005), (3) MEDLINE (to December 2006), and (4) Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE) (to June 2005). Reference lists from trials and abstracts of conference proceedings were searched by hand, and experts were contacted to identify further relevant trials. RCTs of celecoxib, rofecoxib, etoricoxib, valdecoxib, and lumiracoxib were included if they reported on endoscopic ulcers, clinically important ulcer complications, or adverse gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms with the use of these COX-2s, compared with placebo or with nonselective NSAIDs. Study selection and data extraction were performed in duplicate by independent reviewers. Data were analyzed by using Review Manager 4.2 in accordance with accepted meta-analysis techniques.

RESULTS

Compared with nonselective NSAIDs, COX-2s produced significantly fewer gastroduodenal ulcers (relative risk, 0.26; 95% confidence interval, 0.23-0.30) and clinically important ulcer complications (relative risk, 0.39; 95% confidence interval, 0.31-0.50), as well as fewer treatment withdrawals caused by GI symptoms. The co-administration of acetylsalicylic acid appears to reduce the GI safety of COX-2s in subgroup analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

COX-2s appear to offer greater upper GI safety and are better tolerated than nonselective NSAIDs. The co-administration of acetylsalicylic acid might reduce the safety advantage of COX-2s over that of nonselective NSAIDs.

Determinants of the short-term gastric damage caused by NSAIDs in man

BACKGROUND

The short-term gastric damage seen with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in man may involve inhibition of cyclooxygenase (COX-1) and COX-2 as well as the topical irritancy, which is dependant on the acidity (pKa) and/or lipophilicity (log P(7.4)).

AIM

To study the quantitative relationship between NSAID-induced short-term gastric damage, their physicochemical properties and contrasting roles of COX-1 and COX-2 inhibition.

METHODS

We identified studies that allowed a qualitative comparison of the gastric injury (Lanza scores) induced by NSAIDs with their pKa and log P(7.4). Damage was correlated with gastric COX inhibition and potency to inhibit COX-1 and 2 and their COX-2/COX-1 selectivity ratio.

RESULTS

The gastric damage correlates significantly with pKa (r = -0.69; P < 0.01), log P (r = -0.58, P < 0.05) and potency of the NSAIDs to inhibit COX-1 (r = -0.61, P < 0.02), but not with COX-2 inhibition or COX-2/COX-1 selectivity.

CONCLUSION

Against a background of COX-1 and COX-2 inhibition, the physicochemical properties of NSAID appear to play an important role in short-term gastric damage.

Pooled analysis of thrombotic cardiovascular events in clinical trials of the COX-2 selective Inhibitor etoricoxib

BACKGROUND

A pooled analysis of randomized clinical trials data was performed to compare the rate of thrombotic cardiovascular events (thrombotic events) in patients taking the COX-2 selective inhibitor (coxib) etoricoxib, a traditional NSAID, or placebo.

METHODS

Data collected during all phase IIb/III etoricoxib clinical trials > or = 4 weeks in duration were evaluated. The pooled data set includes clinical information from approximately 6500 patient-years (PYs) of drug exposure in patients diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), osteoarthritis (OA), ankylosing spondylitis (AS), or chronic low back pain (CLBP). Patients were treated with either etoricoxib (> or = 60 mg/day), the traditional NSAIDs naproxen (1000 mg/day), ibuprofen (2400 mg/day), diclofenac (150 mg/day), or placebo. The Relative risks (RRs) based on time to first occurrence of a thrombotic event in the etoricoxib group versus the comparator traditional NSAIDs or versus placebo were determined using patient-level data.

RESULTS

In the pooled dataset, a total of 74 thrombotic events occurred in 69 patients. The RRs for thrombotic events were 1.11 (95%CI: 0.32, 3.81) for etoricoxib (N = 2818) versus placebo (N = 1767); 0.83 (95%CI: 0.26, 2.64) for etoricoxib (N = 1266) versus the combined non-naproxen traditional NSAID group (ibuprofen and diclofenac; N = 718); and 1.70 (95%CI: 0.91, 3.18) for etoricoxib (N = 1960) versus naproxen (N = 1497).

CONCLUSIONS

There was no discernible difference in the incidence of thrombotic events in patients treated with etoricoxib versus non-naproxen traditional NSAIDs in this limited dataset. A trend toward more events with etoricoxib versus naproxen was observed. Despite the limited dataset available for this pooled analysis, these results are consistent with findings for other coxibs.

NSAIDs, coxibs, and the intestine

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are capable of damaging the whole gastrointestinal tract. Small and large intestinal injuries manifest as acute changes in permeability with endoscopic erosions, chronic erosions and ulcers, diaphragms in the small bowel, and an increase in small and large bowel complications including perforation and diverticular bleeding. It is quite likely, though not proven, that such lesions contribute to anemia in patients taking them. A growing body of data shows that selective inhibitors of the cyclooxygenase-2 enzyme have much reduced toxicity in this respect. In addition, NSAID use has also been associated with development or relapse of ulcerative colitis. Whether the same is true of Crohn's disease, particularly of the small bowel, is less clear. An important point is that there are data that suggest that paracetamol may also not be devoid of toxicity. This makes use of selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors attractive. There have been a number of reports of their use in inflammatory bowel disease. However, many of these have principally involved Crohn's disease and there have not been enough to be clear whether they affect the influence of relapse of ulcerative colitis.

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.

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 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.

Etoricoxib in the treatment of osteoarthritis over 52-weeks: a double-blind, active-comparator controlled trial [NCT00242489]

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term efficacy and tolerability of etoricoxib, a COX-2 selective inhibitor, in osteoarthritis (OA) patients.

METHODS

A double-blind, randomized, multicenter study was conducted in 617 patients with OA of the knee. The base study was 14 weeks in duration and consisted of 2 parts; in Part I (6 weeks), patients were allocated to once daily oral etoricoxib 5, 10, 30, 60, 90 mg or placebo. In Part II (8 weeks); the placebo, etoricoxib 5 and 10 mg groups were reallocated to etoricoxib 30, 60, or 90 mg qd or diclofenac 50 mg t.i.d. Treatment was continued for consecutive 12 and 26 week extensions. Primary efficacy endpoints were the WOMAC VA 3.0 pain subscale and investigator global assessment of disease status. Safety and tolerability were assessed by collecting adverse events throughout the study.

RESULTS

Compared with placebo, the etoricoxib groups displayed significant (p < 0.05), dose-dependent efficacy for all primary endpoints in Part I; efficacy was maintained throughout the 52 weeks of the study. During the 46-week active-comparator controlled period, the etoricoxib groups demonstrated clinical efficacy that was similar to that of diclofenac 150 mg and was generally well tolerated, with a lower incidence of gastrointestinal (GI) nuisance symptoms compared with diclofenac (13.1, 14.7, and 13.5% for etoricoxib 30, 60, and 90 mg, respectively compared with 22.5% for diclofenac).

CONCLUSION

In this extension study, etoricoxib, at doses ranging from 30 to 90 mg, demonstrated a maintenance of significant clinical efficacy in patients with OA through 52 weeks of treatment. Etoricoxib displayed clinical efficacy similar to diclofenac 150 mg and was generally well tolerated.

Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of etoricoxib in the treatment of hemophilic arthropathy

This 2-part, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was conducted to determine the safety and efficacy of etoricoxib, a COX-2 selective inhibitor, for the treatment of hemophilic arthropathy. In part 1 (6 weeks), 102 patients (> or = 12 years old) with hemophilic arthropathy were randomized to receive 90 mg etoricoxib once daily or placebo (1:1 ratio). In part 2 (6 months), 51 patients taking placebo in part 1 were randomized to receive 90 mg etoricoxib or 25 mg rofecoxib once daily; patients taking etoricoxib in part 1 continued the same treatment. Efficacy end points included Patient Assessment of Arthropathy Pain, Patient Global Assessment of Arthropathy Disease Status, and Investigator Global Assessment of Arthropathy Disease Status. Safety was evaluated at each study visit. Etoricoxib provided significant improvement in all end points versus placebo (P < .001). Fewer patients taking etoricoxib discontinued due to a lack of efficacy versus placebo (P = .048). During part 2, efficacy was maintained; etoricoxib and rofecoxib demonstrated similar results. The most common adverse experiences were upper respiratory infection and headache. The incidence of joint bleeding during part 1 was similar between etoricoxib (66.7%) and placebo (72.6%) and during part 2 between etoricoxib (77.0%) and rofecoxib (78.9%). We conclude that etoricoxib provided superior efficacy versus placebo for the treatment of hemophilic arthropathy and was generally safe and well tolerated.

Time course and pattern of blood loss with ibuprofen treatment in healthy subjects

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) users are at increased risk of gastrointestinal bleeding. We aimed to assess the pattern and extent of fecal blood loss (FBL) with ibuprofen, which is considered to have a favorable gastrointestinal safety profile.

METHODS

We conducted a post hoc analysis of 2 separate randomized, parallel-group, double-blind studies, in which ibuprofen was used as a positive control. FBL was measured by radioactive analysis of chromium-51 labeled red cells in stools during baseline and then followed by 4 weeks of treatment with ibuprofen (800 mg 3 times daily) or placebo in 68 healthy volunteers. FBL was considered significant when blood loss was >2 mL daily.

RESULTS

The baseline period was identical for all subjects, with an average FBL of 0.36 mL (standard deviation, +/-0.075) per day. During the study period, all subjects receiving ibuprofen had a daily mean FBL >2 mL, with a group daily mean loss 3.64-fold greater than in the placebo group (2.55 mL [+/-3.2] vs 0.7 mL [+/-0.37], P < .001). In the ibuprofen group (n = 31), 26 subjects had between 1 and 7 random episodes of microbleeding with FBL >3 mL. Nine had a maximum FBL >10 mL (29.35 +/- 23.32 mL), and in 2 subjects blood loss reached 73 mL and 66 mL, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with a therapeutic dose of ibuprofen, a commonly used nonselective NSAID, in healthy subjects is associated with significant FBL, which occurs randomly with spikes of bleeding, sometimes exceeding 66 mL in a single day. Chronic anemia or gastrointestinal bleeding in patients taking nonselective NSAIDs should be thoroughly investigated.