Tolerability of multiple administration of intramuscular meloxicam: a comparison with intramuscular piroxicam in patients with rheumatoid arthritis or osteoarthritis

Piroxicam

A comprehensive profile of piroxicam including the nomenclatures, formulae, elemental composition, appearance, uses and applications. The methods which were utilized for the preparation of the drug substance and their respective schemes are outlined. The physical characteristics of the drug including the ionization constant, solubility, x-ray powder diffraction pattern, differential scanning calorimetry, thermal behavior and spectroscopic studies are described. The methods which were used for the analysis of the drug substance in bulk drug and/or in pharmaceutical formulations including the compendial, spectrophotometric, electrochemical and the chromatographic methods are reported. The stability, toxicity, pharmacokinetics, bioavailability, drug evaluation, comparison, in addition to compiled reviews on the drug substance are involved. Finally, more than four hundred and fifty references are listed at the end of this profile.

Pain management for rheumatoid arthritis and cardiovascular or renal comorbidity

BACKGROUND

Pain in rheumatoid arthritis is common, is often multi-factorial and many different pharmacotherapeutic agents are routinely used for pain management. There are concerns that some of the pain pharmacotherapies currently used may increase the risk of adverse events in people with rheumatoid arthritis and concurrent cardiovascular or renal disease.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically assess and collate the scientific evidence on the efficacy and safety of using pain pharmacotherapy in people with rheumatoid arthritis and cardiovascular or renal comorbidities.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library 2010, Issue 4); MEDLINE, from 1950; EMBASE, from 1980; the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE). We also handsearched the conference proceedings for American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and European League against Rheumatism (EULAR) for 2008-09, and checked the websites of regulatory agencies for reported adverse events, labels and warnings.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered randomised controlled trials and non-randomised studies comparing the efficacy and safety of pain pharmacotherapies in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, with and without comorbid cardiovascular or renal conditions.In addition, we also considered controlled before-after studies, interrupted time series, cohort and case control studies and case series (N ≥ 20) to assess safety.For the purpose of our review, pain pharmacotherapy was defined as including simple analgesics (such as paracetamol), non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), opioids or opioid-like drugs (such as tramadol), and neuromodulators (including anti-depressants, anti-convulsants, and muscle relaxants).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the search results and planned to extract data and appraise the risk of bias of included studies.

MAIN RESULTS

We did not identify any studies meeting our inclusion criteria. Many of the trials of NSAIDs explicitly excluded patients with cardiovascular or renal comorbidities.We did identify one trial that reported evidence in mixed populations (including both rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis) taking either diclofenac or etoricoxib. In this study, the presence of cardiovascular disease increased the likelihood of a further cardiovascular event three-fold. Patients with two or more cardiovascular comorbidities showed a two-fold increased likelihood of adverse cardiovascular events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There were no trials that specifically compared the efficacy and safety of pain pharmacotherapies for patients with rheumatoid arthritis, with and without comorbid cardiovascular or renal conditions.In the absence of specific evidence in rheumatoid arthritis, current guidelines recommend that NSAIDs be used with caution in the general rheumatoid arthritis population while highlighting the added need for extra vigilance in patients with established cardiovascular disease or risk factors for its development. Current guidelines regarding the use of NSAIDs and opioids in moderate to severe renal impairment should also be applied to the rheumatoid arthritis population.Further research is required to guide clinicians when treating pain in rheumatoid arthritis.

Gingival crevicular fluid matrix metalloproteinase-8 levels following adjunctive use of meloxicam and initial phase of periodontal therapy

BACKGROUND

The purpose of the present study was to assess the effects of adjunctive meloxicam on the matrix metalloproteinase-8 (MMP-8) levels of gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) in chronic periodontitis patients following the initial phase of periodontal therapy.

METHODS

Twelve chronic periodontitis patients received 7.5 mg meloxicam, and 10 patients received placebo tablets together with scaling and root planing in a 1 x 1 regimen for 10 days. Scaling and root planing were performed on day 3 of drug intake. The MMP-8 levels in GCF samples obtained before and on day 10 of drug intake were determined by using the immunofluorescence assay. Plaque index (PI), papilla bleeding index (PBI), and GCF MMP-8 levels were compared within each patient group, between the 2 patient groups, and also with a clinically healthy control group using non-parametric statistical analyses.

RESULTS

Both meloxicam and placebo groups showed statistically significant reductions in PBI, PI, and GCF MMP-8 levels on day 10 compared to baseline (P<0.01). The GCF MMP-8 level on day 10 in the meloxicam group was similar to the clinically healthy control group (P>0.05), while it was significantly higher in the placebo group (P<0.01). Positive correlations were found between MMP-8 total amounts and PBI scores at baseline and day 10 of drug intake in the patient groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Meloxicam showed a tendency to reduce GCF MMP-8 levels in vivo within the first 10 days when used as an adjunct in the initial phase of periodontal treatment that consists of scaling and root planing. Verification of this effect on collagenase-2 downregulation, as well as on the clinical periodontal parameters in long-term studies using larger test and control groups, is needed to provide further support for the adjunctive use of selective cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 inhibitors in the treatment of chronic periodontitis.

Meloxicam

Each month, subscribers to The Formulary® Monograph Service receive five to six researched monographs on drugs that are newly released or are in late Phase III trials. The monographs are targeted to your Pharmacy and Therapeutics Committee. Subscribers also receive monthly one-page summary monographs on the agents that are useful for agendas and pharmacy/nursing in-services. A comprehensive target drug utilization evaluation (DUE) is also provided each month. The monographs are published in printed form and on diskettes that allow customization. Subscribers to the The Formulary Monograph Service also receive access to a pharmacy bulletin board called The Formulary Information Exchange (The F.I.X). All topics pertinent to clinical pharmacy are discussed on The F.I.X.

Through the cooperation of The Formulary, Hospital Pharmacy publishes selected reviews in this column. If you would like information about The Formulary Monograph Service or The F.I.X., call The Formulary at 800-322-4349. The July 2000 Formulary monographs are linezolid, insulin glargine, rivastigmine, pemirolast, and tacrolimus ointment. The DUE is on linezolid.

The cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors: safety and effectiveness

OBJECTIVE

To review the development of cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors and discuss specific agents that are currently under investigation or have been marketed.

DATA SOURCES

Primary literature on selective COX inhibitors was identified from a comprehensive MEDLINE, English-literature search from January 1966 through September 1998, with additional studies selected by review of the references. Abstracts from recent meetings and package insert literature from approved agents were also used as source material. Indexing terms included COX-2 inhibitors, meloxicam, celecoxib, rofecoxib, flosulide, SC-58635, and MK-966.

STUDY SELECTION

Human clinical, pharmacokinetic, and dose-ranging trials performed in Europe and the US and randomized comparative trials were reviewed.

DATA SYNTHESIS

With the discovery of at least two COX isoforms, a better understanding of the mechanism of action and gastrointestinal toxicity of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) has been realized. While COX-1 is involved in physiologic maintenance, COX-2 seems to be involved in inflammation, mitogenesis, and specialized signal transductions. Selective COX-2 inhibitors may allow maximum antiinflammatory activity while improving the safety profile associated with NSAID therapy. Celecoxib and rofecoxib have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of osteo- and rheumatoid arthritis; meloxicam is undergoing Phase III clinical trials. Preliminary data indicate that the selective COX-2 inhibitors provide analgesic and antiinflammatory efficacy comparable with older NSAIDs, with fewer adverse gastrointestinal effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Specific COX-2 inhibitors offer promising benefits over older NSAIDs with regard to gastrointestinal safety while maintaining analgesic and antiinflammatory efficacy. Further study is required to determine long-term efficacy and safety in clinical use.

Efficacy and tolerability of intramuscular and oral meloxicam in patients with acute lumbago: a comparison with intramuscular and oral piroxicam

In this controlled, randomised, parallel-group, multicentre study, the efficacy and tolerability of an intramuscular (i.m.) dose of meloxicam (15 mg) on Day 1 followed by seven days of oral meloxicam (15 mg/day) were compared with those of an i.m. dose of piroxicam (20 mg) on Day 1 followed by seven days of oral piroxicam (20 mg/day) therapy in a total of 169 outpatients with acute lumbago. Time to onset of analgesic action after i.m. injection was determined, and overall efficacy, pain on movement, limitation of daily activities, local tolerability at the injection site and overall tolerability were assessed by investigators and patients on verbal rating scales (VRSs). Adverse events and laboratory assessments were documented. Meloxicam and piroxicam showed a rapid onset of action after i.m. injection (40 and 45 minutes median time, respectively), overall efficacy of both therapies was highly rated, and limitations to daily life were greatly reduced in the majority of patients in both groups. There were no statistically significant differences in efficacy between meloxicam and piroxicam. Local and overall tolerabilities were equally good for the two drugs, but there were fewer gastrointestinal (GI) adverse events among meloxicam patients (1.2% of patients) than piroxicam patients (7.0% of patients). The improved tolerability profile of meloxicam may be explained by its selectivity towards cyclooxygenase-2.

Meloxicam

Meloxicam is a new nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) developed for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis. It has greater in vitro and in vivo inhibitory action against the inducible isoform of cyclo-oxygenase (COX-2), which is implicated in the inflammatory response, than against the constitutive form of this enzyme (COX-1), inhibition of which is associated with gastric, renal and other adverse effects. It has anti-inflammatory effects similar to or better than those of other NSAIDs in animal models, and a greater therapeutic ratio (ulcerogenic potential:efficacy in adjuvant arthritis). In healthy volunteers meloxicam 7.5 or 15 mg caused less gastrointestinal mucosal damage on endoscopy than piroxicam 20 mg, with a significant difference between meloxicam 7.5 mg and piroxicam. In comparative clinical trials, meloxicam was at least as effective as piroxicam and naproxen in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, and diclofenac and piroxicam in patients with osteoarthritis. Meloxicam was at least as well tolerated as piroxicam, diclofenac or naproxen overall but had improved gastrointestinal tolerability compared with these agents.

The efficacy and tolerability of an 8-day administration of intravenous and oral meloxicam: a comparison with intramuscular and oral diclofenac in patients with acute lumbago. German Meloxicam Ampoule Study Group

In this controlled, randomized, parallel and open multicentre study, the efficacy and tolerability of a regimen comprising intravenous (i.v.) meloxicam followed by oral therapy was compared with a standard regimen of intramuscular (i.m.) diclofenac followed by oral dosing in patients with acute lumbago. Of a total of 183 patients, 92 were randomized to receive meloxicam 15 mg i.v. on day 1 followed by 7 days oral treatment with one 15 mg tablet daily, and 91 patients received diclofenac 75 mg i.m. on day 1 followed by 7 days treatment with one 100 mg slow release tablet daily. Pain on movement and limitation of activities were assessed by patients and physicians using questionnaires. Meloxicam i.v. demonstrated a significantly faster median time of onset of analgesic action (30 minutes), compared with diclofenac i.m. (60 minutes). The reduction in pain during movement 30 minutes after injection was also significantly in favour of meloxicam. Assessments of global efficacy indicated that meloxicam was significantly better than diclofenac as rated by investigators (p = 0.02) and patients (p = 0.01). Moreover, the rating of investigators and patients for local and global tolerance was significantly in favour of meloxicam (p < 0.05) and improvements in the quality of life were almost significant (p = 0.053). Fewer adverse events, particularly of a gastrointestinal (GI) nature, occurred in the meloxicam group compared with the diclofenac group. This study therefore demonstrates that meloxicam 15 mg i.v. followed by oral therapy is both efficacious and well tolerated in the treatment of acute lumbago, and compares favourably with the standard NSAID, diclofenac, in this indication.