Bleeding complications in patients on celecoxib and warfarin1

Drug-drug Interactions with Warfarin: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

AIM

The objective of this paper is to systematically review the literature on drug-drug interactions with warfarin, with a focus on patient-important clinical outcomes.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the International Pharmaceutical Abstract (IPA) databases were searched from January 2004 to August 2019. We included studies describing drug-drug interactions between warfarin and other drugs. Screening and data extraction were conducted independently and in duplicate. We synthesized pooled odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), comparing warfarin plus another medication to warfarin alone. We assessed the risk of bias at the study level and evaluated the overall certainty of evidence using GRADE.

RESULTS

Of 42,013 citations identified, a total of 72 studies reporting on 3,735,775 patients were considered eligible, including 11 randomized clinical trials and 61 observational studies. Increased risk of clinically relevant bleeding when added to warfarin therapy was observed for antiplatelet (AP) regimens (OR=1.74; 95% CI 1.56, 1.94), many antimicrobials (OR=1.63; 95% CI 1.45, 1.83), NSAIDs including COX-2 NSAIDs (OR=1.83; 95% CI 1.29, 2.59), SSRIs (OR=1.62; 95% CI 1.42, 1.85), mirtazapine (OR=1.75; 95% CI 1.30, 2.36), loop diuretics (OR=1.92; 95% CI 1.29, 2.86), and others. We found a protective effect of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) against warfarin-related gastrointestinal (GI) bleedings (OR=0.69; 95% CI 0.64, 0.73). No significant effect on thromboembolic events or mortality of any drug group used with warfarin was found, including single or dual AP regimens.

CONCLUSIONS

This review found low to moderate certainty evidence supporting the interaction between warfarin and a small group of medications, which result in increased bleeding risk. PPIs are associated with reduced hospitalization for upper GI bleeding for patients taking warfarin. Further studies are required to better understand drug-drug interactions leading to thromboembolic outcomes or death.

A Minimal Information Model for Potential Drug-Drug Interactions

Despite the significant health impacts of adverse events associated with drug-drug interactions, no standard models exist for managing and sharing evidence describing potential interactions between medications. Minimal information models have been used in other communities to establish community consensus around simple models capable of communicating useful information. This paper reports on a new minimal information model for describing potential drug-drug interactions. A task force of the Semantic Web in Health Care and Life Sciences Community Group of the World-Wide Web consortium engaged informaticians and drug-drug interaction experts in in-depth examination of recent literature and specific potential interactions. A consensus set of information items was identified, along with example descriptions of selected potential drug-drug interactions (PDDIs). User profiles and use cases were developed to demonstrate the applicability of the model. Ten core information items were identified: drugs involved, clinical consequences, seriousness, operational classification statement, recommended action, mechanism of interaction, contextual information/modifying factors, evidence about a suspected drug-drug interaction, frequency of exposure, and frequency of harm to exposed persons. Eight best practice recommendations suggest how PDDI knowledge artifact creators can best use the 10 information items when synthesizing drug interaction evidence into artifacts intended to aid clinicians. This model has been included in a proposed implementation guide developed by the HL7 Clinical Decision Support Workgroup and in PDDIs published in the CDS Connect repository. The complete description of the model can be found at https://w3id.org/hclscg/pddi.

Same-day discharge protocol for laparoscopic treatment of adnexal disease: management and acceptance

OBJECTIVE

Develop a 'same-day discharge' setting for laparoscopic treatment of adnexal disease.

SETTING

Preventive Gynecology, European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy.

POPULATION

Two hundred patients undergoing laparoscopic procedures.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Data were retrospectively collected through clinical, surgical and laboratory reports. After discharge patients were contacted by phone and e-mail.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The rate of discharge, adverse events and readmission was measured. The need for adjunctive care provided by our on-call service or by a primary care physician and the acceptability of the same-day discharge protocol were also investigated.

RESULTS

One hundred and sixty-five patients out of 200 were discharged on the same day. Of the 35 patients hospitalized, the most frequent causes for overnight admission were: uncontrolled pain, surgical length or complexity of the procedure in nine patients, nausea/vomit in four patients. One hundred and one out of 200 patients answered the mailed questionnaire. None of the discharged patients were readmitted. Eighty-five percent of the answering patients evaluated the length of their hospital stay as adequate or moderately adequate. Ninety-two percent of the patients would recommend the day surgery to other patients.

CONCLUSIONS

our experience demonstrates that the same-day discharge protocol for laparoscopic treatment of adnexal disease is safe and acceptable.

Risk of Bleeding with Exposure to Warfarin and Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

 Warfarin use can trigger the occurrence of bleeding independently or as a result of a drug-drug interaction when used in combination with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs).

OBJECTIVES

 This article examines the risk of bleeding in individuals exposed to concomitant warfarin and NSAID compared with those taking warfarin alone (Prospero Registry ID 145237).

METHODS

 PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched. The primary outcome of interest was gastrointestinal bleeding and general bleeding. Summary effects were calculated to estimate average treatment effect using random effects models. Heterogeneity was assessed using Cochran's Q and I ². Risk of bias was also assessed using the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality bias assessment tool.

RESULTS

 A total of 651 studies were identified, of which 11 studies met inclusion criteria for meta-analysis. The odds ratio (OR) for gastrointestinal bleeding when exposed to warfarin and an NSAID was 1.98 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.55-2.53). The risk of gastrointestinal bleeding was also significantly elevated with exposure to a COX-2 inhibitor and warfarin relative to warfarin alone (OR = 1.90, 95% CI: 1.46-2.46). There was an increased risk of general bleeding with the combination of warfarin with NSAIDs (OR = 1.58, 95% CI: 1.18-2.12) or COX-2 inhibitors (OR = 1.54, 95% CI: 0.86-2.78) compared with warfarin alone.

CONCLUSION

 Risk of bleeding is significantly increased among persons taking warfarin and a NSAID or COX-2 inhibitor together as compared with taking warfarin alone. It is important to caution patients about taking these medications in combination.

Management of NSAID-associated peptic ulcer disease

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) use increases the risk of gastrointestinal complications such as ulcers or bleeding. The presence of factors like advanced age, history of peptic ulcer, Helicobacter pylori infection and the use of anticoagulants or antiplatelet agents increase this risk further. COX-2 inhibitors and antisecretory drugs, particularly proton pump inhibitors, help to minimize the risk of gastrointestinal complications in high-risk patients. This review presents a practical approach to the prevention and treatment of NSAID-associated peptic ulcer disease and examines the new advances in the rational use of NSAIDs.

Enhancing medical education by improving statistical methodology in journal articles

BACKGROUND

Medical journal articles often contain imprecise and inaccurate statistical methods and terminology that inhibit effective teaching and learning in medical education.

SUMMARY

Examples are used for ten flaws dealing with research design and methods and statistical analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

If these inaccurate and inappropriate usages are avoided, teaching and learning in medical student and graduate medical education will be enhanced, and subsequently the health care of patients will be improved.

Risk of potential drug-drug interactions among Brazilian elderly: a population-based, cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Drug-drug interactions (DDIs) are one of the main causes of adverse reactions related to medications, being responsible for up to 23% of hospital admissions. However, only a few studies have evaluated this problem in elderly Brazilians.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the prevalence of potential DDIs (PDDIs) in community-dwelling elderly people in Brazil, analyse these interactions with regard to severity and clinical implications, and identify associated factors.

METHODS

A population-based cross-sectional study was carried out involving 2143 elderly (aged >or=60 years) residents of the metropolitan area of Sao Paulo, Brazil. Data were obtained from the SABE (Saúde, Bem estar e Envelhecimento [Health, Well-Being, and Aging]) survey, which is a multicentre study carried out in seven countries of Latin America and the Caribbean, coordinated by the Pan-American Health Organization. PDDIs were analysed using a computerized program and categorized according to level of severity, onset, mechanism and documentation in the literature. The STATA software statistical package was used for data analysis, and logistic regression was conducted to determine whether variables were associated with PDDIs.

RESULTS

Analysis revealed that 568 (26.5%) of the elderly population included in the study were taking medications that could lead to a DDI. Almost two-thirds (64.4%) of the elderly population exposed to PDDIs were women, 50.7% were aged >or=75 years, 71.7% reported having fair or poor health and 65.8% took 2-5 medications. A total of 125 different PDDIs were identified; the treatment combination of an ACE inhibitor with a thiazide or loop diuretic (associated with hypotension) was the most frequent cause of PDDIs (n = 322 patients; 56.7% of individuals with PDDIs). Analysis of the PDDIs revealed that 70.4% were of moderate severity, 64.8% were supported by good quality evidence and 56.8% were considered of delayed onset. The multivariate analysis showed that the risk of a PDDI was significantly increased among elderly individuals using six or more medications (odds ratio [OR] 3.37) and in patients with hypertension (OR 2.56), diabetes mellitus (OR 1.73) or heart problems (OR 3.36).

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately one-quarter of the elderly population living in Sao Paulo could be taking two or more potentially interacting medicines. Polypharmacy predisposes elderly individuals to PDDIs. More than half of these drug combinations (57.6%, n = 72) were part of commonly employed treatment regimens and may be responsible for adverse reactions that compromise the safety of elderly individuals, especially at home. Educational initiatives are needed to avoid unnecessary risks.

Celecoxib induces tolerance in a model of peripheral inflammatory pain in rats

Celecoxib is a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) that selectively inhibits cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2). Like most NSAIDs, celecoxib exhibits analgesic effects in models of inflammatory pain but these appear to be dependent on endogenous opioid release. Therefore, this study has assessed the ability of celecoxib to induce tolerance in rats, comparable to that induced by morphine. Rats were injected subcutaneously (s.c.) twice daily with divided doses of celecoxib, morphine or indomethacin. Inflammation was induced in one hind paw of rats by injecting prostaglandin E(2) (PGE(2); 200 ng) 30 min after drug administration, on days 1, 3, 5 and 6 or 7. Nociceptive thresholds to mechanical stimulation were measured 3 h after PGE(2) injection, on the same days. On days 6 or 7, analgesic effects of the full doses of test drugs were assessed. Celecoxib-induced tolerance, as did morphine, an effect not shown by another NSAID, indomethacin. Cross-tolerance between celecoxib and morphine was observed as they did not induce analgesia when animals were chronically treated with morphine or celecoxib, respectively. In addition, tolerance to celecoxib's analgesic effects persisted for at least two days after the end of the chronic treatment with celecoxib. Naltrexone prevented induction of tolerance to morphine or celecoxib. The present results strengthen the possibility that celecoxib has also mechanisms of analgesia unrelated to COX inhibition but dependent on endogenous opioid release. Our results also imply the existence of a new class of analgesics without the deleterious effects of COX inhibitors.

Gastrointestinal safety of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs and selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors in patients on warfarin

BACKGROUND

The interaction between warfarin and nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) is well known. However, warfarin and NSAIDs are still commonly prescribed together. Selective cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors, a newer class of NSAID, offer potential advantages over the nonselective NSAIDs in patients treated with warfarin.

OBJECTIVE

To study the rates of hospitalization for gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding events in 3 groups of patients: those taking warfarin only, those taking warfarin plus a nonselective NSAID, and those taking warfarin plus a selective COX-2 inhibitor.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort analysis in a large nonprofit health maintenance organization. All warfarin users from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2005, were eligible for inclusion in the study. Eligible patients were grouped by their exposure time to warfarin only, warfarin plus nonselective NSAIDs, or warfarin plus selective COX-2 inhibitor. The study endpoint was hospitalization for a GI bleed. Patients were matched using a propensity scoring methodology. A multivariate Cox proportional hazards model was used to estimate the hazard ratio for GI bleeding between patient cohorts, controlling for age, sex, baseline medical conditions, prior history of GI bleeding, and prescription drug use.

RESULTS

The eligible population consisted of 35,548 patients undergoing 46,214 courses of warfarin therapy. The adjusted hazard ratio for hospital-associated GI bleeding in the warfarin plus nonselective NSAID group versus warfarin alone was 3.58 (95% CI 2.31 to 5.55; p < 0.01) and for warfarin plus selective COX-2 inhibitor versus warfarin alone was 1.71 (95% CI 0.60 to 4.84; p = 0.31). For nonselective NSAIDs plus warfarin versus selective COX-2 inhibitor plus warfarin, the adjusted hazard ratio was 3.69 (95% CI 1.42 to 9.60; p = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

In general, nonselective NSAIDs and selective COX-2 inhibitors should be avoided in patients taking warfarin. In situations where patients require NSAIDs and cannot be managed using other therapies, our results suggest that selective COX-2 inhibitors are associated with fewer hospitalizations for GI bleeding.

Adverse drug interactions involving common prescription and over-the-counter analgesic agents

BACKGROUND

Eight analgesic preparations with approved indications for acute pain were among the top 200 drugs prescribed in the United States in 2006. In addition, an estimated 36 million Americans use over-the-counter (OTC) analgesics daily. Given this volume of use, it is not surprising that a number of drug interactions involving analgesic drugs have been reported.

OBJECTIVES

This article examines the pharmacologic factors that enhance the clinical relevance of potential drug interactions and reviews the literature on drug interactions involving the most commonly used analgesic preparations in the United States.

METHODS

A PubMed search was conducted for English-language articles published between January 1967 and July 2007. Among the search terms were drug interactions, acetaminophen, aspirin, ibuprofen, naproxen, celecoxib, NSAIDs, hydrocodone, oxycodone, codeine, tramadol, OTC analgesics, alcohol, ethanol, antihypertensive drugs, methotrexate, warfarin, SSRIs, paroxetine, fluoxetine, sertraline, citalopram, serotonin syndrome, MAOIs, and overdose. Controlled clinical trials, case-control studies, and case reports were included in the review.

RESULTS

A number of case reports and well-controlled clinical trials were identified that provided evidence of the relatively well known drug-drug interactions between prescription/OTC NSAIDs and alcohol, antihypertensive drugs, high-dose methotrexate, and lithium, as well as between frequently prescribed narcotics and other central nervous system depressants. In contrast, the ability of recent alcohol ingestion to exacerbate the hepatotoxic potential of therapeutic doses of acetaminophen is not supported by either case reports or clinical research. Use of ibuprofen according to OTC guidelines in patients taking cardioprotective doses of aspirin does not appear to interfere with aspirin's antiplatelet activity, whereas chronic prescription use of ibuprofen and other NSAIDs may interfere. Low-dose aspirin intake appears to abolish the gastroprotective effects of cyclooxygenase-2-selective inhibitors, including celecoxib. There is evidence of other less well known and potentially clinically significant drug-drug interactions, including the ability of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors to inhibit the analgesic activity of tramadol and codeine through inhibition of their metabolic activation, to induce serotonin syndrome when used chronically in the presence of high doses of tramadol through synergistic serotonergic action, and to increase the potential for gastrointestinal bleeding associated with NSAID therapy through additive or supra-additive antiplatelet activity.

CONCLUSIONS

Considering the widespread use of analgesic agents, the overall incidence of serious drug-drug interactions involving these agents has been relatively low. The most serious interactions usually involved other interacting drugs with low therapeutic indices or chronic and/or high-dose use of an analgesic and the interacting drug.

Potential drug–drug interactions within Veterans Affairs medical centers

PURPOSE

This study assessed the prevalence of 25 clinically important drug-drug interactions (DDIs) in the ambulatory care clinics of the Department of Veterans Affairs medical centers (VAMCs).

METHODS

This study was a retrospective, cross-sectional database analysis of pharmacy records to assess the prevalence of 25 clinically important DDIs. For each DDI, the object drug was defined as the medication that has its therapeutic effect modified by the drug interaction process. The precipitant drug was defined as the medication responsible for affecting the pharmacologic action or the pharmacokinetic properties of the object drug. Rates of interactions for each VAMC facility were calculated as the number of patients with a DDI divided by the total number of individual patients exposed to the object or precipitant medications. The 25 DDIs were categorized into four main categories on the basis of the therapeutic classification of the medications involved in the drug pairs.

RESULTS

The study population included 2,795,345 patients who filled prescriptions for medications involved in potential DDIs across 128 VAMCs. The highest DDI exposure rate was 129.2 per 1,000 recipients of monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs) that occurred with combinations of selective serotonin-reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). The lowest DDI exposure rate was 0.01 per 1,000 warfarin recipients who had the warfarin and sulfinpyrazone combination.

CONCLUSION

The analysis of pharmacy records of veterans who filled prescriptions at the outpatient settings within VAMC found an overall rate of 2.15% for potential DDIs. Case-exposure rates were greatest for veterans receiving SSRIs and MAOIs, ganciclovir and zidovudine, anticoagulants and thyroid hormones, and warfarin and nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs.