Efficacy, safety and tolerability of lumiracoxib in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

Use of corticoids and non-steroidal anti-inflammatories in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: Systematic review and network meta-analysis

Evidence on the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and corticoids for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is inconclusive and is not up to date. This systematic review assessed the effectiveness and safety of these anti-inflammatories (AI) in the treatment of RA. COCHRANE (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science and Virtual Health Library were searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCT) with adults which used AI (dose represented in mg/day) compared with placebo or active controls and was carried out up to December of 2019. Reviewers, in pairs and independently, selected studies, performed the data extraction and assessed the risk of bias. The quality of the evidence was assessed by GRADE. Network meta-analyses were performed using the Stata v.14.2. Twenty-six articles were selected (NSAIDs = 21 and corticoids = 5). Naproxen 1,000 improved physical function, reduced pain and the number of painful joints compared to placebo. Etoricoxib 90 reduced the number of painful joints compared to placebo. Naproxen 750 reduced the number of swollen joints, except for etoricoxib 90. Naproxen 1,000, etoricoxib 90 and diclofenac 150 were better than placebo regarding patient assessment. Assessment physician showed that NSAIDs were better than placebo. Meta-analyses were not performed for prednisolone and prednisone. Naproxen 1,000 was the most effective drug and celecoxib 200 showed fewer adverse events. However, the low quality of the evidence observed for the outcomes with NSAIDs, the absence of meta-analyses to assess the outcomes with corticoids, as well as the risk of bias observed, indicate that future RCT can confirm such findings.

Impact of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs on cardiovascular risk: Is it the same in osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis?

Although large-scale population studies have shown that non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) increase the risk of myocardial infarction, this is not confirmed in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Herein, we review the litterature on the differential effects of NSAIDs on cardiovascular risk in osteoarthritis (OA) versus RA and discuss possible explanations for this discrepancy. To assess a potential additive effect of age in non-RA populations, we compared weighted mean age between RA patients and unselected NSAID users included in cohort and case-control studies that estimate the cardiovascular risk of NSAIDs, assuming that the main indication for NSAID usage in elderly populations is OA. Our hypothesis that advanced age in osteoarthtitis compared to RA patients confounds the effect of NSAIDs on cardiovasular risk was not confirmed. Several other hypotheses that can be proposed to explain this counterintuitive effect of NSAIDs on the cardiovascular risk of RA patients are discussed. We conclude that patients with RA have a lower cardiovascular disease risk associated with the use of NSAIDs, probably due to the nature of their disease per se, until further research indicates differently.

Risk of stroke associated with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), both cyclooxygenase (COX)-2-selective and nonselective agents, have been associated with the increased risk of adverse cardiovascular events. The majority of studies have focused on myocardial infarction as the primary cardiovascular outcome. However, the association between NSAIDs and the risk of stroke events is not as clear, although an understanding of this association is important since stroke continues to be a significant cause of morbidity and mortality. Various factors may contribute to an association between NSAIDs and stroke, including hypertension and thrombosis. Additionally, the risk may vary with different NSAID types. In this review, we discuss the relevant literature assessing the possible association between NSAID use and stroke events, along with the potential mechanisms and the possible directions for future study.

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and risk of cardiovascular disease in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a nationwide cohort study

OBJECTIVE: To examine the risk of major cardiovascular disease associated with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in a large 'real-world' contemporary rheumatoid arthritis (RA) cohort. METHODS: A longitudinal cohort study was conducted with use of Danish nationwide individual-level registry data on inpatient and outpatient health care provision, pharmacotherapy and income during 1997-2009. 17 320 RA patients were identified and matched with 69 280 controls (4 : 1) by age and sex. NSAID-associated risk of major cardiovascular disease defined as the combined endpoint of myocardial infarction, stroke or cardiovascular mortality was assessed in multivariable survival models. RESULTS: During follow-up (median 4.9 years) 6283 events occurred. The cardiovascular risk associated with overall NSAID use was significantly lower in RA patients than in controls (HR 1.22 (95% CI 1.09 to 1.37) vs 1.51 (1.36 to 1.66), p<0.01). The pattern of lower NSAID-associated risk in RA patients was generally found with the individual NSAIDs investigated. While use of rofecoxib (HR 1.57 (1.16 to 2.12)) and diclofenac (HR 1.35 (1.11 to 1.64)) was associated with increased cardiovascular risk in RA patients, there was no significant risk increase associated with use of other NSAIDs in these patients. CONCLUSIONS: The cardiovascular risk associated with NSAID use in RA patients was modest and significantly lower than in non-RA individuals. Moreover, only a few of the individual NSAIDs were associated with increased cardiovascular risk. NSAID use should be assessed in the individual patient based on the indication for pain relief and risk factors for adverse effects, and not automatically be avoided due to concerns of severe cardiovascular outcomes alone.

Lumiracoxib Does Not Affect the Ex Vivo Antiplatelet Aggregation Activity of Low-Dose Aspirin in Healthy Subjects

This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study evaluated the pharmacodynamic effects of concomitant low-dose aspirin and lumiracoxib in healthy subjects. Participants received lumiracoxib 400 mg once daily (n = 14) or placebo (n = 14) for 11 days, with concomitant low-dose aspirin (75 mg once daily) from days 5 to 11. Ex vivo pharmacodynamic assessments included assays of platelet aggregation and urinary thromboxane and prostacyclin metabolite profile. Arachidonic acid-stimulated platelet aggregation was reduced from 76.3% on day 4 to 4.8% on day 11 in the placebo group and from 75.8% on day 4 to 5.1% on day 11 in the lumiracoxib group. Collagen-induced platelet aggregation was reduced from 77.5% on day 4 to 52.8% on day 11 in the placebo group and from 79.5% on day 4 to 55.9% on day 11 in the lumiracoxib group. Urinary thromboxane and prostacyclin were unaffected by lumiracoxib. In conclusion, concomitant lumiracoxib did not interfere with the cyclooxygenase-1-mediated antiplatelet effects of low-dose aspirin.

Efficacy and tolerability of naproxen/esomeprazole magnesium tablets compared with non-specific NSAIDs and COX-2 inhibitors: a systematic review and network analyses

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), such as non-selective NSAIDs (nsNSAIDs) or selective cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors, are commonly prescribed for arthritic pain relief in patients with osteoarthritis (OA), rheumatoid arthritis (RA), or ankylosing spondylitis (AS). Treatment guidelines for chronic NSAID therapy include the consideration for gastroprotection for those at risk of gastric ulcers (GUs) associated with the chronic NSAID therapy. The United States Food and Drug Administration has approved naproxen/esomeprazole magnesium tablets for the relief of signs and symptoms of OA, RA, and AS, and to decrease the risk of developing GUs in patients at risk of developing NSAID-associated GUs. The European Medical Association has approved this therapy for the symptomatic treatment of OA, RA, and AS in patients who are at risk of developing NSAID-associated GUs and/or duodenal ulcers, for whom treatment with lower doses of naproxen or other NSAIDs is not considered sufficient. Naproxen/esomeprazole magnesium tablets have been compared with naproxen and celecoxib for these indications in head-to-head trials. This systematic literature review and network meta-analyses of data from randomized controlled trials was performed to compare naproxen/esomeprazole magnesium tablets with a number of additional relevant comparators. For this study, an original review examined MEDLINE®, Embase®, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register from database start to April 14, 2009. Using the same methodology, a review update was conducted to December 21, 2009. The systematic review and network analyses showed naproxen/esomeprazole magnesium tablets have an improved upper gastrointestinal tolerability profile (dyspepsia and gastric or gastroduodenal ulcers) over several active comparators (naproxen, ibuprofen, diclofenac, ketoprofen, etoricoxib, and fixed-dose diclofenac sodium plus misoprostol), and are equally effective as all active comparators in treating arthritic symptoms in patients with OA, RA, and AS. Naproxen/esomeprazole magnesium tablets are therefore a valuable option for treating arthritic symptoms in eligible patients with OA, RA, and AS.

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.

Efficacy and tolerability of lumiracoxib, a highly selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 (COX2) inhibitor, in the management of pain and osteoarthritis

Lumiracoxib is a COX2 inhibitor that is highly selective, is more effective than placebo on pain in osteoarthritis (OA), with similar analgesic and anti-inflammatory effects as non-selective NSAIDs and the selective COX2 inhibitor celecoxib, has a lower incidence of upper gastrointestinal (GI) side effects in patients not taking aspirin, and a similar incidence of cardiovascular (CV) side effects compared to naproxen or ibuprofen. In the context of earlier guidelines and taking into account the GI and CV safety results of the TARGET study, lumiracoxib had secured European Medicines Agency (EMEA) approval with as indication symptomatic treatment of OA as well as short-term management of acute pain associated with primary dysmenorrhea and following orthopedic or dental surgery. In the complex clinical context of efficiency and safety of selective and non-selective COX inhibitors, its prescription and use should be based on the risk and safety profile of the patient. In addition, there is further need for long-term GI and CV safety studies and general post-marketing safety on its use in daily practice. Meanwhile, at the time of submission of this manuscript, the EMEA has withdrawn lumiracoxib throughout Europe because of the risk of serious side effects affecting the liver.

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.

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.

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.

Clinical use and pharmacological properties of selective COX-2 inhibitors

Selective COX-2 inhibitors (coxibs) are approved for the relief of acute pain and symptoms of chronic inflammatory conditions such as osteoarthritis (OA) and rheumatoid arthritis (RA). They have similar pharmacological properties but a slightly improved gastrointestinal (GI) safety profile if compared to traditional nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (tNSAIDs). However, long-term use of coxibs can be associated with an increased risk for cardiovascular (CV) adverse events (AEs). For this reason, two coxibs were withdrawn from the market. Currently celecoxib, etoricoxib, and lumiracoxib are used. These three coxibs differ in their chemical structure and selectivity for COX-2, which might explain some of their pharmacological features. Following oral administration, the less lipophilic celecoxib has a lower bioavailability (20-40%) than the other two coxibs (74-100%). All are eliminated by hepatic metabolism involving mainly CYP2C9 (celecoxib, lumiracoxib) and CYP3A4 (etoricoxib). Elimination half-life varies from 5 to 8 h (lumiracoxib), 11 to 16 h (celecoxib) and 19 to 32 h (etoricoxib). In patients with liver disease, plasma levels of celecoxib and etoricoxib are increased about two-fold. Clinical efficacies of the coxibs are comparable to tNSAIDs. There is an ongoing discussion about whether the slightly better GI tolerability (which is lost if acetylsalicylic acid is coadministered) of the coxibs is offset by their elevated risks for CV AEs (also seen with tNSAIDs other than naproxen), which apparently increase with dose and duration of exposure. In addition, the higher costs for coxibs (if compared to tNSAIDs, even when a "gastroprotective" proton pump inhibitor is coadministered) should be taken into consideration, if a coxib will be selected for certain patients with a high risk for GI complications. For such treatment, the lowest effective dose should be used for a limited time. Monitoring of kidney function and blood pressure appears advisable. It is hoped that further controlled studies can better define the therapeutic place of the coxibs.

Risk of myocardial infarction associated with selective COX-2 inhibitors: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

PURPOSE

To evaluate the risk of myocardial infarction (MI) associated with the use of selective cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors (coxibs).

METHODS

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) using a fixed-effect model to estimate the odds ratios (ORs) for risk of MI associated with coxibs compared against placebo, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and other coxibs.

RESULTS

Fifty-five trials (99 087 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. The overall pooled OR for MI risk for any coxib compared against placebo was 1.46 (95%CI: 1.02, 2.09). We found celecoxib, rofecoxib, etoricoxib, valdecoxib and lumiracoxib were associated with higher MI risks compared against placebo. The pooled OR for any coxib compared against other NSAIDs was 1.45 (95%CI: 1.09, 1.93). Rofecoxib had a significantly higher risk of MI than naproxen (OR: 5.39; 95%: 2.08, 14.02) and valdecoxib had lower MI risk than diclofenac (OR: 0.14, 95%CI: 0.03, 0.73). There were no significant differences identified in the risk of MI from the available head-to-head comparisons of coxibs.

CONCLUSIONS

Coxibs were associated with increased risks of MI when compared against placebo or non-selective NSAIDs. Differences in MI risk were also apparent between comparisons of individual NSAIDs. Future work should consider using individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis to explore differences in MI risk between different subgroups of patients.

Systematic review of trials of the effect of continued use of oral non-selective NSAIDs on blood pressure and hypertension

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effects of continued use of non-selective NSAIDs (nsNSAIDs) on blood pressure and hypertension.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This was a systematic review of randomized clinical trials of oral nsNSAIDs used for at least a 4-week duration. Searches were conducted of PubMed and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, using key terms for nsNSAIDs and blood pressure or hypertension, to identify articles published in the English language peer-reviewed literature through March 2007.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Change from baseline to end of study in systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP), and the incidence of hypertension. Pooled statistics were computed using fixed and random-effects analyses.

RESULTS

Thirty-two articles were included. The mean change (95% confidence interval [CI]) in blood pressure (in mmHg) from baseline to end of study for five trials of ibuprofen was 3.54 (2.70, 4.39) for SBP and 1.16 (0.68, 1.64) for DBP (p < 0.001 for both changes). Results of four trials of indomethacin were similar to those for ibuprofen: 2.90 (-0.28, 6.08) for SBP (p = 0.07) and 1.58 (0.29, 2.87) for DBP (p = 0.02). Mean changes from baseline for two trials of diclofenac were -0.46 (-1.48, 0.56) for SBP (p = 0.38) and -0.56 (-1.19, 0.07) for DBP (p = 0.08) and were similar to those for placebo. Changes from baseline in SBP were positive but not statistically significant for naproxen, sulindac, and nabumetone. Compared with placebo, the risk ratio (95% CI) for hypertension was 2.85 (1.44, 5.65; p = 0.003) in two ibuprofen trials.

CONCLUSIONS

Continued use of ibuprofen increases blood pressure and raises the incidence of hypertension. There appears to be heterogeneity in such effects with continued use of other nsNSAIDs but, due to limitations in the data, results for naproxen, sulindac, and nabumetone are inconclusive.

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.

Do selective COX-2 inhibitors increase the risk of cerebrovascular events? A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the risk of cerebrovascular events (CVEs) associated with selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors (coxibs).

METHOD

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). A fixed-effect model was used to estimate the odds ratios (ORs) for risk of CVE associated with coxibs compared against placebo, non-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and other coxibs.

RESULTS

Forty trials (88 116 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. The overall pooled OR for CVE for any coxib against placebo was 1.03 (95% CI: 0.71, 1.50). Comparing individual coxibs against placebo, we found that celecoxib, rofecoxib, etoricoxib and lumiracoxib were associated with higher CVE risks and valdecoxib was associated with a lower CVE risk, although there were no significant differences detected. There was also no significant difference in risk of CVE when comparing coxibs against any non-selective NSAIDs; the corresponding pooled OR was 0.86 (95% CI: 0.64, 1.16).

CONCLUSION

On the basis of a detailed analysis of available RCTs, there does not appear to be any significant difference in risk of CVEs associated with coxibs when compared against placebo or non-selective NSAIDs. It is likely that the increased risk of thrombotic vascular events associated with coxibs is largely attributable to an increased risk of myocardial infarction, rather than CVEs.

Cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events in the randomized, controlled Alzheimer's Disease Anti-Inflammatory Prevention Trial (ADAPT)

Objectives:

The Alzheimer's Disease Anti-inflammatory Prevention Trial (ADAPT) was designed to evaluate the conventional NSAID naproxen sodium and the selective COX-2 inhibitor celecoxib for primary prevention of Alzheimer's dementia (AD). On 17 December 2004, after the Adenoma Prevention with Celecoxib (APC) trial reported increased cardiovascular risks with celecoxib, the ADAPT Steering Committee suspended treatment and enrollment. This paper reports on cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events in ADAPT.

Design:

ADAPT is a randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel chemoprevention trial with 1–46 mo of follow-up.

Setting:

The trial was conducted at six field sites in the United States: Baltimore, Maryland; Boston, Massachusetts; Rochester, New York; Seattle, Washington; Sun City, Arizona; and Tampa, Florida.

Participants:

The 2,528 participants were aged 70 y and older with a family history of AD.

Interventions:

Study treatments were celecoxib (200 mg b.i.d.), naproxen sodium (220 mg b.i.d.), and placebo.

Outcome measures:

Outcome measures were deaths, along with nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, congestive heart failure (CHF), transient ischemic attack (TIA), and antihypertensive treatment recorded from structured interviews at scheduled intervals. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to analyze these events individually and in several composites.

Results:

Counts (with 3-y incidence) of participants who experienced cardiovascular or cerebrovascular death, MI, stroke, CHF, or TIA in the celecoxib-, naproxen-, and placebo-treated groups were 28/717 (5.54%), 40/713 (8.25%), and 37/1070 (5.68%), respectively. This yielded a hazard ratio (95% confidence interval [CI]) for celecoxib of 1.10 (0.67–1.79) and for naproxen of 1.63 (1.04–2.55). Antihypertensive treatment was initiated in 160/440 (47.43%), 147/427 (45.00%), and 164/644 (34.08%). This yielded hazard ratios (CIs) of 1.56 for celecoxib (1.26–1.94) and 1.40 for naproxen (1.12–1.75).

Conclusions:

For celecoxib, ADAPT data do not show the same level of risk as those of the APC trial. The data for naproxen, although not definitive, are suggestive of increased cardiovascular and cerebrovascular risk.

Background: Evidence from observational studies suggests that people taking certain nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are at lower risk of developing Alzheimer's disease. However, in order to reliably find out whether NSAIDs reduce the risk of Alzheimer's, it is important to perform a properly designed randomized trial. Such a trial, ADAPT, was sponsored by the United States National Institute on Aging, and the study started recruitment in 2001. The trial involved three treatment arms: naproxen (one type of NSAID), celecoxib (another type of NSAID, but one that specifically inhibits an enzyme called COX-2), and placebo, acting as a control. It was planned that 2,625 participants would be recruited and that the primary outcome of interest was incidence of Alzheimer's disease in the three treatment arms; the trial would run for 7 y. However, this trial was terminated early, a decision based in part on information from other studies that demonstrated an increased risk of certain harms, such as heart attacks and strokes, in people taking celecoxib and other types of COX-2 inhibitors. Therefore meaningful data were not available at the time on the study's primary outcome (prevention of Alzheimer's disease). However, data about the chance of these harms are available from the ADAPT results, and these results are presented here.

What this trial shows: The investigators compared frequency of particular types of harm in the treatment arms: heart attack, stroke, congestive heart failure (CHF), and transient ischemic attack (TIA). For each individual type of event, some were more likely in people treated with celecoxib compared with placebo, but others were not. When considering people taking naproxen, all four types of adverse events were more likely to occur in the treatment group as compared to placebo. The investigators then combined data from all four types of harm together, and here they found that the overall risk in people taking celecoxib was higher than for people taking placebo, but that this was not statistically significant, so it could have been due to chance alone. When considering naproxen as compared with placebo, the researchers saw an approximately 60% increase in risk for all four harms combined, and this result was statistically significant. The death rate in people taking either celecoxib or naproxen was higher than for those taking placebo, but this was not statistically significant, and therefore could have been due to chance.

Strengths and limitations: Strengths of this study include the randomization procedures, which used a distributed computer system to assign patients to treatment arms (minimizing the chance of bias), blinding of patients to their treatment assignment, and blinding of the committee reviewing deaths and safety reports to treatment assignment. One limitation is that although the trial was large and appropriately powered for the main outcome (prevention of Alzheimer's disease), the number of safety events reported here were small and the trial was not primarily designed to examine safety. Further, participants eligible to join this trial were required to have a family history of Alzheimer's disease, so it is possible that their risk factors are slightly different from the general population.

Contribution to the evidence: The cardiovascular safety of NSAID's, including COX-2 inhibitors, is an intensely debated topic. Very few published data exist on the long-term safety of celecoxib as compared with placebo, although there are a number of as-yet-unpublished studies. These data on harms provided by ADAPT provide important results that should be incorporated into future meta-analyses. Such meta-analyses will give a more rigorous and reliable assessment of the safety of the drugs studied here.

Clinical pharmacology of lumiracoxib: a selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitor

Lumiracoxib (Prexige) is a selective cyclo-oxygenase (COX)-2 inhibitor developed for the treatment of osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis and acute pain. Lumiracoxib possesses a carboxylic acid group that makes it weakly acidic (acid dissociation constant [pKa] 4.7), distinguishing it from other selective COX-2 inhibitors. Lumiracoxib has good oral bioavailability (74%). It is rapidly absorbed, reaching maximum plasma concentrations 2 hours after dosing, and is highly plasma protein bound. Lumiracoxib has a short elimination half-life from plasma (mean 4 hours) and demonstrates dose-proportional plasma pharmacokinetics with no accumulation during multiple dosing. In patients with rheumatoid arthritis, peak lumiracoxib synovial fluid concentrations occur 3-4 hours later than in plasma and exceed plasma concentrations from 5 hours after dosing to the end of the 24-hour dosing interval. These data suggest that lumiracoxib may be associated with reduced systemic exposure, while still reaching sites where COX-2 inhibition is required for pain relief. Lumiracoxib is metabolised extensively prior to excretion, with only a small amount excreted unchanged in urine or faeces. Lumiracoxib and its metabolites are excreted via renal and faecal routes in approximately equal amounts. The major metabolic pathways identified involve oxidation of the 5-methyl group of lumiracoxib and/or hydroxylation of its dihaloaromatic ring. Major metabolites of lumiracoxib in plasma are the 5-carboxy, 4'-hydroxy and 4'-hydroxy-5-carboxy derivatives, of which only the 4'-hydroxy derivative is active and COX-2 selective. In vitro, the major oxidative pathways are catalysed primarily by cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2C9 with very minor contribution from CYP1A2 and CYP2C19. However, in patients genotyped as poor CYP2C9 metabolisers, exposure to lumiracoxib (area under the plasma concentration-time curve) is not significantly increased compared with control subjects, indicating no requirement for adjustment of lumiracoxib dose in these subjects. Lumiracoxib is selective for COX-2 compared with COX-1 in the human whole blood assay with a ratio of 515 : 1 in healthy subjects and in patients with osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis. COX-2 selectivity was confirmed by a lack of inhibition of arachidonic acid and collagen-induced platelet aggregation. COX-2 selectivity of lumiracoxib is associated with a reduced incidence of gastroduodenal erosions compared with naproxen and a lack of effect on both small and large bowel permeability. Lumiracoxib does not exhibit any clinically meaningful interactions with a range of commonly used medications including aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid), fluconazole, an ethinylestradiol- and levonorgestrel-containing oral contraceptive, omeprazole, the antacid Maalox, methotrexate and warfarin (although, as in common practice, routine monitoring of coagulation is recommended when lumiracoxib is co-administered with warfarin). As such, dose adjustments are not required when co-administering these agents with lumiracoxib. In addition, moderate hepatic impairment and mild to moderate renal impairment do not appear to influence lumiracoxib exposure.

Cardiovascular safety of lumiracoxib: a meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials > or =1 week and up to 1 year in duration of patients with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis

BACKGROUND

The cardiovascular (CV) safety of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors has been the subject of considerable debate.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to determine the risk of CV events with lumiracoxib by meta-analysis of all completed, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of > or =1 week and up to 1 year in duration of patients with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis.

METHODS

The Novartis Lumiracoxib Clinical Trial Database, which includes all clinical studies conducted to date with lumiracoxib, was reviewed. Data were extracted from RCTs of > or =1 week and up to 1 year in duration, the maximum study duration; 34,668 patients were included in standard and cumulative meta-analyses. Twenty-two RCTs of lumiracoxib 100 to 1200 mg daily were identified; 22,781 patients were included in 1-year trials. Mean age of the patients was 61.5 years and 74% were female. More than 50% of the patients in these studies had hypertension at baseline and 6% had diabetes. Parameters analyzed were the Antiplatelet Trialists' Collaboration (APTC) composite CV end point of myocardial infarction (MI), stroke (ischemic and hemorrhagic), and CV death; MI alone; and stroke alone. Twenty-one of the 22 RCTs have been published.

RESULTS

For all 3 parameters, relative risk (RR) was calculated versus non-naproxen NSAIDs, naproxen, and placebo. The results were as follows: for the APTC end point versus non-naproxen NSAIDs: RR 0.83, 95% CI, 0.46-1.51; versus naproxen: RR 1.49, 95% CI, 0.94-2.36; versus placebo: RR 1.08, 95% CI, 0.41-2.86; for MI alone versus non-naproxen NSAIDs: RR 0.80, 95% CI, 0.28-2.25; versus naproxen: RR 1.69, 95% CI, 0.82-3.48; versus placebo: RR 1.27, 95% CI, 0.25-6.56; and for stroke alone versus non-naproxen NSAIDs: RR 0.91, 95% CI, 0.35-2.35; versus naproxen: RR 1.42, 95% CI, 0.70-2.91; versus placebo: RR 0.59, 95% CI, 0.13-2.74. Cumulative meta-analyses of lumiracoxib versus all comparators (placebo, diclofenac, ibuprofen, celecoxib, rofecoxib, and naproxen) did not find any significant differences in APTC, MI alone, or stroke alone.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis of 34,668 patients receiving > or =1 week and up to 1 year of treatment found no evidence that lumiracoxib was associated with a significant increase in CV risk compared with naproxen, placebo, or all comparators (placebo, diclofenac, ibuprofen, celecoxib, rofecoxib, and naproxen).

Meta-analysis: cardiovascular events associated with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs

PURPOSE

We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to assess the effect of nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) on cardiovascular events in trials of joint disease and Alzheimer's disease.

METHODS

We performed comprehensive searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and Cochrane databases from 1966 to July 2005, and references of identified articles and reviews. We included randomized placebo-controlled trials of at least 6 weeks duration that evaluated nonselective NSAIDs in trials of joint disease or Alzheimer's disease, and reported at least one cardiovascular event or death. The outcome measured was the composite of death, myocardial infarction or cerebrovascular accident, with the pooled results reported as odds ratios (OR). Subgroup analyses evaluated the difference between trials of joint disease and Alzheimer's disease, and for naproxen and non-naproxen NSAIDs.

RESULTS

Pooled data from 13 trials with 7718 participants showed that nonselective NSAIDs had no significant effect on cardiovascular events (OR 1.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.8 to 2.1). No significant effect was seen for joint disease trials (OR 0.6; 95% CI, 0.2 to 1.7) or Alzheimer disease trials (OR 1.6; 95% CI, 0.9 to 2.7). There was no significant difference in results for naproxen and non-naproxen NSAIDs.

CONCLUSION

Nonselective NSAIDs have no significant effect on cardiovascular events or death in trials of joint disease and Alzheimer disease, but a small adverse effect could not be excluded. An indication for risk was present in trials of Alzheimer's disease but not in joint disease trials. There was no significant adverse or cardioprotective effect of naproxen.

Expectations from patients with rheumatoid arthritis regarding COX-2s: cutting to the heart of the matter

Before the withdrawal of 2 COX-2 selective agents (COX-2s) from the market, many rheumatoid arthritis patients were using these products regularly, with disease-modifying antirheumatic agents. Clinical trials have shown benefit of COX-2s equivalent to nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NS-NSAIDs) in rheumatoid arthritis. Better gastrointestinal (GI) safety has been demonstrated with COX-2s; numerical but not statistical benefit with concomitant use of cardiovascular (CV) doses of aspirin. COX-2 benefit may extend to lower GI blood loss against which proton pump inhibitors are not protective. COX-2s are associated with hypertension and edema of similar magnitude to NS-NSAIDs in predisposed individuals. Epidemiologic studies and clinical trials have confirmed the association of serious thromboembolic (CV) events and congestive heart failure with rofecoxib>25 mg daily, celecoxib, and NS-NSAIDs, although there is a paucity of long-term data. Important questions remain regarding relative GI and CV risks: is concomitant aspirin protective when coadministered with COX-2s? Does this abrogate their GI benefit? As identified many years ago with NS-NSAIDs, patients may respond to one and not another; COX-2s should be considered individually and not as a single "class." Patients deserve the opportunity to make a choice about the perceived benefit/risk assessment when using these therapies, with the collaboration of their physician.

Gastrointestinal tolerability of lumiracoxib in patients with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The aim of this study was to evaluate the gastrointestinal safety of lumiracoxib, a novel selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor.

METHODS

Results from 15 Phase II and III randomized studies of lumiracoxib in osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis were pooled. Patients received lumiracoxib (200/400 mg/day), celecoxib (200/400 mg/day), rofecoxib (25 mg once daily), diclofenac (75 mg twice daily), ibuprofen (800 mg 3 times daily), naproxen (500 mg twice daily), or placebo. Outcome measures included the incidence of definite or probable ulcer complications (perforations, obstructions, or bleedings as confirmed by an adjudication committee) and symptomatic upper gastrointestinal ulcers, the incidence of prespecified gastrointestinal adverse events, and the discontinuation rate caused by adverse events. All suspected ulcer complications in these 15 studies were adjudicated prospectively. Data from 2 endoscopic studies were pooled separately to assess the cumulative incidence of gastroduodenal ulcers >or=3 mm in diameter.

RESULTS

Symptomatic upper gastrointestinal ulcers and ulcer complications were reduced nearly 10-fold with lumiracoxib (1.7 events per 100 patient-years [95% confidence interval, 1.09-2.39]) compared with nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (13.7 events per 100 patient-years [95% confidence interval, 9.47-18.82]). Symptomatic ulcer frequency was markedly lower with lumiracoxib (0.4%) than with nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (2.5%). Discontinuation rates due to gastrointestinal adverse events were higher for nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (8.4%) than for lumiracoxib (3.3%). In the endoscopy analysis, the cumulative frequency of ulcers >or=3 mm in diameter was reduced by >70% for lumiracoxib versus ibuprofen.

CONCLUSIONS

Lumiracoxib exhibited a gastrointestinal safety profile superior to nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.

Pharmacodynamic behaviour of the selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor lumiracoxib in the lipopolysaccharide-stimulated rat air pouch model

PURPOSE

To investigate the pharmacodynamic behaviour of the selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor, lumiracoxib, in the rat air pouch.

METHODS

Air pouches were injected with lipopolysaccharide to stimulate prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) production 1h after lumiracoxib treatment. Pouch fluid samples were collected 6 or 24 h after lumiracoxib administration to measure PGE2 levels. Lumiracoxib concentrations in pouch fluid and plasma were measured by mass spectrometry.

RESULTS

Oral administration of lumiracoxib resulted in dose-dependent inhibition of PGE2 production 6 and 24 h post-dose. The estimated ED50 values for inhibition of PGE2 production were 0.1 and 2.0 mg/kg at 6 and 24 h, respectively. Lumiracoxib concentrations in plasma and pouch fluid increased in proportion to dose. There was a strong positive correlation between lumiracoxib concentrations in plasma and pouch fluid compartments. Lumiracoxib concentrations were higher in plasma than in pouch fluid 6 h post-dose, but at 24 h post-dose, pouch fluid concentrations were > or =4-fold greater than plasma concentrations.

CONCLUSIONS

Lumiracoxib readily enters the air pouch and persists in this extravascular compartment for a longer period of time than in plasma. This distribution profile may contribute to the ability of lumiracoxib to inhibit PGE2 production up to 24 h after dosing.

Clinical pharmacology of lumiracoxib, a second-generation cyclooxygenase 2 selective inhibitor

Although highly selective cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 inhibitors have been shown to be less toxic to the gastrointestinal tract than conventional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), their overall safety profile is questioned. Since different selective COX-2 inhibitors were found to be associated with increased cardiovascular thrombotic events, the thrombotic hazard may be a class effect. Furthermore, warnings have been issued regarding serious skin and hypersensitivity reactions associated with valdecoxib. Lumiracoxib is a novel COX-2 selective inhibitor (coxib) with improved biochemical selectivity over that of currently available coxibs. It is structurally distinct from other drugs in the class and has weakly acidic properties. Clinical studies support a once-daily dosing regimen, despite its relatively short plasma elimination half-life (3 - 6 h). In randomised, controlled clinical trials, lumiracoxib 100 - 200 mg/day has been shown to be superior to placebo in patients with symptomatic osteoarthritis, with clinical efficacy similar to diclofenac 150 mg/day, celecoxib 200 mg/day or rofecoxib 25 mg/day. Furthermore, lumiracoxib 200 - 400 mg/day appeared to be effective in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. In patients with acute pain related to primary dysmenorrhoea, dental or orthopaedic surgery, lumiracoxib 400 mg/day was found to be at least as effective as standard doses of traditional NSAIDs and other coxibs. Endoscopic studies have indicated that lumiracoxib is associated with a rate of gastroduodenal ulcer formation that is significantly lower than with ibuprofen and does not differ from celecoxib. In the Therapeutic Arthritis Research and Gastrointestinal Trial, which enrolled 18,325 patients with osteoarthritis, the cumulative 1-year incidence of ulcer complications (primary end point) was significantly reduced by approximately threefold on lumiracoxib 400 mg/day compared with naproxen 1000 mg/day or ibuprofen 2400 mg/day (0.32 versus 0.91%). Reduction in ulcer complications was more pronounced in the population not taking low-dose aspirin (0.2 versus 0.92%, respectively). Conversely, the gastrointestinal advantage of lumiracoxib was abrogated in patients receiving low-dose aspirin (0.69 versus 0.88%, respectively, p = 0.49). Regarding cardiovascular events contributing to the trialists' composite end point (myocardial infarction, stroke or cardiovascular death), there was no significant difference between lumiracoxib (0.65%) versus combined comparator NSAIDs (0.55%). Similarly, no significant difference was recorded in rates of myocardial infarction (clinical and silent) between the lumiracoxib (0.25%) and the combined NSAID (0.19%) treatment groups. Liver function test abnormalities were more frequent with lumiracoxib (2.57%) than with the comparator NSAIDs (0.63%). Whether or not this would result in an increased risk of clinical hepatitis in the real world setting is unforeseeable.