Etoricoxib reduced pain and disability and improved quality of life in patients with chronic low back pain: a 3 month, randomized, controlled trial

Outcome of non-invasive treatment modalities on back pain: an evidence-based review

At present, there is an increasing international trend towards evidence-based health care. The field of low back pain (LBP) research in primary care is an excellent example of evidence-based health care because there is a huge body of evidence from randomized trials. These trials have been summarized in a large number of systematic reviews. This paper summarizes the best available evidence from systematic reviews conducted within the framework of the Cochrane Back Review Group on non-invasive treatments for non-specific LBP. Data were gathered from the latest Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2005, Issue 2. The Cochrane reviews were updated with additional trials, if available. Traditional NSAIDs, muscle relaxants, and advice to stay active are effective for short-term pain relief in acute LBP. Advice to stay active is also effective for long-term improvement of function in acute LBP. In chronic LBP, various interventions are effective for short-term pain relief, i.e. antidepressants, COX2 inhibitors, back schools, progressive relaxation, cognitive-respondent treatment, exercise therapy, and intensive multidisciplinary treatment. Several treatments are also effective for short-term improvement of function in chronic LBP, namely COX2 inhibitors, back schools, progressive relaxation, exercise therapy, and multidisciplinary treatment. There is no evidence that any of these interventions provides long-term effects on pain and function. Also, many trials showed methodological weaknesses, effects are compared to placebo, no treatment or waiting list controls, and effect sizes are small. Future trials should meet current quality standards and have adequate sample size.

Systematic review: coxibs, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or no cyclooxygenase inhibitors in gastroenterological high-risk patients?

Selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors have been marketed as alternatives of conventional, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs with the purpose of reducing/eliminating the risk of ulcer complications. Unexpectedly, randomized-controlled trials revealed that long-term use of coxibs, such as rofecoxib, significantly increased the risk of myocardial infarction and stroke, while the use of valdecoxib was associated with potentially life-threatening skin reactions. Subsequently, rofecoxib and valdecoxib were withdrawn from the market. Although more strict precautions for other coxibs, such as celecoxib, etoricoxib, lumiracoxib and parecoxib, may be accepted/recommended by regulatory agencies, a critical review of published data suggests that their use may not be justified - even in high-risk patients - taking benefits, costs and risks into consideration. Clinicians should, therefore, never prescribe coxibs to patients with cardiovascular risk factors, and should only reluctantly prescribe coxibs to patients with a history of ulcer disease or dyspepsia to overcome persistent pain due to, e.g. rheumatoid arthritis or osteoarthritis. Instead, they should consider using conventional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in combination with a proton pump inhibitor or a prostaglandin analogue, especially for patients with increased cardiovascular risks, i.e. established ischaemic heart disease, cerebrovascular disease and/or peripheral arterial disease, or alternatively acetaminophen. An evidence-based algorithm for treatment of a chronic arthritis patient with one or more gastrointestinal risk factors is presented.

Short-term tolerability of etoricoxib in patients with cutaneous hypersensitivity reactions to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs

BACKGROUND

Etoricoxib is a novel cyclooxygenase 2 selective inhibitor. Until now, there has not been information in the literature about its tolerability in patients with a history of hypersensitivity reactions to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs).

OBJECTIVE

To determine the short-term tolerability of etoricoxib in patients with a history of cutaneous adverse reactions to NSAIDs.

METHODS

Single-blind challenge testing was performed on 2 different days using placebo (talc) and etoricoxib. On the first day, 2 placebo capsules were administered 1 hour apart; 7 days later, each patient received divided doses of the total therapeutic dose of 90 mg of etoricoxib: 22.5 mg initially and 67.5 mg 1 hour later if no reactive symptoms were noted.

RESULTS

Of 141 patients who underwent challenge testing with etoricoxib, only 2 (1.4%) had positive test results; both developed wheals on the extremities. These 2 patients were treated with chlorpheniramine maleate (10 mg intravenously), and the symptoms completely resolved within 2 hours. None of the patients experienced adverse reactions to the placebo challenge.

CONCLUSION

The low rate of adverse reactions to etoricoxib, tested by oral challenge, suggests that patients with previous cutaneous hypersensitivity reactions to NSAIDs (primarily urticaria and angioedema) may tolerate this drug.

Efficacy of etoricoxib 60 mg/day and diclofenac 150 mg/day in reduction of pain and disability in patients with chronic low back pain: results of a 4-week, multinational, randomized, double-blind study

BACKGROUND AND METHODS

The efficacy and safety of etoricoxib 60 mg/day in patients with established chronic low back pain (CLBP) were compared with those of diclofenac 150 mg/day in a 4-week, multicentre, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group trial. Four hundred and forty-six adult patients with CLBP (Quebec Task Force on Spinal Disorders Class 1 or 2) and with worsening pain upon discontinuation of pre-study analgesic medication were enrolled in the study. The study primary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline in Low Back Pain Intensity Scale (LBP-IS) score over the 4-week treatment period. Secondary and other efficacy endpoints included: changes in Roland and Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), Patient Global Assessment of Response to Therapy (PGART) and Low Back Pain Bothersomeness Scale (LBP-BS) scores. Early efficacy was assessed using PGART and LBP-IS scores 4 h after the first dose on the mornings of Days 1, 2 and 3. The overall safety and tolerability of etoricoxib 60 mg/day during 4 weeks of treatment were also assessed.

RESULTS

The least-squares mean time-weighted change from baseline LBP-IS score over 4 weeks was -32.94 mm (95% CI -36.25, -29.63) for etoricoxib, indicating substantial efficacy in relief of pain. The treatment difference for the primary outcome was 2.51 mm (95% CI -1.50, 6.51), fulfilling the prespecified equivalence criterion of 95% confidence interval wholly within +/- 10 mm. Etoricoxib improved all secondary and other efficacy outcomes. There were no statistically significant between-group differences in the proportion of patients with one or more clinical adverse events (AEs) (etoricoxib 35%, diclofenac 39%), or the proportion of patients who discontinued due to AEs (etoricoxib 7%, diclofenac 5%).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study confirm that, for adult patients with CLBP, etoricoxib 60 mg once daily over 4 weeks is effective for relief of pain and improvement of physical function and comparable to high-dose diclofenac 150 mg daily.

Clinical pharmacology of etoricoxib

Etoricoxib is a highly selective COX-2 inhibitor (coxib) approved in Europe for the treatment of osteoarthritis (OA), rheumatoid arthritis and acute gouty arthritis. Etoricoxib is an effective analgesic drug that has shown some improved efficacy versus traditional NSAIDs and it is the only coxib approved for the treatment of acute gouty arthritis. Moreover, recent studies evidence its efficacy in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. In the Etoricoxib Diclofenac Gastrointestinal Evaluation study performed in patients with OA, etoricoxib significantly reduced the rate of discontinuation by 50% due to gastrointestinal adverse events versus diclofenac. Comparable rates of thrombotic cardiovascular events were detected. Rates of discontinuation due to hypertension-related adverse effects were higher on etoricoxib than diclofenac. Similarly to other selective COX-2 inhibitors, etoricoxib is contraindicated in patients with ischaemic heart disease or stroke and it should be used with caution in patients with risk factors for heart disease. The European Medicines Agency has contraindicated the use of etoricoxib in patients with uncontrolled hypertension. Selective COX-2 inhibitors remain an appropriate choice in patients at low cardiovascular risk, but with increased risk of gastrointestinal complications.

Selective COX-2 inhibitors and risk of myocardial infarction

Selective inhibitors of cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2, 'coxibs') are highly effective anti-inflammatory and analgesic drugs that exert their action by preventing the formation of prostanoids. Recently some coxibs, which were designed to exploit the advantageous effects of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs while evading their side effects, have been reported to increase the risk of myo cardial infarction and atherothrombotic events. This has led to the withdrawal of rofecoxib from global markets, and warnings have been issued by drug authorities about similar events during the use of celecoxib or valdecoxib/parecoxib, bringing about questions of an inherent atherothrombotic risk of all coxibs and consequences that should be drawn by health care professionals. These questions need to be addressed in light of the known effects of selective inhibition of COX-2 on the cardiovascular system. Although COX-2, in contrast to the cyclooxygenase-1 (COX-1) isoform, is regarded as an inducible enzyme that only has a role in pathophysiological processes like pain and inflammation, experimental and clinical studies have shown that COX-2 is constitutively expressed in tissues like the kidney or vascular endothelium, where it executes important physiological functions. COX-2-dependent formation of prostanoids not only results in the mediation of pain or inflammatory signals but also in the maintenance of vascular integrity. Especially prostacyclin (PGI(2)), which exerts vasodilatory and antiplatelet properties, is formed to a significant extent by COX-2, and its levels are reduced to less than half of normal when COX-2 is inhibited. This review outlines the rationale for the development of selective COX-2 inhibitors and the pathophysiological consequences of selective inhibition of COX-2 with special regard to vasoactive prostaglandins. It describes coxibs that are current ly available, evaluates the current knowledge on the risk of atherothrombotic events associated with their intake and critically discusses the consequences that should be drawn from these insights.

Use of gastroprotective agents and discontinuations due to dyspepsia with the selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor etoricoxib compared with non-selective NSAIDs

BACKGROUND

Most nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are non-selective cyclooxygenase-1 (COX-1) and COX-2 inhibitors and are associated with upper gastrointestinal (GI) dyspeptic symptoms often resulting in GI co-medication usage or treatment discontinuation.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the rates of new use of gastroprotective agents and discontinuations due to dyspepsia with the COX-2 selective inhibitor etoricoxib compared with non-selective NSAIDs.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This pre-specified combined analysis used data from nine randomized, double-blind, controlled, clinical trials with etoricoxib in patients with osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, chronic low back pain, or ankylosing spondylitis. The cumulative incidences of (1) new use (new prescription or increased dose) of gastroprotective agents (GPA) and (2) discontinuation due to dyspeptic symptoms were compared among patients treated with etoricoxib (60 mg, 90 mg, or 120 mg daily) vs. non-selective NSAIDs (diclofenac 50 mg. t.i.d. or naproxen 500 mg. b.i.d.).

RESULTS

The overall rates/100 patient-years for new use of GPAs were 9.1 and 13.0 for etoricoxib and NSAIDs, respectively (RR = 0.75; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.64, 0.89; p < 0.001). A benefit with etoricoxib was seen in the first 6 months when most new GPA usage occurred; after 6 months new use of GPAs was similar between etoricoxib and NSAIDs. The rates/100 patient-years of treatment discontinuation due to dyspeptic symptoms with etoricoxib and NSAIDs were 1.5 and 2.7, respectively (RR = 0.60; 95% CI 0.41, 0.87; p = 0.007). Analyses of placebo-controlled treatment periods showed significantly more new GPA use and more discontinuations due to dyspeptic symptoms with NSAIDs vs. placebo, but not with etoricoxib vs. placebo.

CONCLUSION

In this combined analysis of clinical trials of patients with OA, RA, chronic low back pain, or AS, new use of gastroprotective agents was significantly lower with etoricoxib than with the comparator non-selective NSAIDs during the initial 6 months of treatment and similar thereafter. There were significantly fewer discontinuations for dyspeptic symptoms with etoricoxib than with NSAIDs over the entire follow-up period.