Prevention of gastroduodenal damage induced by non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs: controlled trial of ranitidine

Épidémiologie des complications gastro-duodénales associées aux anti-inflammatoires non stéroïdiens

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents (NSAIDs) are among the most widely prescribed drugs worldwide. In France, about 25% of individuals aged 40 years or older are treated with NSAIDs at least one week in the year. Although the therapeutic benefits of these drugs are substantial, their use is limited by their gastroduodenal toxicity. Dyspepsia occurs in about 30% of patients receiving NSAIDs, an approximately two-fold enhancement of risk compared with control subjects. Asymptomatic endoscopic lesions are observed in 20 to 80% of patients, depending on population characteristics, individual NSAIDs and definitions of endoscopic lesions. The risk of symptomatic ulcer, complicated ulcer (haemorrhage, perforation, stenosis) and death related to ulcer complication is multiplied by 4 in patients treated with NSAIDs. Established risk factors for NSAID-induced gastroduodenal complications are age, ulcer history, heavy alcohol consumption, individual NSAIDs, dose, association with corticoid or aspirin or anticoagulants (ulcer haemorrhage) while the role of treatment duration and Helicobacter pylori infection are controversial.

Traitements curatif et préventif des ulcères gastro-duodénaux induits par les AINS

The use of treatments to heal or to prevent nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) associated gastroduodenal lesions is based on replacement of mucosal prostaglandin deficiency or inhibition of acid secretion. Four-week acid suppression by proton pump inhibitors (PPI) with 7-day eradication triple therapy in Helicobacter pylori positive patients is effective in healing gastric and duodenal ulcer upon discontinuation of NSAIDs. In the event NSAIDs must be continued, PPIs (omeprazole 20 mg, lansoprazole 30 mg, pantoprazole 40 mg) are more effective than H2-blockers and cytoprotective agents (sucralfate, misoprostol) to heal mucosal lesions. In long-term prevention studies, omeprazole 20 mg, lansoprazole 15 mg, and pantoprazole 20 mg significantly reduce gastric and duodenal ulcer rates. Misoprostol 800 microg is as effective as PPIs for preventing symptomatic and complicated gastric ulcers, but less effective to prevent duodenal ulcer, with a high rate of adverse effects such as diarrhea. Helicobacter pylori eradication in infected patients decrease the risk of NSAIDs-associated lesions but is less effective than concomitant antisecretory treatment. Current data from comparative studies of PPIs vs ranitidine or misoprostol are in favor of the PPIs as well tolerated and effective drugs in the prophylaxis of NSAIDs-related gastroduodenal lesions in high-risk patients.

Clopidogrel plus omeprazole compared with aspirin plus omeprazole for aspirin-induced symptomatic peptic ulcers/erosions with low to moderate bleeding/re-bleeding risk -- a single-blind, randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND

Clopidogrel causes significantly less symptomatic peptic ulcer disease and gastrointestinal bleeding than low-dose aspirin in average-risk patients. The gastrotoxicity of clopidogrel in patients with active peptic ulcer disease is unknown.

AIM

To compare the incidence of unhealed ulcers in patients receiving clopidogrel or aspirin.

METHODS

Patients with aspirin-induced peptic ulcer disease treated with omeprazole (20 mg/day) were randomized to receive clopidogrel (75 mg/day) or to continue with low-dose aspirin. Success was defined as ulcer/erosion healing at the eighth week.

RESULTS

One hundred and twenty-nine patients were recruited (69 received clopidogrel and 60 continued with aspirin). Thirty-one (45%) in the clopidogrel group and 25 (42%) in the aspirin group had a minor gastrointestinal bleed. No ulcer showed an adherent clot or visible vessel. The distributions of peptic ulcer disease were similar in the clopidogrel and aspirin groups (gastric ulcer: 41% vs. 40%; duodenal ulcer: 10% vs. 12%; gastric ulcer + duodenal ulcer: 6% vs. 3%; gastritis: 32% vs. 37%; duodenitis: 4% vs. 7%; gastritis + duodenitis: 0% vs. 2%). Clopidogrel and aspirin were re-started after 0.86 +/- 1.79 and 0.44 +/- 1.60 days, respectively (P = 0.170). Three (4%) patients stopped clopidogrel due to drug rash. Using per protocol analysis, the treatment success rates of clopidogrel and aspirin were 94% (62/66) and 95% (57/60), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with aspirin-associated peptic ulcer disease of low to moderate grade, both early conversion from aspirin to clopidogrel and continuation of aspirin are safe.

Systematic review for evaluation of tolerability of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs in osteoarthritis patients in Japan

To evaluate the gastrointestinal tolerability of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in osteoarthritis patients in Japan, a systematic review of Japanese randomized controlled trials was performed. This study consisted of double-blind, randomized, controlled clinical trials with 4-week NSAID treatment of osteoarthritis patients in Japan. The analysis included 4725 patients from 25 trials. On average the cumulative incidences of patients who had experienced any adverse reaction and any adverse digestive reaction were 14.3% [95% confidence interval (CI) 13.3%-15.3%] and 10.4% (95% CI 9.4%-11.4%), respectively. The cumulative incidence for the upper gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms such as abdominal pain, nausea/vomiting, and dyspepsia was estimated to be approximately 10.9%. When the risk of upper GI symptoms was compared between males and females, the summary odds ratio was 1.71 (95% CI 1.11-2.65). Comparing the risk of upper GI symptoms between patients 59 years of age and younger and those 60+ years old, the summary odds ratio was 1.07 (95% CI 0.75-1.52). Despite the incidence of adverse reactions varying across the drugs being used, there was an obvious increased risk of GI symptoms.

Nonopioid and adjuvant analgesics in chronic pain management: strategies for effective use

Nonopioid and adjuvant analgesics encompass a huge range of heterogenous drugs that differ chemically and mechanistically. These drugs generally are prescribed for mild-to-moderate pain, as coanalgesics for severe pain, or to target specific pain-generating mechanisms. This article provides an overview of some of the more commonly used nonopioid and adjuvant analgesics used to treat chronic pain, including salicylates, acetaminophen, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, tricyclic antidepressants, anticonvulsants, N-Methyl-D-Aspartate receptor antagonists, lidocaine, skeletal muscle relaxants, and topical analgesics.

[Prescription of non-steroidal anti-inflammatories and gastric protectors in emergency service]

OBJECTIVES

To find the number of patients seen in casualty who received gastropathy prophylaxis with NSAIDs that complied with the pharmaco-therapeutic guidelines of the health district.

DESIGN

Descriptive study of technical-scientific quality.

SETTING

The Casualty Department of the Ramón y Cajal hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Randomised sample of 400 emergencies attended in January 1999 and 2000, excluding paediatric cases, people previously treated with gastro-protectors, patients admitted and the deceased. Main measurements. On the basis of casualty records: suitability of indication and criteria used; if unsuitable, how; adequacy of selection of the principle, patient' age and sex, digestive pathology history, area and year of care.

RESULTS

NSAIDs were prescribed in 37.9% of cases (33.27-42.79), with prescription unsuitable in 21.19% (15.2-28.3). 15% (9.5-22) were unsuitable by default; and 54.2% (35.1-72.1), by excess. Unsuitability was greater among women, if there was history of digestive pathology, and among older people, with no differences found for area or year of care. The choice of gastric protector was not suitable in any case.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the amount of primary care prescription originating in hospital casualty departments, and its effect on the training of family medicine interns, strategies coordinated between health care levels must be introduced in order to improve gastric protection prescription in NSAID gastropathy prophylaxis. The effectiveness of these strategies must be evaluated.

[Cost-effectiveness analysis of the use of celecoxib for the treatment of osteoarthritis]

BACKGROUND

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), used for the treatment of osteoarthritis, can produce serious gastrointestinal (GI) adverse reactions.Celecoxib, a specific COX-2 inhibitor, has a proven efficacy equivalent to that of traditional NSAIDs with an improved tolerance and safety profile.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis on the use of celecoxib versus traditional NSAIDs in the treatment of osteoarthritis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This cost-effectiveness analysis was designed through a pharmacoeconomic model; each effectiveness unit was defined as each year of life gained after the ingestion of celecoxib or NSAIDs. The probability of different clinical results appearing was obtained from published articles and incorporated assumptions. Only direct medical costs were evaluated (medication, hospitalization, additional tests, analyses, extra visits, etc.) and other costs were excluded. The study perspective was the national health system and the time horizon chosen was 6 months.

RESULTS

The additional cost for each year of life gained through the use of celecoxib compared with that of traditional NSAIDs amounted to 8017; (1,333,834 ptas). Sensitivity analysis demonstrated how these values were sensitive to changes in the costs of NSAIDs and gastroprotective agents as well as to the inclusion of younger population groups.

CONCLUSION

Celecoxib can be considered as a cost-effective option in the treatment of osteoarthritis because its use prevents deaths and increases survival rate and the additional cost is reasonable and moderate compared with that of NSAIDs. Its efficiency increases in proportion to its use in younger patients and probably in those at high risk for developing GI complications.

Hospitalization and mortality rates from peptic ulcer disease and GI bleeding in the 1990s: relationship to sales of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and acid suppression medications

OBJECTIVES

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) can cause peptic ulcer disease and upper GI bleeding. Acid suppression medications effectively treat NSAID-induced ulcers. However, it is unknown what effect the availability of proton pump inhibitors and over-the-counter preparations of NSAIDs and histamine type 2 receptor antagonists have had on population rates of hospitalization and mortality from GI toxicity. This study examines trends in hospitalization and mortality rates from GI toxicity during the 1990s.

METHODS

We performed an analysis of secular trends of hospitalization and mortality rates from peptic ulcer disease, upper GI bleeding, and any GI bleeding using data from the National Hospital Discharge Survey, comparing them with sales of NSAIDs, aspirin, and acid suppression medications from 1992 to 1999.

RESULTS

From 1992 to 1999, annual rates of hospitalization and mortality per 100,000 population for peptic ulcer disease declined from 205 to 165 and 7.7 to 6.0, respectively; calendar year was negatively correlated with both peptic ulcer disease hospitalization rates (p = -0.88, p = 0.007) and mortality rates (p = -0.71, p = 0.058). In contrast, these correlations did not reach statistical significance for upper or any GI bleeding (p > 0.1 for all comparisons). Sales of acid suppression medications were negatively correlated with peptic ulcer disease hospitalization rates (p = -0.76, p = 0.037) and mortality rates (p = -0.83, p = 0.015). Sales of NSAIDs were not positively correlated with hospitalization or mortality rates from peptic ulcer disease or GI bleeding (p > 0.2 for all comparisons).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite changing patterns of use of NSAIDs and acid suppression medications during the 1990s, mortality rates from GI bleeding and peptic ulcer disease have been relatively stable, with an apparent decline in hospitalization rates and mortality from peptic ulcer disease. Changing rates of peptic ulcer disease morbidity and mortality were temporally related to increasing sales of antiulcerants but not to change in sales of NSAIDs.

Management of peptic ulcer disease not related to Helicobacter

Most peptic ulcers not due to Helicobacter pylori are caused by non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID), among which an important subset are due to vascular protective ("low-dose") aspirin therapy. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs ulcers heal quite quickly when treated with a proton pump inhibitor (PPI), even though the NSAID is continued. If the NSAID can be stopped, the ulcers heal readily with either a PPI or a histamine H2-receptor antagonist (H2-RA). If anti-inflammatory treatment is still needed after ulcers are healed, prophylactic co-therapy with a PPI or misoprostol will reduce the risk of ulcer recurrence by about 60-80%. The alternative of switching to a highly selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor has been shown to reduce the risk of a complicated ulcer by about 50-60%, unless low-dose aspirin treatment needs to be given as well for vascular disease. Idiopathic ulcers are becoming more frequent as H. pylori prevalence falls. Some may be sequelae of previous NSAID ulceration even though the NSAID has been ceased and the original ulcer had healed. These are best treated with an H2-RA or a PPI, followed by long-term maintenance with either of these (often in half the healing dosage) to prevent recurrence. Ulcers due to Zollinger-Ellison syndrome and other hypergastrinemia syndromes are rare, and largely beyond the scope of this review.

Critical effect of Helicobacter pylori infection on the effectiveness of omeprazole for prevention of gastric or duodenal ulcers among chronic NSAID users

BACKGROUND

The recently reported OMNIUM and ASTRONAUT NSAID ulcer prevention trials using omeprazole to prevent endoscopic ulcer recurrence among chronic NSAID users suggested superiority over misoprostol or ranitidine.

AIM

To test the hypothesis the results from the OMNIUM and ASTRONAUT studies would not be generalizible as ulcer healing and ulcer recurrence would differ in relation to Helicobacter pylori status.

METHODS

The data regarding H. pylori status were made available by AstraZenca allowing separate analysis of the outcome of those with NSAID ulcers (i.e. without H. pylori infection) and those NSAID use was complicated with the presence of an active H. pylori infection.

RESULTS

Reanalysis confirmed that omeprazole was superior to placebo for the prevention of ulcer recurrence in chronic NSAID users. However, overall omeprazole was not significantly better than the subtherapeutic dose (400 microg/day) of misoprostol (14.5% vs. 19.6%, respectively, p =.93); 400 microg of misoprostol was actually superior to omeprazole for the prevention of gastric ulcers among those NSAID ulcers (8.2% vs. 16.6% for misoprostol and omeprazole, respectively; p <.05). Omeprazole was also not statistically different from misoprostol for gastric ulcer prevention in those whose NSAID use was complicated by an active H. pylori infection. Omeprazole was not significantly different from 300 mg of ranitidine for the prevention of NSAID gastric ulcers (14.6% vs. 11.6%, respectively, p =.56). Duodenal ulcers were over represented among H. pylori infected NSAID users and duodenal ulcer prevention was more sensitive to acid suppression than gastric ulcer.

CONCLUSION

The OMNIUM and ASTRONAUT trials may have provided an unrealistic sense of security regarding the effectiveness of omeprazole for protection against ulcer recurrence in chronic NSAID users.

Effect of Helicobacter pylori eradication on duodenal ulcer scar in patients with no clinical history of duodenal ulcer

BACKGROUND

Helicobacter pylori eradication has become the standard treatment for duodenal ulcer. However, there is no relevant evidence for antibacterial treatment of the white scar stage of duodenal ulcer (duodenal ulcer scar) in patients with no past history of duodenal ulcer.

AIM

To investigate whether H. pylori eradication could decrease duodenal ulcer recurrence in patients with duodenal ulcer scar and no past history of duodenal ulcer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We prospectively enrolled 66 patients with duodenal ulcer scar: 53 were H. pylori-positive and 13 were H. pylori-negative. H. pylori-positive patients were randomly assigned into two groups (two-to-one allocation): 36 patients were assigned to the treatment group and 17 to the follow-up group. Thirteen H. pylori-negative patients were followed up according to the study protocol. Follow-up endoscopy was performed to evaluate ulcer scar changes and H. pylori status 6 weeks after anti-H. pylori treatment and then every 6 months for up to 30 months.

RESULTS

Active duodenal ulcer recurrence was identified in seven of 23 H. pylori-positive/non-cured patients (30%). There was no duodenal ulcer recurrence in 43 H. pylori-negative/cured patients (0%), which was significantly different in terms of duodenal ulcer recurrence (P=0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

H. pylori eradication is effective at preventing active duodenal ulcer recurrence in patients with duodenal ulcer scar and no past history of duodenal ulcer.

Role of initial NSAID choice and patient risk factors in the prevention of NSAID gastropathy: a decision analysis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the role of initial nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug (NSAID) choice in the prevention of NSAID gastropathy, based on relative clinical and economic effects.

METHODS

To mimic clinical practice, a symptom-driven decision analytic model was constructed to compare 2 treatment strategies for long-term users of NSAIDs over a 1-year period: Strategy 1-generic NSAID used initially, and safer, more expensive NSAID reserved for treatment failures due to symptomatic gastropathy; and Strategy 2-safer, more expensive NSAID used in all instances. The only distinction between the strategies was the choice of initial NSAID. NSAIDs differed in gastrointestinal safety profiles and acquisition costs. The use and impact of antisecretory medications were included in the model. Because published data on patients' ulcer risk and relative NSAID safety show considerable variability, sensitivity analyses were used to evaluate the key clinical outcomes and costs.

RESULT

For patients without risk factors for NSAID ulcers (average risk), the model estimated that the strategy restricting use of the safer NSAID resulted in more symptomatic ulcers (Strategy 1, 2.58; Strategy 2, 0.73) and ulcer-related complications (Strategy 1, 1.18; Strategy 2, 0.23) per 100 patient years. The restricted strategy led to a significantly lower cost per patient treated (Strategy 1, $239; Strategy 2, $831 per year). In the principal analysis, the incremental costs to prevent symptomatic and complicated ulcers were $31,900 and $56,700, respectively. The estimated incremental cost per ulcer avoided was sensitive to the relative protection provided by the safer NSAID and fell dramatically as the patients' ulcer risk was increased above average risk.

CONCLUSION

Unrestricted use of NSAIDs that reduce the risk of symptomatic ulcers has the potential to produce important clinical benefits at incremental cost. The impressive impact of ulcer risk on the incremental cost per ulcer prevented warrants increased attention to risk factor identification when NSAIDs are prescribed.

Prophylaxis and treatment of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug-induced upper gastrointestinal side-effects

The use of specific agents to heal mucosal lesions or to prevent non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug toxicity, has focused upon two approaches: replacement of prostaglandin deficiency and inhibition of acid secretion. Acid suppression with traditional ulcer healing doses of H2-blockers is effective in healing gastric and duodenal ulcers upon discontinuation of the offending drug. In the event the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug must be continued, the use of H2-blockers is associated with a decrease in the healing rate. In long-term prevention studies, H2-blockers significantly reduce duodenal ulcer rates, but are ineffective in reducing gastric ulceration. More potent acid inhibition with a double-dose of H2-blockers (famotidine 80 mg daily, ranitidine 600 mg daily) may reduce the risk of gastric and duodenal ulcers. Marked acid suppression with proton pump inhibitors (omeprazole 20-40 mg, lansoprazole 30 mg daily) also appears to be very effective in healing gastric and duodenal ulcers in patients continuing the offending drug as well. An analysis of pooled data from comparative studies on omeprazole vs ranitidine, misoprostol and sucralfate shows a therapeutic advantage in favour of the proton pump inhibitor, ranging from 10 to 40%. In long-term prevention studies, omeprazole (20 mg daily) and pantoprazole (40 mg daily) have also been shown to reduce the risk of gastric and duodenal ulcers and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug-related dyspepsia. Current data from recent comparative studies of omeprazole (20 mg daily) vs ranitidine (150 mg daily) and misoprostol (200 microg daily) showed that, after 6 months' follow-up, the proton pump inhibitor was significantly superior to control drugs in reducing the risk both of gastric and duodenal ulcer. Misoprostol (at doses ranging from 400 microg to 800 microg/day) is an effective form of therapy for preventing non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug-induced gastroduodenal lesions. However high-dose misoprostol only, seems adequate for the prevention of ulcer complications, mainly in high-risk non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug users. Thus, available data are undoubtedly in favour of the proton pump inhibitors as well tolerated and effective drugs in the prophylaxis and treatment of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug-related mucosal lesions in the gastrointestinal tract.

Gastro-duodenal protection in an era of cyclo-oxygenase-2-selective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are effective and necessary for the relief of pain and inflammation in patients with arthritis. NSAIDs are however also associated with an increased risk for ulceration in the stomach and in the duodenum, and many NSAID users experience bothersome dyspeptic symptoms during continued NSAID therapy. PPIs like omeprazole, have been shown to heal and to prevent ulcers and dyspeptic symptoms during continued NSAID therapy, and during continued NSAID therapy the prostaglandin analogue, misoprostol, has been shown to reduce the risk for ulcer complications. The COX-2 selective NSAID, rofecoxib, is in comparison with naproxen, a non-selective NSAID, associated with fewer clinically important upper gastrointestinal events. The incidence of myocardial infarctions seems, however, to be lower with naproxen than with rofecoxib, and this is expected to lead to low-dose aspirin use in rofecoxib users at risk for cardiovascular events. Co-administration of the COX-2 selective NSAID, celecoxib, and low-dose aspirin, is associated with the same risk for upper gastrointestinal ulcer complications alone and combined with symptomatic ulcers, as the non-selective NSAIDs, ibuprofen and diclofenac. A proton pump inhibitor (PPI) should be used for healing of NSAID-associated ulcers, and a PPI or misoprostol should be considered for prevention of ulceration in non-selective NSAID users at risk for ulceration. The experience with COX-2 selective NSAIDs is still limited, and it remains to be studied whether subpopulations of COX-2 selective NSAID users will benefit from gastro-duodenal protection.

Cyclooxygenase 2-implications on maintenance of gastric mucosal integrity and ulcer healing: controversial issues and perspectives

Cyclooxygenase (COX), the key enzyme for synthesis of prostaglandins, exists in two isoforms (COX-1 and COX-2). COX-1 is constitutively expressed in the gastrointestinal tract in large quantities and has been suggested to maintain mucosal integrity through continuous generation of prostaglandins. COX-2 is induced predominantly during inflammation. On this premise selective COX-2 inhibitors not affecting COX-1 in the gastrointestinal tract mucosa have been developed as gastrointestinal sparing anti-inflammatory drugs. They appear to be well tolerated by experimental animals and humans following acute and chronic (three or more months) administration. However, there is increasing evidence that COX-2 has a greater physiological role than merely mediating pain and inflammation. Thus gastric and intestinal lesions do not develop when COX-1 is inhibited but only when the activity of both COX-1 and COX-2 is suppressed. Selective COX-2 inhibitors delay the healing of experimental gastric ulcers to the same extent as non-COX-2 specific non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Moreover, when given chronically to experimental animals, they can activate experimental colitis and cause intestinal perforation. The direct involvement of COX-2 in ulcer healing has been supported by observations that expression of COX-2 mRNA and protein is upregulated at the ulcer margin in a temporal and spatial relation to enhanced epithelial cell proliferation and increased expression of growth factors. Moreover, there is increasing evidence that upregulation of COX-2 mRNA and protein occurs during exposure of the gastric mucosa to noxious agents or to ischaemia-reperfusion. These observations support the concept that COX-2 represents (in addition to COX-1) a further line of defence for the gastrointestinal mucosa necessary for maintenance of mucosal integrity and ulcer healing.

Prevention of acute NSAID-related gastroduodenal damage: a meta-analysis of controlled clinical trials

No consensus exists as to whether cotherapy is effective in the short-term prevention of severe NSAID-related gastroduodenal damage. The aim of this study was to provide a quantitative systematic review of the efficacy of gastroprotective drugs, such as misoprostol, H2-blockers, and proton pump inhibitors (PPI) in preventing the severe acute NSAID-related gastroduodenal damage. Placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials on the use of misoprostol, H2-blockers, and PPIs as preventative agents published between January 1986 and May 1999 were identified through Medline and reference lists from clinical reviews. Studies on patients or healthy subjects were considered to be eligible for data pooling if they were performed in acute NSAID users (not longer than 30 days) and with at least one endoscopic evaluation during therapy that reported results specifically for gastric and duodenal damage. Risk difference (RD), heterogeneity chi2 test, publication bias assessment and number needed to treat (NnT) were calculated for each meta-analysis by a customized program. Twenty-one trials met the inclusion criteria evaluating a total of 636 healthy subjects and 1904 patients with arthritis randomized to active drug or placebo. The baseline risk of NSAID-related gastric (68% vs 16.6%, P < 0.001) and duodenal (22% vs 8.5%, P < 0.001) damage was higher in healthy subjects compared to patients with arthritis. Meta-analysis demonstrated a significant heterogeneity between trials performed in the two populations (P < 0.0001). In healthy subjects the active drug treatment induced a significant prevention of severe gastric (misoprostol RD = 69%, 95% CI = 60.3-77.7, H2-blocker RD = 38.3%, 95% CI = 17.8-58.9 and PPI RD = 43%, 95% CI = 28.2-57.7) and duodenal damage (misoprostol RD = 22.3%, 95% CI = 13.6-31, H2-blocker RD = 13.2%, 95% CI = 5.2-21.3 and PPI RD = 17.7%, 95% CI = 3.5-31.8). NnT values were, respectively, 1, 3, and 2 for gastric and 4, 8, and 6 for duodenal damage. In patients with arthritis lower RD and higher NnT values were found compared to healthy subjects. In conclusions, cotreatment with gastroprotective drugs for short-term prevention of severe gastroduodenal NSAID-related damage was more effective in healthy subjects than in patients with arthritis; misoprostol and PPIs were more effective than H2-blockers in the prevention of both gastric and duodenal severe damage; more studies need to evaluate the role of short-term prevention in patients with arthritis who require acute NSAID treatment.

Role of acid suppressants in prophylaxis of NSAID damage

Gastric acid contributes to the pathogenesis of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-induced ulceration via several mechanisms, including conversion of superficial to deeper injury, impairment of haemostasis, and interference with ulcer healing. The suppression of acid secretion has been shown to reduce the severity of NSAID-induced mucosal damage in experimental models and clinical studies. Current evidence indicates that proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are the preferred treatment for the healing of gastric ulcers when NSAIDs cannot be discontinued. PPIs are superior to standard-dose H(2)-receptor antagonists and equivalent to low-dose misoprostol in preventing NSAID-induced gastric ulcers. Whether there is any significant advantage of PPIs over higher doses of H(2)-receptor antagonists or misoprostol is unknown. The efficacy of PPIs is enhanced in the presence of H. Pylori infection. Omeprazole has been shown to be effective for the secondary prevention of ulcer bleeding in H. pylori -infected NSAID users. The efficacy of PPIs for the prevention of ulcer complications in H. pylori-negative NSAID users remains uncertain.

COX-2 inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis

The selective cyclooxygenase 2 (COX-2) inhibitors have emerged as an important option in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Rofecoxib and celecoxib, the selective COX-2 inhibitors currently available, have shown efficacy in reducing symptoms of RA comparable with that of traditional nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). The primary advantage of selective COX-2 inhibitors relates to reduced gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity. Gastroduodenal ulcers detected by endoscopy are markedly diminished in patients receiving selective COX-2 inhibitors versus those receiving NSAIDs. Moreover, unpublished data indicate that the risk of symptomatic and complicated ulcers is reduced by approximately half in patients prescribed rofecoxib or celecoxib. Despite these encouraging findings, selective COX-2 inhibitors have the potential for important adverse events such as impaired renal function, hypertension, and edema. Furthermore, clinicians must balance the competing demands of reducing GI risk while managing the increasing costs associated with selective COX-2 inhibitor use.

Approaches to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug use in the high-risk patient

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are probably the most common cause of gastroduodenal injury in the United States today. Approximately half of patients who regularly take NSAIDs have gastric erosions, and 15%-30% have ulcers when they are examined endoscopically. However, the incidence of clinical gastrointestinal (GI) events caused by NSAIDs is much lower. Clinical upper GI events may occur in 3%-4.5% of patients taking NSAIDs, and serious complicated events develop in approximately 1.5%. However, the risk varies widely in relationship to clinical features such as history of ulcers or GI events, age, concomitant anticoagulant or steroid use, and NSAID dose. This review discusses the risks of clinical GI disease in NSAID users, the predictors of increased risk, and strategies for prevention of NSAID-associated GI disease.

Helicobacter pylori and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs: interaction with proton pump inhibitor therapy for prevention of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug ulcers and ulcer complications--future research needs

Two recently reported studies of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), the Omeprazole versus Misoprostol for NSAID-induced Ulcer Management and the Acid Suppression Trial: Ranitidine versus Omeprazole for NSAID-associated Ulcer Treatment studies, concluded that omeprazole was superior to a subtherapeutic misoprostol or an ineffective dose of ranitidine for the endpoint, prevention of gastroduodenal ulcers in chronic NSAID users. Helicobacter pylori status was collected prospectively but was not reported. We report separate analyses for patients with unequivocal NSAID ulcers (H. pylori negative) and patients whose NSAID use was complicated by the presence of an active H. pylori infection. Omeprazole was superior to placebo for the prevention of ulcer recurrence in chronic NSAID users. However, omeprazole was not significantly better than a subtherapeutic dose of misoprostol for the prevention of gastroduodenal ulcers in chronic NSAID users. Misoprostol was superior to omeprazole for the prevention of gastric ulcers among those patients with unequivocal NSAID ulcers (8.2% vs 16.6%, respectively; P <0.05). Omeprazole was not statistically different from misoprostol for gastric ulcer prevention in those whose NSAID use was complicated by an active H. pylori infection. Ranitidine and omeprazole were also not statistically different for the prevention of unequivocal NSAID gastric ulcers (14.6% vs 11.6%, respectively; P = 0.56). That the Misoprostol Ulcer Complications Outcomes Safety Assessment (MUCOSA) trial found full-dose misoprostol to be more effective in ulcer prevention than it was in prevention of ulcer complications suggests that either many of the ulcer complications were related to H. pylori ulcers or that more antisecretory activity than can be provided with misoprostol is needed, or both. The question remains whether the combination of low-dose misoprostol plus an antisecretory drug (either an H(2)-receptor antagonist or a proton pump inhibitor) would provide superior results compared with either alone. That omeprazole was not superior to one half the dose of misoprostol used in the ulcer complication prevention, or MUCOSA, study indicates that it would not be prudent to suggest that ulcer prevention with omeprazole alone would be able to provide similar protection to misoprostol.

Approaches to healing and prophylaxis of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug-associated ulcers

Treating and preventing peptic ulcers associated with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) calls for clinical judgment. Physicians must weigh their patients' need for anti-inflammatory therapy against their individual risks for ulcer development; their likelihood of coping with an ulcer complication if it should develop; and the economics, efficacy, and tolerability of various treatment and prevention options. This article considers some general strategies common to both treatment and prevention. Data from randomized trials that can guide clinicians and their patients as they attempt to heal an established NSAID ulcer or prevent one occurring in the future are also reviewed.

A framework for evaluating the clinical consequences of initial therapy with NSAIDs, NSAIDs plus gastroprotective agents, or celecoxib in the treatment of arthritis

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study is to provide a framework for estimating the economic efficiency of nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), concomitant gastroprotective agents (GPAs) to reduce the risk of NSAID toxicity, and celecoxib, a specific cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitor. Concomitant GPA therapies considered include one of the following: proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) plus NSAIDs, histamine H2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs) plus NSAIDs, misoprostol plus NSAIDs, and a single tablet formulation of diclofenac/misoprostol.

DESIGN

The study employs a decision-tree framework to establish probabilities of upper gastrointestinal (GI) adverse events occurring over a 6-month time frame. Celecoxib clinical trial data are used to establish probabilities of upper GI events for celecoxib and NSAIDs, and published literature is used to predict upper GI events for the other concomitant therapies. Upper GI adverse events included in the decision-tree are as follows: GI discomfort, symptomatic ulcer, serious GI complications (with and without death), and anaemia with occult bleeding.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES AND RESULTS

Clinical probabilities indicate celecoxib has significant tolerability and safety advantages compared with nonselective NSAIDs. Celecoxib also reduces the risk of GI adverse events to a similar or superior degree when compared with reductions observed with NSAIDs with concomitant GPAs.

CONCLUSION

Use of celecoxib is expected to significantly reduce the economic costs of GI toxicity and its associated morbidity.

Helicobacter pylori screening for individuals requiring chronic NSAID therapy: a decision analysis

INTRODUCTION

Although it is incontrovertible that Helicobacter pylori causes peptic ulcer disease, controversy persists regarding the impact of H. pylori infection on the incidence of NSAID-related complications and whether H. pylori eradication reduces the rate of adverse events.

METHODS

A symptom-driven decision analytic model was developed to compare the clinical and economic impact of H. pylori screening compared to a strategy of no H. pylori testing for individuals requiring chronic NSAID therapy. In the principal analysis, it was assumed that untreated H. pylori infection increased the ulcer risk by 50% and that successful eradication reduced the risk of adverse events to that of uninfected patients. Patients' ulcer risk and the protective effect of H. pylori eradication were evaluated using sensitivity analysis.

RESULTS

When compared to no H. pylori testing, H. pylori screening led to fewer symptomatic ulcers (no test, 5.4; H. pylori test, 4.6 per 100 patient years) and ulcer complications (no test, 2.6; H. pylori test, 2.3 per 100 patient years) and a higher cost per patient (no test, $435; H. pylori test, $556). The incremental cost attributable to the H. pylori screening strategy to prevent a symptomatic and complicated ulcer was $16,805 and $31,842, respectively. The clinical and cost-effectiveness advantage of H. pylori screening improved as patients' ulcer risk increased or the protective effect of H. pylori eradication was enhanced.

CONCLUSIONS

Based upon the available evidence, H. pylori screening has the potential to reduce NSAID-related adverse events for average-risk patients at an incremental cost. Until controlled investigations definitively quantify the effect of H. pylori eradication on clinically significant NSAID-related adverse events, a compelling argument can be made for H. pylori testing for chronic NSAID users at increased risk of ulcer disease.

An economic model for determining the costs and consequences of using various treatment alternatives for the management of arthritis in Canada

OBJECTIVE

To construct a decision analytical model to compare the costs and clinical consequences of treating patients with celecoxib or various nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)/gastrointestinal (GI) co-therapy regimens for the management of osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis. The model quantified the number of patients expected to experience any GI complication commonly associated with NSAID therapy.

DESIGN

Resource use for the treatment of each GI complication in the model was estimated after consulting Canadian experts. Standard unit costs from Ontario were applied to resources to calculate the cost of each complication.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES AND RESULTS

The model revealed that the NSAID-alone regimen was associated with the lowest cost [$262 Canadian dollars ($Can) per patient per 6 months] followed by the celecoxib regimen ($Can273), diclofenac/misoprostol ($Can365), NSAID + histamine H2 receptor antagonist ($Can413), NSAID + misoprostol ($Can421), and NSAID + proton pump inhibitor ($Can731). A break-even analysis showed that up to 80% of the study cohort could be treated with celecoxib instead of the NSAID-alone regimen without increasing the health system's overall budget. Celecoxib was associated with the fewest GI-related deaths, hospitalised events; symptomatic ulcers, and cases of anaemia. The celecoxib regimen was also associated with the fewest cases of upper GI distress. Sensitivity analyses revealed that the model was most sensitive to the distribution of GI risk in the population and to the ingredient costs of the treatment alternatives.

CONCLUSIONS

This model indicates that the use of celecoxib could lead to the avoidance of a significant number of NSAID-attributable GI adverse events, and the incremental cost of using celecoxib for arthritis patients > or = 65 years of age in place of current treatment alternatives would not impose an excessive incremental impact on a Canadian provincial healthcare budget.

Incremental cost-effectiveness analysis comparing rofecoxib with nonselective NSAIDs in osteoarthritis: Ontario Ministry of Health perspective

BACKGROUND

Clinical trials have shown rofecoxib, a selective inhibitor of cyclo-oxygenase-2, to be associated with fewer gastrointestinal complications than non-selective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs).

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the potential clinical and economic consequences of rofecoxib prescription in Ontario, Canada, for patients with osteoarthritis (OA) aged >65 years who did not respond to paracetamol (acetaminophen) therapy.

DESIGN

Decision analytic modelling study.

METHODS

A model was constructed to compare rofecoxib and nonselective NSAIDs with respect to their gastrointestinal complications in patients with OA. The model had a 1-year horizon and considered direct medical costs from the perspective of the Ontario Ministry of Health. Event rates were estimated from a pooled analysis of 8 phase IIb/Ill clinical trials. The number of perforations, ulcers and bleeds (PUBs) with each strategy was used as the primary measure of effectiveness.

RESULTS

In the base-case scenario, the expected total cost per patient-day on nonselective NSAIDs was 1.60 Canadian dollars (Can dollars) versus 1.67 Can dollars on rofecoxib (1999 values). Rofecoxib was associated with 0.0109 fewer PUBs per patient per year. The incremental cost to avoid 1 additional PUB by substituting rofecoxib for nonselective NSAIDs was 2247 Can dollars. The rofecoxib strategy became dominant if a gastroprotective agent was prescribed to more than 27.5% of the patients receiving nonselective NSAIDs.

CONCLUSION

For patients with OA aged >65 years in whom paracetamol therapy has failed, rofecoxib may represent a cost-effective alternative to nonselective NSAIDs. Increased costs for drug acquisition are offset, in part. by avoidance of gastrointestinal complications and reduced use of gastroprotective agents. Rofecoxib may offer increased benefit among patients at a higher risk of serious gastrointestinal events.

Pain management

Pain is a common problem encountered among elderly people in subacute and long-term care facilities. Pain often is underestimated and undertreated in these settings. Most pain problems can be improved by careful assessment and careful use of analgesic drugs and nondrug strategies. Subacute care and other long-term care facilities often present unique challenges to pain management. Clinicians who care for patients in these settings must help to establish a plan of care that is reasonable for the given resources and skills often available in these settings. Clinicians have an obligation to improve comfort and dignity for these patients, especially those near the end of life.

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug toxicity in the upper gastrointestinal tract

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) toxicity in the upper gastrointestinal tract is the most common serious drug-induced toxicity reported to drug regulatory authorities. In the last two decades, the rediscovery of H. pylori, development of potent ulcer-healing drugs and specific Cox-II inhibitors have opened new horizons in the management of NSAID toxicity. A Working Party composed of gastroenterologists and rheumatologists in the Asia-Pacific region met in Cairns, Australia, in 1999 to review the literature and develop appropriate guidelines. Recommendations were made based on the latest existing evidence. The importance of clinical events as study endpoints was emphasized. While differences exist between NSAIDs and aspirin, most studies have shown that advanced age, history of peptic ulcer disease, serious concomitant illnesses and coprescription of NSAID/aspirin with anticoagulants and steroids are high risk factors. These patients should be considered for prophylactic anti-ulcer therapy. Helicobacter pylori infection may aggravate the toxicity of NSAIDs and, in selected cases, should be treated before NSAID/aspirin is prescribed. Proton pump inhibitors and misoprostol are the most promising agents in preventing gastric and duodenal ulcers. When NSAID/aspirin needs to be continued in patients who develop an NSAID-related ulcer, proton pump inhibitors offer the best healing effect. With the discovery of cyclo-oxygenase isoforms (Cox-I and Cox-II), preferential and specific Cox-II inhibitors have been developed. While early clinical data have suggested promising antiinflammatory effects and improved safety profile in the gastrointestinal tract, several key issues on long-term safety remain unresolved. The use of potent anti-ulcer therapy, treatment of H. pylori infection and the development of Cox-II inhibitor will change the scenario of NSAID/aspirin-related gastrointestinal toxicity in the next millennium.

Prevention of NSAID-related ulcers

The use of NSAIDs constitutes a significant risk for gastrointestinal bleeding and other ulcer complications. However, if they prove clinically effective in relieving arthritic symptoms, the new COX-2 selectively inhibiting NSAIDs may ultimately solve the problem of gastrointestinal toxicity with NSAIDs.

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs

NSAID-associated dyspeptic symptoms are common and can be managed empirically with an H2-receptor antagonist or a proton-pump inhibitor. Treatment of established gastroduodenal ulcers is accomplished best by withholding the offending drugs. Proton-pump inhibitors appear to heal ulcers at the same rate whether or not NSAID therapy is continued. After the ulcer is healed and if NSAID therapy must be continued, prophylaxis is accomplished best by the concomitant use of proton-pump inhibitors, misoprostol (at least 200 micrograms 3 times a day), or a NSAID that preferentially inhibits COX-2. The future development of newer, safer NSAID preparations, including highly selective COX-2 inhibitors and nitric oxide-releasing NSAIDs, should provide better treatment options for the increasing number of individuals requiring anti-inflammatory agents.

The gastroduodenal toxicity of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs: a review of the literature

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are popular and important for the treatment of inflammation and pain. However, conventional NSAIDs are intrinsically toxic to the gastroduodenal (GD) mucosa. The literature can, and should, guide us towards safer prescribing of NSAIDs. Factors known to increase the risk of GD toxicity include: history of peptic ulcer disease; advanced age; high doses; and coadministration of aspirin, anticoagulants or corticosteroids. Patients with any one of these risk factors, with the possible exception of age alone, should receive gastroprotective prophylaxis with proton pump inhibitors or misoprostol. Standard dose H2 antagonists do not protect against NSAID-induced gastric ulcers and are unsuitable for prophylaxis. Awareness of risk factors and appropriate prophylactic agents will minimize the risk to patients. Whether the new generation of highly selective COX-2 inhibitors and nitric oxide-donating NSAIDs are safer drugs in long-term use be remains to be proven, though initial clinical trial data are positive.

An evidence-based approach to the management of uninvestigated dyspepsia in the era of Helicobacter pylori. Canadian Dyspepsia Working Group

OBJECTIVES

To provide Canadian primary care physicians with an evidence-based clinical management tool, including diagnostic and treatment recommendations, for patients who present with uninvestigated dyspepsia.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The management tool has 5 key decision steps addressing the following: (1) evidence that symptoms originate in the upper gastrointestinal tract, (2) presence of alarm features, (3) use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), (4) dominant reflux symptoms and (5) evidence of Helicobacter pylori infection. All patients over 50 years of age who present with new-onset dyspepsia and patients who present with alarm features should receive prompt investigation, preferably by endoscopy. The management options for patients with uninvestigated dyspepsia who use NSAIDs regularly are: (1) to stop NSAID therapy and assess symptomatic response, (2) to treat with NSAID prophylaxis if NSAID therapy cannot be stopped or (3) to refer for investigation. Gastroesophageal reflux disease can be diagnosed clinically if the patient's dominant symptoms are heartburn or acid regurgitation, or both; these patients should be treated with acid suppressive therapy. The remaining patients should be tested for H. pylori infection, and those with a positive result should be treated with H. pylori-eradication therapy. Those with a negative result should have their symptoms treated with optimal antisecretory therapy or a prokinetic agent. VALIDATION AND EVIDENCE: Evidence for resolution of the dyspepsia symptoms was the main outcome measure. Supporting evidence for the 5 steps in the management tool and the recommendations for treatment were graded according to the strength of the evidence and were endorsed by consensus of committee members. If no randomized controlled clinical trials were available, the recommendations were based on the best available evidence.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Evidence was obtained from MEDLINE searches for pertinent articles published from 1966 to October 1999. The searches focused on dyspepsia, diagnosis and treatment. Additional articles were retrieved through a manual search of bibliographies and abstracts from international gastroenterology conferences.

Cost-effectiveness of strategies for primary prevention of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug-induced peptic ulcer disease

OBJECTIVE

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) increase the risk of peptic ulcer disease by 5- to 7-fold in the first 3 months of treatment. This study examined the relative cost-effectiveness of different strategies for the primary prevention of NSAID-induced ulcers in patients that are starting NSAID treatment.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

A decision analysis model was developed to compare the cost-effectiveness of 6 prophylactic strategies relative to no prophylaxis for patients 65 years of age starting a 3-month course of NSAIDs: (1) testing for Helicobacter pylori infection and treating those with positive tests; (2) empiric treatment of all patients for Helicobacter pylori; (3) conventional-dose histamine2 receptor antagonists; (4) high-dose histamine2 receptor antagonists; (5) misoprostol; and (6) omeprazole. Costs were estimated from 1997 Medicare reimbursement schedules and the Drug Topics Red Book. Empiric treatment of Helicobacter pylori with bismuth, metronidazole, and tetracycline was cost-saving in the baseline analysis. Selective treatment of Helicobacter pylori, misoprostol, omeprazole, and conventional-dose or high-dose histamine2 receptor antagonists cost $23,800, $46,100, $34,400, and $15,600 or $21,500 per year of life saved, respectively, relative to prophylaxis. The results were sensitive to the probability of an ulcer, the probability and mortality of ulcer complications, and the cost of, efficacy of, and compliance with prophylaxis. The cost-effectiveness estimates did not change substantially when costs associated with antibiotic resistance of Helicobacter pylori were incorporated.

CONCLUSIONS

Several strategies for primary prevention of NSAID-induced ulcers in patients starting NSAIDs were estimated to have acceptable cost-effectiveness relative to prophylaxis. Empirically treating all patients for Helicobacter pylori with bismuth, metronidazole, and tetracycline was projected to be cost-saving in older patients.

Quantitative estimation of rare adverse events which follow a biological progression: a new model applied to chronic NSAID use

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) alone are unlikely to provide reliable estimates of the incidence of rare events because of their limited size. Cohort, case control, and other observational studies have large numbers but are vulnerable to various kinds of bias. Wanting to estimate the risk of death from bleeding or perforated gastroduodenal ulcers with chronic usage of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) with greater precision, we developed a model to quantify the frequency of rare adverse events which follow a biological progression. The model combined data from both RCTs and observational studies. We searched systematically for any report of chronic (>/=2 months) use of NSAIDs which gave information on gastroduodenal ulcer, bleed or perforation, death due to these complications, or progression from one level of harm to the next. Fifteen RCTs (19364 patients exposed to NSAIDs for 2-60 months), three cohort studies (215076 patients redeeming a NSAID prescription over a 3-12 month period), six case-control studies (2957 cases) and 20 case series (7406), and case reports (4447) were analysed. In RCTs the incidence of bleeding or perforation in 6822 patients exposed to NSAIDs was 0.69%; two deaths occurred. Of 11040 patients with bleeding or perforation with or without NSAID exposure across all reports, 6-16% (average 12%) died; the risk was lowest in RCTs and highest in case reports. Death from bleeding or perforation in all controls not exposed to NSAIDs occurred in 18 out of 849489 (0.002%). From these numbers we calculated the number-needed-to-treat for one patient to die due to gastroduodenal complications with chronic (>/=2 months) NSAIDs as 1/((0.69x¿6-16%, average 12%¿)-0.002%))=909-2500 (average 1220). On average 1 in 1200 patients taking NSAIDs for at least 2 months will die from gastroduodenal complications who would not have died had they not taken NSAIDs. This extrapolates to about 2000 deaths each year in the UK.

Management of gastroduodenal ulcers caused by non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are a major cause of morbidity and mortality, probably resulting in the death of 1200 patients per annum in the UK. The main mechanism of toxicity involves an inhibition of prostaglandin synthesis that results in mucosal erosion as a result of the abrogation of defence mechanisms. However, acid peptic attack can deepen this initial injury. Thus, logical treatments include prostaglandin analogues as 'replacement therapy', acid suppression, enteric coating to avoid topical effects and the use of safer NSAIDs, including those that have little or no effect on gastric mucosal prostaglandin synthesis. There is less logic to the strategy of Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) eradication, and the status of this approach is controversial. Overall, proton pump inhibitors have the best profile of efficacy and side-effects for the healing and prevention of NSAID-associated ulcers. Misoprostol is also effective and appears to be superior to proton pump inhibitors for superficial erosive injury. Early indications are that selective inhibitors of the inducible cyclooxygenase-2 enzyme have little or no effect in causing ulcers. Growing experience with these agents will probably revolutionize the management of patients with arthritic conditions. However, the increasing use of low-dose aspirin for cardiovascular prophylaxis means that gastroenterologists will have to continue to grapple with the problems of NSAID-associated ulcers for some time to come.

Pharmacological basis for the therapy of pain and inflammation with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) belong to the most frequently used drugs. The discovery of an inducible isoform of cyclo-oxygenase (COX-2) has led to an intensive worldwide search and the introduction of selective COX-2 inhibitors. In this review, recent advances in understanding the mechanism of action of NSAIDs and, in this context, clinical findings on NSAID-induced gastrointestinal side effects are summarized. This knowledge is important for the effective treatment of pain and inflammation, as well as for preventing serious and sometimes lethal gastrointestinal side effects.

Prevention of chronic NSAID induced upper gastrointestinal toxicity

BACKGROUND

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are important agents in the management of arthritic and inflammatory conditions, and are among the most frequently prescribed medications in North America and Europe. However, there is overwhelming evidence linking these agents to a variety of gastrointestinal (GI) toxicities.

OBJECTIVES

To review the effectiveness of common interventions for the prevention of NSAID induced upper GI toxicity.

SEARCH STRATEGY

A literature search was conducted, according to the Cochrane methodology for identification of randomized controlled trials in electronic databases, including MEDLINE from 1966 to January 2000, Current Contents for 6 months prior to January 2000, Embase to Febuary 1999, and a search of the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register from 1973 to 1999. Recent conference proceedings were reviewed and content experts and companies were contacted.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) of prostaglandin analogues (PA), H2-receptor antagonists (H2RA) or proton pump inhibitors (PPI) for the prevention of chronic NSAID induced upper GI toxicity were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two independent reviewers extracted data regarding population characteristics, study design, methodological quality and number of patients with endoscopic ulcers, ulcer complications, symptoms, overall drop-outs, drop outs due to symptoms. Dichotomous data was pooled using Revman V3.1. Heterogeneity was evaluated using a chi square test.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-three RCTs met the inclusion criteria. All doses of misoprostol significantly reduced the risk of endoscopic ulcers. Misoprostol 800 ug/day was superior to 400 ug/day for the prevention of endoscopic gastric ulcers (RR=0.18, and RR=0. 38 respectively, p=0.0055). A dose response relationship was not seen with duodenal ulcers. Misoprostol caused diarrhea at all doses, although significantly more at 800ug/day than 400ug/day (p=0.0012). Misoprostol was the only prophylactic agent documented to reduce ulcer complications. Standard doses of H2RAs were effective at reducing the risk of endoscopic duodenal (RR=0.24; 95% CI: 0.10-0. 57) but not gastric ulcers(RR=0.73; 95% CI:0.50-1.09). Both double dose H2RAs and PPIs were effective at reducing the risk of endoscopic duodenal and gastric ulcers (RR=0.44; 95% CI:0.26-0.74 and RR=0.37;95% CI;0.27-0.51 respectively for gastric ulcer), and were better tolerated than misoprostol.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Misoprostol, PPIs, and double dose H2RAs are effective at preventing chronic NSAID related endoscopic gastric and duodenal ulcers. Lower doses of misoprostol are less effective and are still associated with diarrhea. Only Misoprostol 800ug/day has been directly shown to reduce the risk of ulcer complications.

Prevention of the gastrointestinal adverse effects of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs: the role of proton pump inhibitors

The associations between nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and the presence and complications of gastroduodenal erosions and ulcers are well established. Evidence that acid aggravates NSAID-induced injury provides a rationale for minimising such damage by acid suppression. Other strategies discussed include avoidance of NSAIDs or minimising their dosage, selecting NSAIDs known to cause less damage, and co-prescription of various agents. Cytoprotection with misoprostol, a prostaglandin analogue, has been shown to be effective in reducing NSAID-related peptic ulcers and their complications. Unfortunately, adverse effects may limit compliance in some patients. Histamine H2 antagonists have only limited efficacy in the prevention of NSAID-induced ulcers in humans, particularly in the stomach, except at higher than standard dosages. This may relate to their relatively modest effect in elevating gastric pH, especially in comparison with proton pump inhibitors. Several studies now confirm the efficacy of proton pump inhibitors in the short and longer term prevention of NSAID-induced upper gastrointestinal injury. Placebo-controlled studies suggest reductions of over 70% in gastric and duodenal ulcer rates over 3 to 6 months. The recent ASTRONAUT (Acid Suppression Trial: Ranitidine versus Omeprazole for NSAID-Associated Ulcer Treatment) study documented the greater prophylactic efficacy of omeprazole over ranitidine at standard dosages for 6 months. The OMNIUM (Omeprazole versus Misoprostol for NSAID-Induced Ulcer Management) study showed omeprazole to be slightly more effective overall than misoprostol in preventing the upper gastrointestinal adverse effects of NSAIDs, with both substantially more effective than placebo, although misoprostol was somewhat less well tolerated. Although substantial reductions in NSAID ulceration are now achievable when co-therapy with a proton pump inhibitor is given, a few patients will still develop ulcers and their complications. Hence the judicious use of NSAIDs in the first instance cannot be overemphasised.

Review article: nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug-associated gastrointestinal complications--guidelines for prevention and treatment

Chronic ingestion of NSAIDs increases the risk for gastrointestinal complications, which range from dyspepsia to gastrointestinal bleeding, obstruction, and perforation. Among patients using NSAIDs, 0.1 to 2.0% per year suffer serious gastrointestinal complications. Patients who require analgesic therapy should be carefully assessed for the lowest possible dosage and shortest duration of NSAID use and for the potential of treatment with a non-NSAID pain reliever. These patients should also be assessed for factors that increase their risk of gastrointestinal complications, including increased age, concomitant anticoagulant or corticosteroid use, and past history of NSAID-associated gastrointestinal complications. The exact association between Helicobacter pylori infection and NSAID-related ulcer disease is unclear, and the routine testing and treatment of all NSAID using patients for H. pylori infection is not recommended at this time. NSAID-using patients who suffer from dyspepsia should have NSAIDs discontinued, the dosage changed, or be changed to a different class of NSAID. If NSAIDs cannot be discontinued, then an antisecretory agent should be initiated. Misoprostol prevents NSAID-associated gastrointestinal complications. Proton pump inhibitors are the most effective at healing NSAID-associated ulcers among patients who cannot discontinue NSAID therapy.

Management of NSAID-related gastrointestinal mucosal injury

The three therapeutic goals in patients with NSAID-induced gastroduodenopathy are treatment of dyspeptic symptoms, management of NSAID-related ulcers and their complications, and prophylaxis against recurrent gastrointestinal toxicity. Both H(2)-receptor antagonists and proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) appear to be helpful in relieving the symptoms associated with NSAID use, while treatment of NSAID-induced gastroduodenal ulcers, whether the NSAID is continued or not, is best achieved by the use of PPIs. However, because symptoms do not often predict the presence of gastroduodenal ulcers, the goal of prevention has become paramount in the treatment of patients with an increased likelihood of gastrointestinal toxicity. The best prophylaxis against NSAID-related toxicity is the use of an alternative agent such as salsalate or paracetamol (acetaminophen). However, if an NSAID is to be used, prophylaxis is best accomplished with a PPI or misoprostol, a prostaglandin E1 analogue. The use of misoprostol is limited by its frequent dosing, at least 200 microg three times a day, and its own gastrointestinal side effects. Future therapy will include NSAIDs that maintain their antiinflammatory effects, while possessing superior safety profiles, and include preferential and highly selective COX-2 inhibitors and nitric oxide releasing compounds.

Arthrotec: the evidence speaks for itself

This article examines the most recently published scientific literature on arthritis therapy options and available mucosal-protective agents. Emphasis is placed on the risks of current nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) therapy, the options for reducing such risks, and the published information that either supports or refutes current thinking in these areas. A comprehensive evaluation is made of clinical data related to the use of Arthrotec (diclofenac/misoprostol) in the treatment of arthritis. A recent meta-analysis of the prophylaxis of NSAID-associated upper gastrointestinal complications is reviewed. The results of this meta-analysis should help to consolidate much of the current scientific literature on the safe and effective treatment of arthritis.

Gastrointestinal effects of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory therapy

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are widely prescribed for the treatment of many conditions including rheumatoid arthritis, osteoarthritis, gouty arthritis, the joint and muscle discomfort associated with systemic lupus erythematosus, and other musculoskeletal disorders. Yet, their benefits, which are believed to be a result of their ability to inhibit cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2), are accompanied by considerable toxicity. NSAIDs' untoward effects are attributed to their inhibition of the constitutively expressed enzyme cyclooxygenase-1 (COX-1), with attendant suppression of the synthesis of prostanoids, substances that mediate key homeostatic functions. Side effects include suppression of hemostasis through inhibition of platelet aggregation, adverse effects in patients with heart failure and cirrhosis, and those with certain renal diseases, as well as complicating antihypertensive therapies involving diuretics or beta-adrenoceptor blockade. Perhaps most importantly, NSAIDs disrupt the gastrointestinal mucosal-protective and acid-limiting properties of prostaglandins, frequently leading to upper gastrointestinal erosions and ulceration, with possible subsequent hemorrhage and perforation. These complications can be reduced through identification of patients at risk, with circumspect use of NSAIDs, careful functional monitoring, and, in the case of gastrointestinal toxicity, co-administration of such agents as misoprostol or omeprazole. However, these strategies introduce complexity into the treatment paradigm. Moreover, side effects and adverse events may be significantly reduced through the use of COX-2-specific inhibitors, new agents that alleviate pain and inflammation without the liability for adverse events caused by COX-1 inhibition.

Comparison of the upper gastrointestinal safety of Arthrotec 75 and nabumetone in osteoarthritis patients at high risk for developing nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug-induced gastrointestinal ulcers

A 6-week, multicenter, double-masked, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study compared the upper gastrointestinal (UGI) safety of Arthrotec 75 (diclofenac sodium 75 mg-misoprostol 200 microg; G.D. Searle & Co., Skokie, Illinois) administered twice daily with that of nabumetone 1500 mg administered once daily in 1203 patients with symptomatic osteoarthritis (OA) of the hip or knee. All patients had a documented clinical history of endoscopically confirmed gastric, pyloric-channel, or duodenal ulcer or > or = 10 erosions in the stomach or duodenum. UGI endoscopy was performed at baseline and again at week 6 or early withdrawal. Treatment with Arthrotec 75 resulted in a significantly lower combined incidence of endoscopically confirmed gastric and duodenal ulcers compared with nabumetone (4% vs 11%), and its rate of endoscopically confirmed ulceration was equivalent to that of placebo. The incidence of gastric ulcers alone was also significantly lower with Arthrotec 75 than with nabumetone (1% vs 9%). The incidence of duodenal ulcer with Arthrotec 75 was not significantly different from that with nabumetone (4% vs 3%). Types of adverse events were similar for all treatment groups, with GI adverse events predominating. Arthrotec 75 was well tolerated by the majority of patients. The results of this study demonstrate that Arthrotec 75 has a superior UGI safety profile, causing significantly fewer UGI ulcers, in comparison with nabumetone in patients with symptomatic OA and a documented history of ulcers or > or = 10 erosions.