Quantitative assessment of the gastrointestinal and cardiovascular risk-benefit of celecoxib compared to individual NSAIDs at the population level

Determination of Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs in Animal Urine Samples by Ultrasound Vortex-Assisted Dispersive Liquid–Liquid Microextraction and Gas Chromatography Coupled to Ion Trap-Mass Spectrometry

A low solvent consumption method for the determination of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in animal urine samples is studied. The NSAIDs were extracted with CH2Cl2 by the ultrasound vortex assisted dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (USVA-DLLME) method from urine samples, previously treated with β-glucuronidase/acrylsulfatase. After centrifugation, the bottom phase of the chlorinated solvent was separated from the liquid matrix, dried with Na2SO4, and derivatized with N,O-bis(trimethylsilyl)trifluoroacetamide (BSTFA) + trimethylchlorosilane (TMCS) (99 + 1). After cooling at room temperature, the solution was concentrated under nitrogen flow, and 1 µL of solution was analyzed in gas chromatography/ion trap-mass spectrometry (GC-IT-MS). The enrichment factor was about 300–450 times and recoveries ranged from 94.1 to 101.2% with a relative standard deviation (RSD) of ≤4.1%. The USVA-DLLME process efficiency was not influenced by the characteristics of the real urine matrix; therefore, the analytical method characteristics were evaluated in the range 1–100 ng mL−1 (R2 ≥ 0.9950). The limits of detection (LODs) and limits of quantification (LOQs) were between 0.1 and 0.2 ng mL−1 with RSD ≤4.5% and between 4.1 and 4.7 ng mL−1 with RSD ≤3.5%, respectively, whereas inter- and intra-day precision was 3.8% and 4.5%, respectively. The proposed analytical method is reproducible, sensitive, and simple.

Usage patterns of 'over-the-counter' vs. prescription-strength nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in France

AIMS

Most risks of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are pharmacological, dose and duration dependent. Usage patterns of prescription-only (POM) or 'over-the-counter (OTC)' NSAIDs may influence risks, but are not commonly described.

METHODS

The Echantillon Généraliste de Bénéficiaires database, the permanent 1/97 representative sample from the French national healthcare insurance systems, was queried over 2009-2010 to identify usage patterns, concomitant chronic diseases and cardiovascular medication in OTC and POM NSAID users.

RESULTS

Over 2 years, 229 477 of 526 108 patients had at least one NSAID dispensation; 44 484 patients (19%) were dispensed only OTC NSAIDs (93% ibuprofen) and 121 208 (53%) only POM NSAIDs. The OTC users were younger (39.9 vs. 47.4 years old) and more often female (57 vs. 53%); 69% of OTC users and 49% of POM users had only one dispensation. A mean of 14.6 defined daily doses (DDD) were dispensed over 2 years for OTC vs. 53 for POM; 93% OTC vs. 60% POM patients bought ≤ 30 DDD over 2 years, and 1.5 vs. 12% bought ≥ 90 DDD. Chronic comorbidities were found in 19% of OTC users vs. 28% of POM users; 24 vs. 37% had at least one dispensation of a cardiovascular drug over the 2 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Most of the use of NSAIDs appears to be short term, especially for OTC-type NSAIDs, such as ibuprofen. The validity of risk estimates for NSAIDs extrapolated from clinical trials or from observational studies not including OTC-type usage may need to be revised.

Estimating the incremental net health benefit of requirements for cardiovascular risk evaluation for diabetes therapies

PURPOSE

To evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of pre-approval requirements for safety data to detect cardiovascular (CV) risk contained in the December 2008 U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidance for developing type 2 diabetes drugs compared with the February 2008 FDA draft guidance from the perspective of diabetes population health.

METHODS

We applied the incremental net health benefit (INHB) framework to quantify the benefits and risks of investigational diabetes drugs using a common survival metric (life-years [LYs]). We constructed a decision analytic model for clinical program development consistent with the requirements of each guidance and simulated diabetes drugs, some of which had elevated CV risk. Assuming constant research budgets, we estimate the impact of increased trial size on drugs investigated. We aggregate treatment benefit and CV risks for each approved drug over a 35-year horizon under each guidance.

RESULTS

The quantitative analysis suggests that the December 2008 guidance adversely impacts diabetes population health. INHB was -1.80 million LYs, attributable to delayed access to diabetes therapies (-0 .18 million LYs) and fewer drugs (-1.64 million LYs), but partially offset by reduced CV risk exposure (0.02 million LYs). Results were robust in sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSION

The health outcomes impact of all potential benefits and risks should be evaluated in a common survival measure, including health gain from avoided adverse events, lost health benefits from delayed or for gone efficacious products, and impact of alternative policy approaches. Quantitative analysis of the December 2008 FDA guidance for diabetes therapies indicates that negative impact on patient health will result.

A mathematical approach for evaluating Markov models in continuous time without discrete-event simulation

Markov models are a simple and powerful tool for analyzing the health and economic effects of health care interventions. These models are usually evaluated in discrete time using cohort analysis. The use of discrete time assumes that changes in health states occur only at the end of a cycle period. Discrete-time Markov models only approximate the process of disease progression, as clinical events typically occur in continuous time. The approximation can yield biased cost-effectiveness estimates for Markov models with long cycle periods and if no half-cycle correction is made. The purpose of this article is to present an overview of methods for evaluating Markov models in continuous time. These methods use mathematical results from stochastic process theory and control theory. The methods are illustrated using an applied example on the cost-effectiveness of antiviral therapy for chronic hepatitis B. The main result is a mathematical solution for the expected time spent in each state in a continuous-time Markov model. It is shown how this solution can account for age-dependent transition rates and discounting of costs and health effects, and how the concept of tunnel states can be used to account for transition rates that depend on the time spent in a state. The applied example shows that the continuous-time model yields more accurate results than the discrete-time model but does not require much computation time and is easily implemented. In conclusion, continuous-time Markov models are a feasible alternative to cohort analysis and can offer several theoretical and practical advantages.

Methodology of a large prospective, randomised, open, blinded endpoint streamlined safety study of celecoxib versus traditional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in patients with osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis: protocol of the standard care versus celecoxib outcome trial (SCOT)

INTRODUCTION

Cyclooxygenase 2 (COX-2) inhibitors have less upper gastrointestinal toxicity than traditional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). However, both COX-2 inhibitors and traditional NSAIDs may be associated with adverse cardiovascular side effects. Data from randomised and observational studies suggest that celecoxib has similar cardiovascular toxicity to traditional NSAIDs. The overall safety balance of a strategy of celecoxib therapy versus traditional NSAID therapy is unknown. The European Medicines Agency  requested studies of the cardiovascular safety of celecoxib within Europe. The Standard care versus Celecoxib Outcome Trial (SCOT) compares the cardiovascular safety of celecoxib with traditional NSAID therapy in the setting of the European Union healthcare system.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

SCOT is a large streamlined safety study conducted in Scotland, England, Denmark and the Netherlands using the Prospective Randomised Open Blinded Endpoint design. Patients aged over 60 years with osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis, free from established cardiovascular disease and requiring chronic NSAID therapy, are randomised to celecoxib or their previous traditional NSAID. They are then followed up for events by record-linkage within their normal healthcare setting. The hypothesis is non-inferiority with a confidence limit of 1.4. The primary endpoint is the first occurrence of hospitalisation or death for the Anti-Platelet Trialists' Collaboration (APTC) cardiovascular endpoint of non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke or cardiovascular death. Secondary endpoints are (1) first hospitalisation or death for upper gastrointestinal ulcer complications (bleeding, perforation or obstruction); (2) first occurrence of hospitalised upper gastrointestinal ulcer complications or APTC endpoint; (3) first hospitalisation for heart failure; (4) first hospitalisation for APTC endpoint plus heart failure; (5) all-cause mortality and (6) first hospitalisation for new or worsening renal failure.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

SCOT has been approved by the relevant ethics committees. The trial results will be published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION NUMBER

Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT00447759).

A quantitative evaluation of the regulatory assessment of the benefits and risks of rofecoxib relative to naproxen: an application of the incremental net-benefit framework

PURPOSE

To undertake a quantitative benefit-risk analysis of rofecoxib relative to naproxen using an incremental net-benefit (INB) analysis from the societal perspective, using the same data evaluated by the Health Canada and US FDA expert advisory panels.

METHODS

We developed a discrete event simulation model to calculate the INB of rofecoxib relative to naproxen in arthritis patients over a 1-year time horizon. All outcomes were weighted using societal utilities for each health state which facilitated the use of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) as the outcome. Probability distributions were incorporated for each model parameter to facilitate a probabilistic analysis using second-order Monte Carlo simulation.

RESULTS

In the base case analysis, the mean INB (SD) of rofecoxib relative to naproxen was 0.0002 (0.415) QALYs per patient over 12 months of treatment, or 0.2 QALYs per 1000 patients treated. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis resulted in a mean INB of 0.0022 QALYs (95%CI -0.0005, 0.0051). Overall, the INB associated with rofecoxib relative to naproxen was ≥0 in 94% of the iterations of the model.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis illustrates the application of the incremental net-benefit framework to quantitative benefit-risk evaluation, and suggests that the potential benefits of rofecoxib outweigh the potential harms relative to naproxen over 1 year from the societal perspective under the assumptions of this model.

Celecoxib-related gastroduodenal ulcer and cardiovascular events in a randomized trial for gastric cancer prevention

AIM

To evaluate the long-term risk of gastroduodenal ulcer and cardiovascular events induced by celecoxib in a population-based, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

METHODS

From 2004 to 2006, a total of 1024 Chinese patients (aged 35 to 64 years) with severe chronic atrophic gastritis, intestinal metaplasia or dysplasia were randomly assigned to receive 200 mg of celecoxib twice daily or placebo in Linqu County (Shandong Province, China), a high-risk area of gastric cancer. All gastroduodenal ulcer and cardiovascular events occurred were recorded and the patients were followed up for 1.5 years after treatment. At the end of the trial, a systematic interview survey about other adverse events was conducted.

RESULTS

Gastroduodenal ulcer was detected in 19 of 463 (3.72%) patients who received celecoxib and 17 of 473 (3.31%) patients who received placebo, respectively (odds ratio = 1.13, 95% CI = 0.58-2.19). Cardiovascular (CV) events occurred in 4 patients who received celecoxib and in 5 patients who received placebo, respectively. Compared with those who received placebo, patients who received celecoxib had no significant increase in occurrence of CV events (hazard ratio = 0.84, 95% CI = 0.23-3.15). Among the adverse events acquired by interview survey, only the frequency of bloating was significantly higher in patients treated with celecoxib than in those treated with placebo.

CONCLUSION

Treatment of gastric cancer with celecoxib is not associated with increased risk of gastroduodenal ulcer and cardiovascular events.