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

Cardiovascular safety of celecoxib in rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective

To assess the cardiovascular safety of celecoxib compared to non-selective non-steroid anti-inflammatory drugs or placebo.

Methods

We included randomized controlled trials of oral celecoxib compared with a non-selective NSAID or placebo in rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis patients. We conducted searches in EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, MEDLINE, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, VIP, Wanfang, and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database. Study selection and data extraction were done by two authors independently. The risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane’s risk-of-bias Tool for Randomized Trials. The effect size was presented as a risk ratio with their 95% confidence interval.

Results

Until July 22^nd, 2021, our search identified 6279 records from which, after exclusions, 21 trials were included in the meta-analysis. The overall pooled risk ratio for Antiplatelet Trialists Collaboration cardiovascular events for celecoxib compared with any non-selective non-steroid anti-inflammatory drugs was 0.89 (95% confidence interval: 0.80–1.00). The pooled risk ratio for all-cause mortality for celecoxib compared with non-selective non-steroid anti-inflammatory drugs was 0.81 (95% confidence interval: 0.66–0.98). The cardiovascular mortality rate of celecoxib was lower than non-selective non-steroid anti-inflammatory drugs (risk ratio: 0.75, 95% confidence interval: 0.57–0.99). There was no significant difference between celecoxib and non-selective non-steroid anti-inflammatory drugs or placebo in the risk of other cardiovascular events.

Conclusion

Celecoxib is relatively safe in rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis patients, independent of dose or duration. But it remains uncertain whether this would remain the same in patients treated with aspirin and patients with established cardiovascular diseases.

Hypersensitivity and Cardiovascular Risks Related to Allopurinol and Febuxostat Therapy in Asians: A Population-Based Cohort Study and Meta-Analysis

The safety of newer xanthine oxidase inhibitor febuxostat compared to allopurinol remains unclear. To compare the risks of allopurinol hypersensitivity and febuxostat hypersensitivity and cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) in Asians, we conducted a population-based cohort study enrolling patients receiving allopurinol or febuxostat from Chang Gung Memorial Hospital Health System across Taiwan during 2012-2016 and further performed a meta-analysis incorporating two recent studies. Among the 61,539 users, a corresponding 12,007 and 5,680 patients were identified as new users. The overall incidence of febuxostat hypersensitivity was significantly lower than allopurinol hypersensitivity (0.2 vs. 2.7 per 1,000 new users; P < 0.001). There were 33 allopurinol-hypersensitivity reactions (including 18 severe cutaneous adverse drug reactions), and only one patient developed febuxostat-maculopapular exanthema. Moreover, febuxostat did not statistically increase the risk of CVD (hazard ratio (HR), 1.16; P = 0.152) and related death (HR, 1.49; P = 0.496) compared to allopurinol. The result of the meta-analysis also showed a consistent result. In conclusion, the incidence and severity of febuxostat-hypersensitivity are lower than with allopurinol. Febuxostat did not show an increased risk of CVD and related death.

Cardiovascular Risk of Nonsteroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs and Classical and Selective Cyclooxygenase-2 Inhibitors: A Meta-analysis of Observational Studies

The purpose of this study was to review the published evidence on the clinical use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and to assess the cardiovascular risk (CVR) of cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors (coxibs), excluding aspirin, by means of a meta-analytic procedure. A search was conducted on MEDLINE and EMBASE databases between October 1999 and June 2018. Cohort and case-control studies showing CVR as relative risk (RR), odds ratio, hazard ratio, or incidence rate ratio associated with NSAIDs versus no treatment were selected. We estimated the pooled RR and the 95% confidence interval (CI) for all NSAIDs as a whole and individually. Eighty-seven studies met the inclusion criteria. Overall, NSAIDs were found to be associated with a statistically significantly increased CVR (RR, 1.24 [95%CI, 1.19-1.28]). The risk was slightly higher for coxibs (RR, 1.22 [95%CI, 1.17-1.28]) as compared with nonselective NSAIDs (RR, 1.18 [95%CI, 1.12-1.24]). Data analysis by drug disclosed that rofecoxib (RR, 1.39 [95%CI, 1.31-1.47]), followed by diclofenac (RR, 1.34 [95%CI, 1.26-1.42]) and etoricoxib (RR, 1.27 [95%CI, 1.12-1.43]) were the NSAIDs associated with the highest CVR. Analysis by type of event showed that the highest risk corresponded to vascular events for both coxibs (RR, 2.18 [95%CI, 1.72-2.78]) and nonselective NSAIDs (RR, 2.46 [95%CI, 2.00-3.02]). The meta-analysis results suggest that the use of the marketed coxibs celecoxib and etoricoxib would be related to a statistically significant CVR increase. Etoricoxib CVR could be higher than that for celecoxib. This increment would be similar to classical NSAID CVR.

Nonselective Nonsteroidal Antiinflammatory Drugs and Cardiovascular Risk: Are They Safe?

Objective:

To assess possible cardiovascular risks associated with use of nonselective nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs).

Data Sources:

Medline and Embase were searched from January 1985 through April 2007 and relevant studies were retrieved.

Study Selection and Data Extraction:

Peer-reviewed, prospective, double-blind, case–control, and cohort-design studies published in the English language literature were considered eligible for review. Previous meta-analyses and systematic reviews were also analyzed. In total, 17 case–control studies; 9 cohort studies; 1 prospective, double-blind study; 3 meta-analyses; and 1 systematic review of observational studies were identified.

Data Synthesis:

Three studies were prospective and the remainder consisted of observational, retrospective studies, with most reporting acute fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction as the cardiovascular endpoint. Among the nonselective NSAIDs, diclofenac appears to pose the highest risk for cardiovascular toxicity; other agents trend toward a neutral effect with respect to cardiovascular risk. Although the data are suggestive, it remains unclear whether naproxen provides protective cardiovascular effects among patients on chronic therapy.

Conclusions:

Currently available data are insufficient for defining evidence-based clinical guidelines for the use of NSAIDs, and the need for additional research, specifically randomized controlled trials, is evident. Diclofenac demonstrates a significant risk while naproxen appears to pose the lowest, albeit nonsignificant, risk for cardiovascular morbidity. Although the current clinical evidence may not warrant recommending naproxen as the preferred NSAID treatment, it may be prudent to avoid diclofenac for patients with cardiovascular risk factors requiring NSAID treatment.

Faster drug approval: challenges for safety

INTRODUCTION

More rapid drug premarketing procedures pose a challenge for regulatory agencies in terms of innovation and improving real-world safety and effectiveness Areas covered: This review considers the blockbuster drugs used over the previous fifteen years with adverse reactions after marketing, the elements and time span of risk identification and the measures implemented or considered, based on the existing literature and reports from the agencies Expert opinion: Risk prediction is founded on several factors: randomization, sample size, a well-established endpoint for safety, use of a comparator rather than placebo and a longer Phase-III period, in which a serious illness may be identified by early signs of alteration in the primary parenchyma with the latest biochemical, instrumental and imaging techniques. In comparative non-inferiority evaluations, increased safety should be preferred, with the exception of drugs that may be useful in serious or life-threatening diseases for which there are few or no effective existing therapies. A period of restricted use may be required to test and dispense new drugs, as well as to implement specific methods for the early detection of adverse events. It is important not to regard a new medicine axiomatically as the best treatment before it comes into wide use.

Long-term frequent use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs might protect patients with ankylosing spondylitis from cardiovascular diseases: a nationwide case-control study

The objective of this case-control study was to investigate the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) following non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) use in patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS). A total of 10,763 new AS patients were identified from the National Taiwan Health Insurance claims database during the period from 1997 to 2008. In all, 421 AS patients with CVD were recruited as cases, and up to 2-fold as many sex- and age-matched controls were selected. Logistic regression models were used to estimate the odds ratio (OR) between NSAID use and CVD incidence. The medication possession rate (MPR) was used to evaluate NSAID exposure during the study period. AS patients had increased risk of CVD (OR, 1.68; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.57 to 1.80). Among frequent (MPR≥80%) COX II users, the risks for all types of CVD were ten times lower than those among non-users at 24 months (OR, 0.08; 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.92). Among frequent NSAID users, the risks of major adverse cardiac event (MACE) were significantly lower at 12 months (OR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.07 to 0.76)—a trend showing that longer exposure correlated with lower risk. Regarding non-frequent NSAID users (MPR<80%), short-term exposure did carry higher risk (for 6 months: OR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.07 to 1.86), but after 12 months, the risk no longer existed. We conclude that long-term frequent use of NSAIDs might protect AS patients from CVD; however, NSAIDs still carried higher short-term risk in the non-frequent users.

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.

Rheumatoid arthritis and cardiovascular disease: an update on treatment issues

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review examines thresholds for treatment of traditional cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and whether RA-specific treatment modulates cardiovascular risk.

RECENT FINDINGS

There are substantial data demonstrating an increased CVD risk among patients with RA. Both traditional CVD risk factors and inflammation contribute to this risk. Recent epidemiologic studies strengthen the case that aggressive immunosuppression with biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs), such as tumour necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists, is associated with a reduced risk of CVD events. However, to date, there are no randomized controlled trials published regarding the management of CVD in RA.

SUMMARY

Epidemiologic evidence continues to accumulate regarding the relationship between the effects of traditional CVD risk factors and RA-specific treatments on cardiovascular outcomes in RA. The field needs randomized controlled trials to better guide management.

Effect of evening primrose oil and ω-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids on the cardiovascular risk of celecoxib in rats

Experimental data raised the specter of increased cardiovascular risk with selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors. The study aimed to investigate the cardiovascular risk caused by celecoxib by studying its effect on blood pressure (BP) and thrombogenesis in rats. We tested the possible protective effects of evening primrose oil (EPO) or ω-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (n-3 PUFAs). Male Wistar rats were assigned to the following groups: vehicle, celecoxib, celecoxib/n-3 PUFAs, celecoxib/EPO, n-3 PUFAs, and EPO. The rats were treated with celecoxib (20 mg·kg(-1)·d(-1)) by gastric gavage for 6 weeks. The mean BP was recorded, and blood samples were collected for testing prothrombin time and activated partial thromboplastin time. Platelet aggregation assay and collagen-induced platelet consumption test were used as models of thrombogenesis. Celecoxib increased the BP without affecting coagulation parameters and accelerated thrombogenesis by increasing platelet aggregation and collagen-induced thrombocytopenia. EPO and n-3 PUFAs decreased the celecoxib-induced elevation in BP. Although EPO significantly decreased platelet aggregation and collagen-induced thrombocytopenia, n-3 PUFAs did not. Celecoxib elevated BP and increased the risk of thrombogenesis in rats. A combination of celecoxib and the selected natural supplements is suggested as a novel approach to minimize cardiovascular risk caused by celecoxib.

Risk of new acute myocardial infarction hospitalization associated with use of oral and parenteral non-steroidal anti-inflammation drugs (NSAIDs): a case-crossover study of Taiwan's National Health Insurance claims database and review of current evidence

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have documented the increased cardiovascular risk associated with the use of some nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Despite this, many old NSAIDs are still prescribed worldwide. Most of the studies to date have been focused on specific oral drugs or limited by the number of cases examined. We studied the risk of new acute myocardial infarction (AMI) hospitalization with current use of a variety of oral and parenteral NSAIDs in a nationwide population, and compared our results with existing evidence.

METHODS

We conducted a case-crossover study using the Taiwan's National Health Insurance claim database, identifying patients with new AMI hospitalized in 2006. The 1-30 days and 91-120 days prior to the admission were defined as case and matched control period for each patient, respectively. Uses of NSAIDs during the respective periods were compared using conditional logistic regression and adjusted for use of co-medications.

RESULTS

8354 new AMI hospitalization patients fulfilled the study criteria. 14 oral and 3 parenteral NSAIDs were selected based on drug utilization profile among 13.7 million NSAID users. The adjusted odds ratio, aOR (95% confidence interval), for risk of AMI and use of oral and parenteral non-selective NSAIDs were 1.42 (1.29, 1.56) and 3.35 (2.50, 4.47), respectively, and significantly greater for parenteral than oral drugs (p for interaction<0.01). Ketorolac was associated with the highest AMI risk among both of oral and parenteral NSAIDs studied, the aORs were 2.02 (1.00, 4.09) and 4.27 (2.90, 6.29) respectively. Use of oral flurbiprofen, ibuprofen, sulindac, diclofenac, and parenteral ketoprofen were also significantly associated with increased AMI risk. The results of the present study were consistent with the majority of evidence from previous studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The collective evidence revealed the tendency of increased AMI risk with current use of some NSAIDs. A higher AMI risk associated with use of parenteral NSAIDs was observed in the present study. Ketorolac had the highest associated risk in both oral and parenteral NSAIDs studied. Though further investigation to confirm the association is warranted, prescribing physicians and the general public should be cautious about the potential risk of AMI when using NSAIDs.

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs as disease-modifying agents for Parkinson's disease: evidence from observational studies

BACKGROUND

Neuroinflammation may play a key role in the neurodegeneration associated with Parkinson's disease (PD). Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) may be beneficial in the primary and secondary prevention of PD.

OBJECTIVES

1) Do NSAIDs prevent the onset of PD?2) Are NSAIDs neuroprotective in PD - do they slow the progression of disease once PD is established?3) What are the adverse effects of taking NSAIDs in PD?

SEARCH METHODS

We searched electronic databases, including trial registers, complemented with handsearching of conference proceedings and citation searching on key articles. All searching was updated in May 2011. We contacted authors to provide additional information where necessary.

SELECTION CRITERIA

For the primary prevention review, we sought primary prevention trials and observational studies (cohort and case-control studies). Participants were free of PD when exposure to NSAIDs was assessed. For the secondary prevention review, we sought clinical trials in patients with a well-defined definition of PD. Two people independently selected studies for inclusion using predetermined criteria.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors abstracted data from the source papers and assessed methodological quality independently. No studies met the inclusion criteria for the secondary prevention review. For the primary prevention review only observational studies were found. We combined data where appropriate using the inverse variance method. We assessed methodological quality using the Newcastle Ottawa Scales and by examining the period of exposure assessed prior to PD onset (or the index date in controls).

MAIN RESULTS

Fourteen observational studies met the inclusion criteria for the primary prevention review (five cohort, nine case-control studies). Exposure to any NSAIDs or aspirin had no effect on the risk of developing PD. Exposure to non-aspirin NSAIDs reduced the risk of developing PD by 13% (effect estimate 0.87 (95% CI 0.73 to 1.04 - random-effects model), but this did not reach statistical significance. We found similar results for the most robust studies. Ibuprofen in isolation was examined in four studies and was associated with a 27% reduction in risk (effect estimate 0.73, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.85). There was a lack of information on adverse effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is currently no evidence for the use of NSAIDs in the secondary prevention of PD. Non-aspirin NSAIDs, particularly ibuprofen, may reduce the risk of developing PD. However, little is known of the effects of other individual drugs and at present no recommendations can be made regarding their use in primary prevention.

High-fat diet alters prostanoid balance and perfusion in ischemic myocardium of naproxen-treated swine

BACKGROUND

The effect of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) on the cardiovascular system remains controversial, especially in patients with cardiovascular comorbidities. We used a swine model of chronic myocardial ischemia to investigate whether hypercholesterolemia alters the cardiovascular effects of the nonselective NSAID naproxen.

METHODS

Yorkshire swine were fed normal chow (NAP; n = 7) or a high-fat diet (HF-NAP; n = 8). Chronic myocardial ischemia was created in all animals by left circumflex ameroid constrictor placement. All swine were started on oral naproxen (440 mg/day) at the time of ameroid placement. After 7 weeks, myocardial perfusion and microvessel reactivity in the ischemic territory were assessed. Tissue levels of prostanoid metabolites 11-dehydrothromboxane B2 (11-d-TXB₂) and 6-keto-prostaglandin F1-α (6-k-PGF(1α)) were measured. Tissue was analyzed for capillary density and protein expression.

RESULTS

Myocardial perfusion was significantly decreased in the HF-NAP group both at rest and during ventricular pacing. Microvessel relaxation responses to sodium nitroprusside and adenosine 5'-diphosphate were similar between groups. Tissue 11-d-TXB₂ levels were similar between groups, but tissue 6-k-PGF(1α) was significantly decreased in the HF-NAP group (P = .001). Expression of thromboxane synthase was significantly higher in the HF-NAP group (P = .02), while prostacyclin synthase expression was significantly decreased in the HF-NAP group (P = .04). Capillary density was higher in the HF-NAP group (P = .005). Proangiogenic vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF; P = .0002) and Akt (P = .01) were downregulated in the HF-NAP group.

CONCLUSION

A high-fat diet impairs tissue perfusion in ischemic myocardium of naproxen-treated swine by shifting the prostanoid balance to favor production of thromboxane over prostacyclin. Dietary modification may improve myocardial blood flow and alter the safety profile in chronically ischemic cardiac patients taking naproxen.

Pain management for rheumatoid arthritis and cardiovascular or renal comorbidity

BACKGROUND

Pain in rheumatoid arthritis is common, is often multi-factorial and many different pharmacotherapeutic agents are routinely used for pain management. There are concerns that some of the pain pharmacotherapies currently used may increase the risk of adverse events in people with rheumatoid arthritis and concurrent cardiovascular or renal disease.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically assess and collate the scientific evidence on the efficacy and safety of using pain pharmacotherapy in people with rheumatoid arthritis and cardiovascular or renal comorbidities.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library 2010, Issue 4); MEDLINE, from 1950; EMBASE, from 1980; the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE). We also handsearched the conference proceedings for American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and European League against Rheumatism (EULAR) for 2008-09, and checked the websites of regulatory agencies for reported adverse events, labels and warnings.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered randomised controlled trials and non-randomised studies comparing the efficacy and safety of pain pharmacotherapies in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, with and without comorbid cardiovascular or renal conditions.In addition, we also considered controlled before-after studies, interrupted time series, cohort and case control studies and case series (N ≥ 20) to assess safety.For the purpose of our review, pain pharmacotherapy was defined as including simple analgesics (such as paracetamol), non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), opioids or opioid-like drugs (such as tramadol), and neuromodulators (including anti-depressants, anti-convulsants, and muscle relaxants).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the search results and planned to extract data and appraise the risk of bias of included studies.

MAIN RESULTS

We did not identify any studies meeting our inclusion criteria. Many of the trials of NSAIDs explicitly excluded patients with cardiovascular or renal comorbidities.We did identify one trial that reported evidence in mixed populations (including both rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis) taking either diclofenac or etoricoxib. In this study, the presence of cardiovascular disease increased the likelihood of a further cardiovascular event three-fold. Patients with two or more cardiovascular comorbidities showed a two-fold increased likelihood of adverse cardiovascular events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There were no trials that specifically compared the efficacy and safety of pain pharmacotherapies for patients with rheumatoid arthritis, with and without comorbid cardiovascular or renal conditions.In the absence of specific evidence in rheumatoid arthritis, current guidelines recommend that NSAIDs be used with caution in the general rheumatoid arthritis population while highlighting the added need for extra vigilance in patients with established cardiovascular disease or risk factors for its development. Current guidelines regarding the use of NSAIDs and opioids in moderate to severe renal impairment should also be applied to the rheumatoid arthritis population.Further research is required to guide clinicians when treating pain in rheumatoid arthritis.

Naproxen aggravates doxorubicin-induced cardiomyopathy in rats

Background:

The repercussion of the heated dispute on cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) selective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) led to the national and international withdrawal of several of the recently introduced coxibs. Further debate and research have highlighted risks of the classical NSAIDs too. There is much controversy about the cardiovascular safety of a nonselective NSAID naproxen (NAP) and its possible cardioprotective effect.

Objectives:

The study was undertaken to determine the cardiovascular effects of NAP on doxorubicin-induced cardiomyopathy in rats.

Materials and Methods:

Male albino rats received a single i.p. injection of normal saline (normal control group) and doxorubicin (DOX) 15 mg/kg (toxic control group). Naproxen was administered alone (50 mg/kg/day, p.o.) and in combination with DOX and DOX + trimetazidine (TMZ) (10 mg/kg/day, p.o.) for 5 days after 24 h of DOX treatment. DOX-induced cardiomyopathy was assessed in terms of increased activities of serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), tissue thiobarbituric acid reactive substances (TBARS) and decreased activities of myocardial glutathione, superoxide dismutase and catalase, followed by transmission electron microscopy of the cardiac tissue.

Results:

Doxorubicin significantly increased oxidative stress as evidenced by increased levels of LDH and TBARS and decreased antioxidant enzymes levels. Both biochemical and electron microscopic studies revealed that NAP itself was cardiotoxic and aggravated DOX-induced cardiomyopathy and abolished the protective effect of TMZ in rats.

Conclusions:

This study indicates that NAP has the potential to worsen the situation in patients with cardiovascular disease. Therefore, it should be used cautiously in patients with compromised cardiac function.

Alzheimer's Disease Anti-inflammatory Prevention Trial: design, methods, and baseline results

BACKGROUND

The Alzheimer's Disease Anti-inflammatory Prevention Trial (ADAPT) was designed to address whether non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) can prevent or delay the onset of Alzheimer's disease (AD).

METHODS

ADAPT was a randomized, double-placebo-controlled, multicenter chemoprevention trial conducted at six U.S. dementia research clinics. At entry, participants were required to test "normal" on a battery of cognitive tests and to be age 70+ with a family history of Alzheimer-like dementia. Persons were randomly assigned to 200 mg b.i.d. celecoxib (Celebrex, Pfizer), 220 mg b.i.d. naproxen sodium (Aleve, Bayer), or placebo. The primary outcome measure was AD. Secondary outcome measures were cognitive decline and measures related to safety of the treatments when used long term. ADAPT was designed to detect a 30% reduction in AD incidence with 80% power. The estimated sample size requirement was 2,625.

RESULTS

Enrollment began in March 2001 and ended in December 2004 when treatments were suspended because of concerns regarding cardiovascular safety of the treatments. Followup ranged from 1 to 46 months. The achieved enrollment was 2,528. Recruitment was achieved primarily via mailings to people aged 70+ living in the catchment areas of the six field sites.

An evidence-based review of the cardiovascular risks of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), both nonselective and cyclooxygenase-2-specific inhibitors, are commonly used medications for the relief of acute and chronic pain associated with a wide range of medical conditions. Because of the extensive use of these agents, adverse events that occur infrequently may still affect the overall risk/benefit ratio of this class of medications. Serious adverse cardiovascular (CV) events have been reported with NSAID use, but unfortunately, definitive evidence regarding the precise CV risk associated with these drugs, as a class and individually, is lacking. Therefore, it is an issue of public health importance that physicians be guided by careful assessment of the existing evidence to make reasonable choices in prescribing these medications. The investigators review the key clinical trials, meta-analyses of clinical trials, and epidemiologic studies on the subject of the CV safety of NSAIDs and identify key variables that define the CV risk of the NSAIDs. In conclusion, it is important that cardiologists, who are not among those physicians frequently prescribing NSAIDs, have a particular responsibility to have up-to-date, thoughtfully synthesized information about the CV risks of these drugs, especially when administered to patients receiving low-dose aspirin for cardioprotection.

Cardiovascular risk associated with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs

Since the introduction of selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors (coxibs), there has been an ongoing discussion about the cardiovascular (CV) safety of coxibs and the traditional nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Available data about the CV safety of NSAIDs come mostly from meta-analyses and a few clinical trials. Current evidence suggests that NSAIDs may increase the risk of CV events. Naproxen might be associated with lower risk, but available data are not conclusive. Recent recommendations on the treatment of patients with NSAIDs favor the use of naproxen in patients with increased CV risk. Therefore, this review focuses on data about naproxen and examines CV risk with ibuprofen and non-naproxen NSAIDs. In addition, data about CV safety of paracetamol (acetaminophen) are presented.

Rationale, design, and governance of Prospective Randomized Evaluation of Celecoxib Integrated Safety versus Ibuprofen Or Naproxen (PRECISION), a cardiovascular end point trial of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory agents in patients with arthritis

BACKGROUND

Pain management in patients with osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis often requires long-term use of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). However, the relative cardiovascular safety of these therapies remains uncertain.

METHODS

The Prospective Randomized Evaluation of Celecoxib Integrated Safety versus Ibuprofen Or Naproxen (PRECISION) trial will evaluate the cardiovascular safety of celecoxib, ibuprofen, and naproxen. Approximately 20,000 patients with symptomatic osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis at high risk for, or with, established cardiovascular disease will be randomized in this double-blind, triple dummy, multinational, multicenter study. The primary end point is the composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. The trial will continue until 762 primary events occur with at least 18 months follow-up. Noninferiority of any of the regimens will require a 97.5% upper CI of the hazard ratio (HR) < or =1.33 and point estimate < or =1.12 for both intent-to-treat (ITT) and modified ITT populations.

CONCLUSION

PRECISION, the first study of patients with high cardiovascular risk chronically treated with a cyclooxygenase-2 selective inhibitor or nonselective NSAID, will define the relative cardiovascular safety profile of celecoxib, ibuprofen, and naproxen and provide data to help guide NSAID use for pain management for this population.

Identifying the best treatment among common nonsurgical neck pain treatments: a decision analysis

STUDY DESIGN

Decision analysis.

OBJECTIVE

To identify the best treatment for nonspecific neck pain.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

In Canada and the United States, the most commonly prescribed neck pain treatments are nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), exercise, and manual therapy. Deciding which treatment is best is difficult because of the trade-offs between beneficial and harmful effects, and because of the uncertainty of these effects.

METHODS

(Quality-adjusted) life expectancy associated with standard NSAIDs, Cox-2 NSAIDs, exercise, mobilization, and manipulation were compared in a decisionanalytic model. Estimates of the course of neck pain, background risk of adverse events in the general population, treatment effectiveness and risk, and patient-preferences were input into the model. Assuming equal effectiveness, we conducted a baseline analysis using risk of harm only. We assessed the stability of the baseline results by conducting a second analysis that incorporated effectiveness data from a high-quality randomized trial.

RESULTS

There were no important differences across treatments. The difference between the highest and lowest ranked treatments predicted by the baseline model was 4.5 days of life expectancy and 3.4 quality-adjusted life-days. The difference between the highest and lowest ranked treatments predicted by the second model was 7.3 quality-adjusted life-days.

CONCLUSION

When the objective is to maximize life expectancy and quality-adjusted life expectancy, none of the treatments in our analysis were clearly superior.

Does the varied use of NSAIDs explain the differences in the risk of myocardial infarction?

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the risk of myocardial infarction (MI) with diclofenac, ibuprofen and naproxen, taking into account the exposure patterns.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study using the General Practice Research Database. Setting. UK primary care. Subjects. Patients aged 40+ years prescribed a traditional nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID). The control cohort was frequency matched by disease risk score.

INTERVENTION

Observational comparisons of MI rates.

RESULTS

The study included 729,294 NSAID users and 443,047 controls. The relative rate (RR) for MI increased with cumulative and daily dose (RR = 1.05 with 0-4 prior prescriptions and RR = 1.49 with 30+; RR = 1.05 with daily dose of < 1200 mg ibuprofen and RR = 1.96 with dose of > or = 2400 mg per day; for diclofenac, the RR was 1.13 with < 150 mg per day and 2.03 with > or = 300 mg per day). Diclofenac users had higher risks of MI (RR = 1.21) than ibuprofen (RR = 1.04) or naproxen (RR = 1.03) users, but exposure varied between these drugs. Taking into account these exposure differences, it was found that the risk of MI was comparable in current and past long-term users. The patterns of hazard rates (i.e. absolute risks) of MI were similar in patients using ibuprofen, diclofenac or naproxen with similar history of NSAID use. There was no statistical difference between ibuprofen, diclofenac and ibuprofen in the linear trends for cumulative dose or daily dose.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term users of traditional NSAIDs have an increased risk of MI that is probably explained by the underlying disease severity. Most of the differences in MI risk between diclofenac, ibuprofen or naproxen may be explained by their varied use.

Safety of the nonselective NSAID nabumetone : focus on gastrointestinal tolerability

Although effective in the treatment of pain associated with rheumatic conditions such as osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis, long-term use of NSAIDs is primarily limited by their association with upper gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity. Adverse effects range from dyspepsia and abdominal pain to ulceration and bleeding. GI damage elicited by NSAIDs arises as the result of biochemically induced topical irritant effects and by topical and systemic pharmacological suppression of gastroprotective prostaglandins. Variation in the physicochemical properties and pharmacological profiles among the individual NSAIDs translate into inter-agent differences regarding propensity to cause adverse GI effects. Nabumetone is a nonselective NSAID that offers distinct advantages over other agents in this class with regard to GI tolerability. Its non-acidic nature and pro-drug formulation, together with the lack of biliary secretion of its active metabolite, 6-methoxy-2-naphthylacetic acid, are thought to contribute to the improved GI tolerability of this drug. In head-to-head trials with other NSAIDs, nabumetone has demonstrated significant benefits regarding the incidence of GI events and more serious perforations, ulcers and bleeds (PUBs). Pooled data from eight postmarketing, randomized, controlled trials demonstrated a lower cumulative frequency of PUBs with nabumetone (0.03%; 95% CI 0.0, 0.08) versus comparator NSAIDs (1.4%; 95% CI 0.5, 2.4). Large-scale database studies also indicate that risk of serious GI complications is lower with nabumetone than comparator NSAIDs. Limited comparative data suggest that nabumetone offers a GI tolerability profile similar to that of cyclo-oxygenase-2 selective NSAIDs (coxibs). Although adverse cardiovascular outcomes appear to be a class effect of the coxibs, conventional NSAIDs may also have the potential for causing atherothrombotic complications. However, based on available data, nabumetone does not appear to be associated with increased cardiovascular risk. Finally, there is no particular concern about the nephrotoxic and hepatotoxic potential of nabumetone. Nonetheless, the potential for adverse drug reactions remains, and hence nabumetone, as with any NSAID, should be used at the lowest dose, which is effective for each patient, and for the shortest time necessary to control symptoms.

Therapeutic targets in prostaglandin E2 signaling for neurologic disease

Prostaglandins (PGs) are potent autocrine and paracrine oxygenated lipid molecules that contribute appreciably to physiologic and pathophysiologic responses in almost all organs, including brain. Emerging data indicate that the PGs, and more specifically PGE2, play a central role in brain diseases including ischemic injury and several neurodegenerative diseases. Given concerns over the potential toxicity from protracted use of cyclooxygenase inhibitors in the elderly, attention is now focused on blocking PGE2 signaling that is mediated by interactions with four distinct G protein-coupled receptors, EP1-4, which are differentially expressed on neuronal and glial cells throughout the central nervous system. EP1 activation has been shown to mediate Ca2+-dependent neurotoxicity in ischemic injury. EP2 activation has been shown to mediate microglial-induced paracrine neurotoxicity as well as suppress microglia internalization of aggregated neurotoxic peptides. Animal models support the potential efficacy of targeting specific EP receptor subtypes in Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, and ischemic stroke. However promising these preclinical studies are, they have yet to be followed by clinical trials targeting any EP receptor in neurologic diseases.

A new prostate cancer therapeutic approach: combination of androgen ablation with COX-2 inhibitor

Prostate cancer is initially responsive to hormonal therapy, but cancers inevitably progress in an androgen-independent fashion with virtually all tumors evolving into more aggressive androgen refractory disease. Immunohistological comparisons of cyclooxygenase 2 (COX-2) expressions in 3 pairs of prostate cancer patients before and after the combined androgen blockade (CAB) therapy show elevated COX-2 expressions. This observation from clinical specimens is further supported by in vitro laboratory data using human prostate cancer cells in which the antiandrogen hydroxyflutamide (HF) induced COX-2 expression, and androgen suppressed COX-2 expression. By applying knockdown and overexpression strategies to modulate AR expression in prostate cancer cells, we confirmed that androgen/AR signal suppressed, and HF induced COX-2 expression at both protein and mRNA levels. COX-2 promoter reporter assay indicated that the suppression of COX-2 by androgen/AR is at the transcriptional level via modulation of NF-kappaB signals. Treatment of LNCaP and LAPC4 cells with 1 microM HF in the presence of 1 nM DHT, which mimics the CAB therapy condition, promotes cell growth, and this growth induction can be suppressed via adding the COX-2 specific inhibitor, NS398. This suggests that HF promoted prostate cancer cell growth is COX-2 dependent and this HF-COX-2 activation pathway can account for one reason of CAB therapy failure. Together, these findings provide a possible explanation how CAB with antiandrogen HF therapy might fail and provide a potential new therapeutic approach to battle prostate cancer via combination of CAB therapy with COX-2 inhibitor(s).

Gastrointestinal and cardiovascular risks of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are widely prescribed but can have serious gastrointestinal (GI) and cardiovascular side effects, which have led to the withdrawal of some of these drugs and continuing uncertainty about the best approach to patients requiring NSAID therapy, particularly in those with GI or cardiovascular risk factors. To define the risks to the GI and cardiovascular systems associated with NSAID therapy, we have undertaken a series of systematic reviews of original articles published between January 1995 and December 2006. In this article we describe the mechanisms and patterns of GI and cardiovascular side effects in NSAID-taking patients and identify a range of drug and patient factors that contribute to an increased risk of adverse events. We conclude that NSAID therapy should not be started unless it is essential, and that Helicobacter pylori eradication should be considered in patients at increased GI risk. We discuss the use of gastroprotective agents and provide practical advice to help physicians assess and balance both cardiovascular and GI risks and benefits in their prescribing decisions.

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug use does not appear to be associated with increased cardiovascular mortality in patients with inflammatory polyarthritis: results from a primary care based inception cohort of patients

Objectives:

There is controversy about the effects of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) on cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality. The aim of this study was to explore associations between NSAID use and mortality in patients with inflammatory polyarthritis (IP).

Subjects and methods:

A total of 923 patients with new onset (IP), recruited to the UK Norfolk Arthritis Register (NOAR) between 1990–1994, were followed up to the end of 2004. Current medication was recorded annually for the first 6 years and then every 2–3 years. Rheumatoid factor (RF) and C-reactive protein (CRP) were measured. Logistic regression was used to calculate all cause and CVD mortality odds ratios (OR) for NSAID use at baseline and during follow-up, adjusting for gender and time-varying covariates: RF, CRP, joint counts, smoking, steroid use, DMARD use and other medication use.

Results:

By 2004 there were 203 deaths, 85 due to CVD. At baseline, NSAIDs were used by 66% of patients. In final multivariate models, baseline NSAID use was inversely associated with all cause mortality (adjusted OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.84) and CVD mortality (adjusted OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.86). Interval NSAID use had weaker mortality associations: all cause mortality (adjusted OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.00), CVD mortality (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.66, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.08).

Conclusion:

No excess CVD or all cause mortality was observed in NSAID users in this cohort of patients with IP. This is at variance with the literature relating to NSAID use in the general population. It is unclear whether this represents unmeasured confounders influencing a doctor’s decision to avoid NSAIDs in the treatment of IP.

Identifying the best treatment among common nonsurgical neck pain treatments: a decision analysis

STUDY DESIGN

Decision analysis.

OBJECTIVE

To identify the best treatment for nonspecific neck pain.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

In Canada and the United States, the most commonly prescribed neck pain treatments are nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), exercise, and manual therapy. Deciding which treatment is best is difficult because of the trade-offs between beneficial and harmful effects, and because of the uncertainty of these effects.

METHODS

(Quality-adjusted) life expectancy associated with standard NSAIDs, Cox-2 NSAIDs, exercise, mobilization, and manipulation were compared in a decision-analytic model. Estimates of the course of neck pain, background risk of adverse events in the general population, treatment effectiveness and risk, and patient-preferences were input into the model. Assuming equal effectiveness, we conducted a baseline analysis using risk of harm only. We assessed the stability of the baseline results by conducting a second analysis that incorporated effectiveness data from a high-quality randomized trial.

RESULTS

There were no important differences across treatments. The difference between the highest and lowest ranked treatments predicted by the baseline model was 4.5 days of life expectancy and 3.4 quality-adjusted life-days. The difference between the highest and lowest ranked treatments predicted by the second model was 7.3 quality-adjusted life-days.

CONCLUSION

When the objective is to maximize life expectancy and quality-adjusted life expectancy, none of the treatments in our analysis were clearly superior.

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in Parkinson's disease

Parkinson's disease (PD) is known to be a chronic and progressive neurodegenerative disease caused by a selective degeneration of dopaminergic (DAergic) neurons in the substantia nigra pars compacta (SNc). A large body of experimental evidence indicates that the factors involved in the pathogenesis of this disease are several, occurring inside and outside the DAergic neuron. Recently, the role of the neuron-glia interaction and the inflammatory process, in particular, has been the object of intense study by the research community. It seems to represent a new therapeutic approach opportunity for this neurological disorder. Indeed, it has been demonstrated that the cyclooxygenase type 2 (COX-2) is up-regulated in SNc DAergic neurons in both PD patients and animal models of PD and, furthermore, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) pre-treatment protects against 1-methyl-4-phenyl-1,2,3,6-tetrahydropyridine (MPTP) or 6 hydroxydopamine (6-OHDA)-induced nigro-striatal dopamine degeneration. Moreover, recent epidemiological studies have revealed that the risk of developing PD is reduced in humans who make therapeutical use of NSAIDs. Consequently, it is hypothesized that they might delay or prevent the onset of PD. However, whether or not these common drugs may also be of benefit to those individuals who already have Parkinson's disease has not as yet been shown. In this paper, evidence relating to the protective effects of aspirin or other NSAIDs on DAergic neurons in animal models of Parkinson's disease will be discussed. In addition, the pharmacological mechanisms by which these molecules can exert their neuroprotective effects will be reviewed. Finally, epidemiological data exploring the effectiveness of NSAIDs in the prevention of PD and their possible use as adjuvants in the therapy of this neurodegenerative disease will also be examined.

Coxibs and heart disease: what we have learned and what else we need to know

Since their approval in 1998, the popularity of selective cyclooxygenase-2 (COX2) inhibitors has swung from a domination of drug sales to serious disputes about their cardiovascular safety. Despite the numerous studies on COX2 inhibitors that have emerged, drawing conclusions about their cardiovascular safety has been complicated by conflicting results, underpowered clinical trials, and the lack of a placebo group and use of post hoc analyses in many trials. Nonetheless, certain conclusions can be made with reasonable accuracy. This review addresses the controversy in 3 segments. It begins with a discussion of the several mechanisms proposed to explain how selective COX2 inhibition impacts the cardiovascular system. This is followed by a recount of the several clinical studies that delved into the cardiovascular outcomes associated with COX2 inhibitors. Finally, answers to key questions are provided to assist the clinician in devising a systematic approach to the risk-benefit analysis of COX2 inhibitors in actual practice.

ADRs in a Community Hospital – Do These Numbers Look like Yours?; A Gaggle of “Dermatologic” Reactions – TEN, Iodide Mumps, Doxycycline Phototoxicity; Pergolide-Induced Ergotism; Acute Coronary Syndrome Due to Fluorouracil Infusion; Aripiprazole-Induced Acute Dystonic Reaction; Meta-Analysis: Cardiovascular Events and NSAIDs; More on Dopamine Agonists and Impulse Control Disorders

The purpose of this feature is to heighten awareness of specific adverse drug reactions (ADRs), discuss methods of prevention, and promote reporting of ADRs to the FDA's medWatch program (800-FDA-1088). If you have reported an interesting preventable ADR to medWatch, please consider sharing the account with our readers.