Agents used in the prevention and treatment of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug-associated symptoms and ulcers

A clinical study of Japanese patients with ulcer induced by low-dose aspirin and other non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs

BACKGROUND

The incidence and severity of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs)-induced gastro-duodenal ulcer have not been extensively studied in Japan.

AIM

We performed a prospective study to clarify NSAIDs-induced gastro-duodenal injury, focusing especially on low-dose aspirin (L-A).

METHODS

Two hundred and thirty-eight patients with bleeding peptic ulcers admitted to our hospital. History of taking NSAIDs and anti-ulcer drugs was obtained from all patients who underwent endoscopic examinations. The lesion scores of patients taking L-A were classified numerically from zero (no lesion) to five (ulcer).

RESULTS

The NSAIDs were associated with 28.2% of hemorrhagic ulcers. The rates of patients using L-A, loxoprofen, diclofenac, and combination of two of these drugs were 27, 16, 10 and 9%, respectively. Co-administered anti-ulcer drugs were cytoprotective anti-ulcer drugs (27%), H2 receptor antagonists (16%), PPI (4%), and none (53%). In patients taking L-A, H2 receptor antagonists were used most frequently. The HP was positive in 63% of L-A-induced ulcer cases and in 69% of NSAIDs other than low-dose aspirin-induced ulcer cases. The lesion scores of patients taking L-A with H2 receptor antagonists or PPI were significantly lower than those of patients who were taking only L-A (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately one-third of hospitalized patients with NSAIDs-induced hemorrhagic ulcer showed an association with L-A. Prospective randomized controlled trials including H2 receptor antagonists are required to establish preventive efforts aimed at L-A-induced gastro-duodenal injury.

NSAIDs: gastroprotection or selective COX-2 inhibitor?

Conventional nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are effective adjuvant analgesics commonly encountered in palliative care. However, these drugs are associated with adverse effects that are primarily due to gastrointestinal toxicity, with resultant serious complications such as gastroduodenal perforations, ulcers and bleeds. This toxicity has been attributed to inhibition of cyclooxygenase-1 (COX-1). Factors known to increase this risk of toxicity include age above 65 years, classification of NSAID in terms of COX-1/COX-2 selectivity, previous history of complications and coadministration of aspirin, anticoagulants and corticosteroids. Selective inhibitors of cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) were developed in an attempt to reduce this association; trials to date confirm that these drugs do indeed have reduced incidence of gastroduodenal toxicity. Prior to the introduction of the COX-2 selective inhibitors, patients at high risk were often coprescribed a gastroprotective agent (such as misoprostol or a proton pump inhibitor) with a conventional NSAID. This review discusses the merits of both options and devises a treatment strategy for the safe and cost-effective use of these drugs in the palliative care population.

Emerging controversies in the treatment of osteoarthritis in older individuals

OBJECTIVE

To discuss emerging controversies in the treatment of osteoarthritis, particularly as they apply to older individuals.

DATA SOURCES

A MEDLINE search covering articles from 1966 to July 2003 was conducted for English-language literature on clinical trials comparing nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and acetaminophen for osteoarthritis treatment. Search terms were NSAIDs, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, osteoarthritis, and acetaminophen.

STUDY SELECTION

All controlled trials comparing acetaminophen and NSAIDs were reviewed.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data from therapeutic end points comparing drugs being studied were extracted and summarized.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Early studies comparing ibuprofen and acetaminophen for knee osteoarthritis identified that therapeutic end points were similar for these two drugs. These data were the basis for clinical practice guidelines published by the American College of Rheumatology in 1995 and updated in 2000. More recent clinical trials using validated instruments to measure osteoarthritis outcomes showed that NSAIDs are better than acetaminophen. There are also recent data that showed acetaminophen is equivalent to placebo in osteoarthritis outcomes. The mean age of study subjects in all the controlled trials of NSAIDs and acetaminophen was less than 65 years, making extrapolation of data from these studies to an elderly population risky. Furthermore, use of NSAIDs in older people has more risks than acetaminophen.

CONCLUSIONS

Current clinical practice guidelines for osteoarthritis are based on questionable data, and new data contradicts the guideline recommendations. More studies using a geriatric population are needed to clarify if acetaminophen or NSAIDs is the better choice for initial management of osteoarthritis.

Economic evaluation of etoricoxib versus non-selective NSAIDs in the treatment of osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis patients in the UK

INTRODUCTION

The objective of this study was to evaluate the potential economic implications of using etoricoxib versus non-selective NSAID alternatives in the treatment of patients with osteoarthritis (OA) or rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in the UK.

STUDY DESIGN

Decision-analytical modelling was used to calculate the expected costs and consequences of the use of etoricoxib compared with non-selective NSAIDs alone, NSAIDs plus proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), NSAIDs plus histamine H2 receptor antagonists and NSAIDs plus misoprostol over a continuous treatment period of 1 year.

METHODS

The model considered direct medical costs from the perspective of the UK National Health Service (NHS) and used data from phase IIb and III clinical trials of etoricoxib to determine probabilities of gastrointestinal (GI) events. Model outcomes were defined as resource-consuming GI-related events, including clinically evident gastroduodenal perforations, symptomatic gastroduodenal ulcers, or upper GI bleeding (collectively, PUBs ['perforation, ulcers and/or bleeding']). Resource utilisation and costs (2002 values) for the treatment of OA and RA as well as GI events were based on published literature and information available from UK-specific sources.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES AND RESULTS

The model suggests that etoricoxib is cost saving compared with non-selective NSAIDs plus PPIs or non-selective NSAIDs plus misoprostol. The model also suggests that etoricoxib is cost effective in terms of the incremental cost per QALY gained for non-selective NSAIDs alone (pound 19,766) and for non-selective NSAIDs plus H2 antagonists (pound 9350). The incremental cost of etoricoxib per PUB avoided was pound 12,446 versus non-selective NSAIDs alone and pound 6438 versus NSAIDs co-prescribed with H2 antagonists. For patients without the presence of specific GI risk factors (history of GI event, corticosteroid use or disability), etoricoxib may be cost effective for patients over age 56 years, assuming a cost-effectiveness threshold of pound 30,000 per QALY gained. Etoricoxib may also be cost effective in patients of all ages who had at least one specific GI risk factor.

CONCLUSIONS

The model suggests, with its underlying assumptions and data, that etoricoxib is a cost-effective alternative to therapeutic regimens involving non-selective NSAIDs for OA or RA, from the UK NHS perspective. Etoricoxib may be cost saving and dominant over non-selective NSAIDs used together with a PPI or misoprostol. When compared with non-selective NSAIDs alone or non-selective NSAIDs co-prescribed with H2 antagonists, the incremental cost per QALY gained with use of etoricoxib was within the generally accepted threshold for cost effectiveness (less than pound 30,000 per QALY gained).

Evaluation of the antiulcerogenic activity of violacein and its modulation by the inclusion complexation with beta-cyclodextrin

The effects of beta-cyclodextrin (betaCD) inclusion complexation on the ability of violacein to prevent gastric ulceration in mice were studied. Violacein-betaCD inclusion complexes were prepared in 1:1 and 1:2 molar ratios and analysed by differential scanning calorimetry and powder X-ray diffractometry. Violacein previously administered orally at 10 mg/kg significantly reduced indomethacin-induced gastric lesions, as well as 100 mg/kg of cimetidine (positive control). However, betaCD complexation in both molar ratios significantly potentiated the protective action of violacein. In the HCl--ethanol-induced gastric ulcer model, violacein and the 1:2 inclusion complex (10 mg/kg, p.o.) inhibited gastric damage by almost 85%, whereas a 63% reduction was observed for the positive control, lansoprazole, at 30 mg/kg. In contrast, treatment with the 1:1 inclusion complex resulted in almost total disappearance of the antiulcer activity in this model. No significant changes in stress-induced gastric injury were found. In addition, the 1:2 inclusion complex improved the antilipoperoxidant activity of violacein in rat liver cells exposed to t-butyl hydroperoxide, whereas the 1:1 complex was less active than violacein. In summary, the 1:2 betaCD inclusion complex has gastroprotective properties similar to or higher than that of violacein. An increase in mucosal defensive mechanisms and protection against peroxidative damage might be involved.

Cervical radiculopathies: conservative approaches to management

It is now well recognized that the natural course of cervical radiculopathy is generally favorable. Comprehensive, aggressive, nonsurgical management often is successful with respect to functional outcomes, pain reduction, and patient satisfaction. Surgery is avoidable for most patients. The focus of this article is a review of the most recent and classic literature related to the nonsurgical management of cervical radiculopathies.

Tolerability profiles of rofecoxib (Vioxx) and Arthrotec. A comparison of six weeks treatment in patients with osteoarthritis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the incidence of selected spontaneously reported adverse events (AEs) in patients with osteoarthritis (OA) treated with rofecoxib (VIOXX, 12.5 mg qd) or Arthrotec (diclofenac 50 mg/misoprostol 200 mcg bid).

METHODS

Double-blind, parallel-group, 6-week study of patients aged > or = 40 years with a clinical diagnosis of OA treated with rofecoxib or Arthrotec. Primary endpoint: self-reported diarrhea; secondary endpoints: abdominal pain, discontinuations due to AEs, GI AEs and NSAID-type GI AEs (ie., acid reflux, dyspepsia, epigastric discomfort, heartburn, nausea, vomiting).

RESULTS

Among 483 patients (80.3% females, mean age 62.1), the rofecoxib group vs the Arthrotec group respectively reported diarrhea 6.2% vs 16.2% (p<0.001); drug-related diarrhea 3.7% vs 16.2% (p<0.001); one or more clinical AEs 52.9% vs 73.0% (p<0.001); GI AEs 28.9% vs 48.5% (p<0.001); NSAID-type GI AEs 18.6% vs 29.9% (p=0.004); discontinuations due to abdominal pain 0.4% vs 3.7% (p<0.05); and discontinuations due to any AE 4.1% vs 9.1% (p=0.029). No significant differences were observed in efficacy.

CONCLUSION

Rofecoxib 12.5 mg qd has improved GI tolerability and similar efficacy compared to Arthrotec (diclofenac 50 mg/misoprostol 200 mcg bid).

Treatment of low back pain exacerbations with willow bark extract: a randomized double-blind study

PURPOSE

Herbal medicines are widely used for the treatment of pain, although there is not much information on their effectiveness. This study was designed to evaluate the effectiveness of willow (Salix) bark extract, which is widely used in Europe, for the treatment of low back pain.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

We enrolled 210 patients with an exacerbation of chronic low back pain who reported current pain of 5 or more (out of 10) on a visual analog scale. They were randomly assigned to receive an oral willow bark extract with either 120 mg (low dose) or 240 mg (high dose) of salicin, or placebo, with tramadol as the sole rescue medication, in a 4-week blinded trial. The principal outcome measure was the proportion of patients who were pain-free without tramadol for at least 5 days during the final week of the study.

RESULTS

The treatment and placebo groups were similar at baseline in 114 of 120 clinical features. A total of 191 patients completed the study. The numbers of pain-free patients in the last week of treatment were 27 (39%) of 65 in the group receiving high-dose extract, 15 (21%) of 67 in the group receiving low-dose extract, and 4 (6%) of 59 in the placebo group (P <0.001). The response in the high-dose group was evident after only 1 week of treatment. Significantly more patients in the placebo group required tramadol (P <0.001) during each week of the study. One patient suffered a severe allergic reaction, perhaps to the extract.

CONCLUSION

Willow bark extract may be a useful and safe treatment for low back pain.