Ibuprofen suspension in the treatment of juvenile rheumatoid arthritis. Pediatric Rheumatology Collaborative Study Group

Systematic review and network meta-analysis of different non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for juvenile idiopathic arthritis

BACKGROUND

Various non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) have been used for juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA). However, the optimal method for JIA has not yet been developed.

AIM

To perform a systematic review and network meta-analysis to determine the optimal instructions.

METHODS

We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar, CNKI, and Wanfang without restriction for publication date or language at August, 2023. Any RCTs that comparing the effectiveness of NSAIDs with each other or placebo for JIA were included in this network meta-analysis. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) analysis was used to rank the treatments. P value less than 0.05 was identified as statistically significant.

RESULTS

We included 8 RCTs (1127 patients) comparing 8 different instructions including meloxicam (0.125 qd and 0.250 qd), Celecoxib (3 mg/kg bid and 6 mg/kg bid), piroxicam, Naproxen (5.0 mg/kg/d, 7.5 mg/kg/d and 12.5 mg/kg/d), inuprofen (30-40 mg/kg/d), Aspirin (60-80 mg/kg/d, 75 mg/kg/d, and 55 mg/kg/d), Tolmetin (15 mg/kg/d), Rofecoxib, and placebo. There were no significant differences between any two NSAIDs regarding ACR Pedi 30 response. The SUCRA shows that celecoxib (6 mg/kg bid) ranked first (SUCRA, 88.9%), rofecoxib ranked second (SUCRA, 68.1%), Celecoxib (3 mg/kg bid) ranked third (SUCRA, 51.0%). There were no significant differences between any two NSAIDs regarding adverse events. The SUCRA shows that placebo ranked first (SUCRA, 88.2%), piroxicam ranked second (SUCRA, 60.5%), rofecoxib (0.6 mg/kg qd) ranked third (SUCRA, 56.1%), meloxicam (0.125 mg/kg qd) ranked fourth (SUCRA, 56.1%), and rofecoxib (0.3 mg/kg qd) ranked fifth (SUCRA, 56.1%).

CONCLUSION

In summary, celecoxib (6 mg/kg bid) was found to be the most effective NSAID for treating JIA. Rofecoxib, piroxicam, and meloxicam may be safer options, but further research is needed to confirm these findings in larger trials with higher quality studies.

Efficacy and Safety of NSAIDs in Infants: A Comprehensive Review of the Literature of the Past 20 Years

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are commonly used in infants, children, and adolescents worldwide; however, despite sufficient evidence of the beneficial effects of NSAIDs in children and adolescents, there is a lack of comprehensive data in infants. The present review summarizes the current knowledge on the safety and efficacy of various NSAIDs used in infants for which data are available, and includes ibuprofen, dexibuprofen, ketoprofen, flurbiprofen, naproxen, diclofenac, ketorolac, indomethacin, niflumic acid, meloxicam, celecoxib, parecoxib, rofecoxib, acetylsalicylic acid, and nimesulide. The efficacy of NSAIDs has been documented for a variety of conditions, such as fever and pain. NSAIDs are also the main pillars of anti-inflammatory treatment, such as in pediatric inflammatory rheumatic diseases. Limited data are available on the safety of most NSAIDs in infants. Adverse drug reactions may be renal, gastrointestinal, hematological, or immunologic. Since NSAIDs are among the most frequently used drugs in the pediatric population, safety and efficacy studies can be performed as part of normal clinical routine, even in young infants. Available data sources, such as (electronic) medical records, should be used for safety and efficacy analyses. On a larger scale, existing data sources, e.g. adverse drug reaction programs/networks, spontaneous national reporting systems, and electronic medical records should be assessed with child-specific methods in order to detect safety signals pertinent to certain pediatric age groups or disease entities. To improve the safety of NSAIDs in infants, treatment needs to be initiated with the lowest age-appropriate or weight-based dose. Duration of treatment and amount of drug used should be regularly evaluated and maximum dose limits and other recommendations by the manufacturer or expert committees should be followed. Treatment for non-chronic conditions such as fever and acute (postoperative) pain should be kept as short as possible. Patients with chronic conditions should be regularly monitored for possible adverse effects of NSAIDs.

The effectiveness and safety of ibuprofen and acetylsalicylic acid in acute rheumatic fever

BACKGROUND

Acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) is a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug used in the treatment of acute rheumatic fever (ARF) and it can cause serious adverse effects. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy and side effects of ibuprofen in the treatment of ARF compared to the classic treatment, ASA.

METHODS

Children who were hospitalized for the treatment of ARF with isolated arthritis and mild carditis between October 2015 and October 2018 and who received non-steroidal anti-inflammatory therapy were evaluated in the study. We compared the demographic data, clinical findings, efficacy, and side effects of the treatments of the children, who were divided into ASA and ibuprofen groups.

RESULTS

Of the 38 patients included in the study, 21 were treated with ASA (ASA group), and 17 were given ibuprofen (IBU group). There was no difference between the groups regarding the length of hospital stay, total treatment time, time to resolution of clinical symptoms, and normalization of acute-phase reactants. Liver enzymes increased during treatment in 13 patients (62%) in the ASA group and three patients (18%) in the IBU group (P = 0.009). In the ASA group, 69% of patients with increased liver enzymes were under 11 years of age during treatment. Clinical side effects were observed in three patients in the ASA group while none were observed in the IBU group.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study suggest that ibuprofen can be a safe alternative in the treatment of ARF, especially in young children. Although ibuprofen can be a safe and effective alternative to ASA, studies including larger series are needed on this subject.

Ibuprofen in the treatment of children's inflammatory pain: a clinical and pharmacological overview

Unlike fever, which is often over-treated especially in children, pain is underestimated and under-treated in pediatric age. The pharmacological agents approved for treating pain in these patients are few, also considering the recent limitation for codeine in children younger than 12 years. Paracetamol and the nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) ibuprofen are the most used at this purpose. The aim of this overview was to analyze the therapeutic appropriateness of ibuprofen in children based on its pharmacological properties. This work is a critical review of the pediatric literature over the last 20 years on efficacy and adverse events associated with the use of ibuprofen as analgesic in the pediatric population. Ibuprofen resulted effective in several pain conditions in children such as musculoskeletal pain, ear pain and acute otitis media, toothache and the inflammatory disease of the oral cavity and pharynx. The drug is a reasonable and efficacious alternative in postoperative pain, including tonsillectomy and adenoidectomy. It remains the treatment of choice for pain in chronic inflammatory diseases such as arthritis. Side effects and adverse events associated with ibuprofen are mild. It has the lowest gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity among NSAIDs, although some cases of GI toxicity may occur. Its renal effects are minimal, but dehydration plays an important role in triggering renal damage, so ibuprofen should not be given to patients with vomiting and diarrhea. Ibuprofen showed a good safety profile and provided evidence of effectiveness for mild-moderate pain of different origin in children. In case of fever or pain, the choice about the drug to be used should fall on ibuprofen in a clinical context where there is an inflammatory pathogenesis.

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents

BACKGROUND

Pain is a common feature of childhood and adolescence around the world, and for many young people, that pain is chronic. The World Health Organization guidelines for pharmacological treatments for children's persisting pain acknowledge that pain in children is a major public health concern of high significance in most parts of the world. While in the past pain was largely dismissed and was frequently left untreated, views on children's pain have changed over time, and relief of pain is now seen as important.We designed a suite of seven reviews on chronic non-cancer pain and cancer pain (looking at antidepressants, antiepileptic drugs, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, opioids, and paracetamol) in order to review the evidence for children's pain utilising pharmacological interventions.As the leading cause of morbidity in the world today, chronic disease (and its associated pain) is a major health concern. Chronic pain (that is pain lasting three months or longer) can arise in the paediatric population in a variety of pathophysiological classifications (nociceptive, neuropathic, or idiopathic) from genetic conditions, nerve damage pain, chronic musculoskeletal pain, and chronic abdominal pain, as well as for other unknown reasons.Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are used to treat pain, reduce fever, and for their anti-inflammation properties. They are commonly used within paediatric pain management. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are currently licensed for use in Western countries, however they are not approved for infants under three months old. The main adverse effects include renal impairment and gastrointestinal issues. Common side effects in children include diarrhoea, headache, nausea, constipation, rash, dizziness, and abdominal pain.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the analgesic efficacy and adverse events of NSAIDs used to treat chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents aged between birth and 17 years, in any setting.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) via the Cochrane Register of Studies Online, MEDLINE via Ovid, and Embase via Ovid from inception to 6 September 2016. We also searched the reference lists of retrieved studies and reviews, as well as online clinical trial registries.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials, with or without blinding, of any dose and any route, treating chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents, comparing any NSAID with placebo or an active comparator.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for eligibility. We planned to use dichotomous data to calculate risk ratio and number needed to treat for one additional event, using standard methods. We assessed GRADE and created three 'Summary of findings' tables.

MAIN RESULTS

We included seven studies with a total of 1074 participants (aged 2 to 18 years) with chronic juvenile polyarthritis or chronic juvenile rheumatoid arthritis. All seven studies compared an NSAID with an active comparator. None of the studies were placebo controlled. No two studies investigated the same type of NSAID compared with another. We were unable to perform a meta-analysis.Risk of bias varied. For randomisation and allocation concealment, one study was low risk and six studies were unclear risk. For blinding of participants and personnel, three studies were low risk and four studies were unclear to high risk. For blinding of outcome assessors, all studies were unclear risk. For attrition, four studies were low risk and three studies were unclear risk. For selective reporting, four studies were low risk, two studies were unclear risk, and one study was high risk. For size, three studies were unclear risk and four studies were high risk. For other potential sources of bias, seven studies were low risk. Primary outcomesThree studies reported participant-reported pain relief of 30% or greater, showing no statistically significant difference in pain scores between meloxicam and naproxen, celecoxib and naproxen, or rofecoxib and naproxen (P > 0.05) (low-quality evidence).One study reported participant-reported pain relief of 50% or greater, showing no statistically significant difference in pain scores between low-dose meloxicam (0.125 mg/kg) and high-dose meloxicam (0.25 mg/kg) when compared to naproxen 10 mg/kg (P > 0.05) (low-quality evidence).One study reported Patient Global Impression of Change, showing 'very much improved' in 85% of ibuprofen and 90% of aspirin participants (low-quality evidence). Secondary outcomesAll seven studies reported adverse events. Participants reporting an adverse event (one or more per person) by drug were: aspirin 85/202; fenoprofen 28/49; ibuprofen 40/45; indomethacin 9/30; ketoprofen 9/30; meloxicam 18/47; naproxen 44/202; and rofecoxib 47/209 (very low-quality evidence).All seven studies reported withdrawals due to adverse events. Participants withdrawn due to an adverse event by drug were: aspirin 16/120; celecoxib 10/159; fenoprofen 0/49; ibuprofen 0/45; indomethacin 0/30; ketoprofen 0/30; meloxicam 10/147; naproxen 17/285; and rofecoxib 3/209 (very low-quality evidence).All seven studies reported serious adverse events. Participants experiencing a serious adverse event by drug were: aspirin 13/120; celecoxib 5/159; fenoprofen 0/79; ketoprofen 0/30; ibuprofen 4/45; indomethacin 0/30; meloxicam 11/147; naproxen 10/285; and rofecoxib 0/209 (very low-quality evidence).There were few or no data for our remaining secondary outcomes: Carer Global Impression of Change; requirement for rescue analgesia; sleep duration and quality; acceptability of treatment; physical functioning as defined by validated scales; and quality of life as defined by validated scales (very low-quality evidence).We rated the overall quality of the evidence (GRADE rating) for our primary and secondary outcomes as very low because there were limited data from studies and no opportunity for a meta-analysis.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We identified only a small number of studies, with insufficient data for analysis.As we could undertake no meta-analysis, we are unable to comment about efficacy or harm from the use of NSAIDs to treat chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents. Similarly, we cannot comment on our remaining secondary outcomes: Carer Global Impression of Change; requirement for rescue analgesia; sleep duration and quality; acceptability of treatment; physical functioning; and quality of life.We know from adult randomised controlled trials that some NSAIDs, such as ibuprofen, naproxen, and aspirin, can be effective in certain chronic pain conditions.

Juvenile idiopathic arthritis: management and therapeutic options

THE GOALS OF TREATMENT FOR JUVENILE IDIOPATHIC ARTHRITIS (JIA) INCLUDE: suppression of inflammation, achievement of remission, relief of pain, maintenance of function and doing so with minimal toxicity. Important discoveries over the past 10-15 years have led to more targeted treatments for children with JIA. The International League of Associations for Rheumatology (ILAR) classification system for childhood arthritides, better assessment tools for clinical response, improved definitions of remission, new imaging techniques and evidence in gene expression profiling have all contributed to the development of more targeted treatments. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents still have a role in mild disease and intra-articular steroid injections continue to be used most commonly in patients with oligoarticular JIA. Disease-modifying agents such as methotrexate have demonstrated efficacy and safety; however, in many patients, the disease remains active despite this treatment. These children now receive more targeted treatment including the tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNFα) inhibitors, interleukin-1 blockade, interleukin-6 blockade, selective costimulation modulators and selective B-cell blockade. The biologic targeted therapies have changed the strategy in which we treat our children with JIA; however, there remains much to be learned about the long-term effects and safety of these medicines.

Systemic arthritis in children: a review of clinical presentation and treatment

Systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis (sJIA) constitutes a small part of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), yet has a disproportionally higher rate of mortality. Despite being grouped under JIA, it is considered to be a multifactorial autoinflammatory disease. The objective of this paper is to review the epidemiology, pathogenesis, genetics, clinical manifestations, complications, therapy, prognosis, and outcome of sJIA. The presentation and clinical manifestations of sJIA have not changed much in the past several decades, but the collective understanding of the pathogenesis and the development of new targeted therapies (particularly the biologic agents) have transformed and improved the disease outcome for children with sJIA.

2011 American College of Rheumatology recommendations for the treatment of juvenile idiopathic arthritis: initiation and safety monitoring of therapeutic agents for the treatment of arthritis and systemic features

Guidelines and recommendations developed and/or endorsed by the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) are intended to provide guidance for particular patterns of practice and not to dictate the care of a particular patient. The ACR considers adherence to these guidelines and recommendations to be voluntary, with the ultimate determination regarding their application to be made by the physician in light of each patient’s individual circumstances. Guidelines and recommendations are intended to promote beneficial or desirable outcomes but cannot guarantee any specific outcome. Guidelines and recommendations developed or endorsed by the ACR are subject to periodic revision as warranted by the evolution of medical knowledge, technology, and practice.

[Juvenile arthritides]

Arthritis in children represents a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge. The diagnostic spectrum is broad and a very precise indication for diagnostic and therapeutic procedures, especially in small children, is important. In addition to acute arthritides - viral arthritis, reactive arthritis, Lyme arthritis and septic arthritis - secondary chronic arthritis related to an underlying disease as well as juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), the most common chronic inflammatory systemic disease in children, need to be considered. This overview is a guide to the diagnosis of arthritis in childhood and to evidence-based therapy of JIA in particular. This consists of a combination of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, systemic and intraarticular corticosteroids, traditional DMARDs such as sulfasalazine, methotrexate and leflunomide, the TNF inhibitors etanercept, adalimumab and, with restrictions, infliximab, other biopharmaceuticals such as anakinra, canakinumab and rilonacept, and tocilizumab and finally, abatacept.

Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs: A survey of practices and concerns of pediatric medical and surgical specialists and a summary of available safety data

OBJECTIVES

To examine the prescribing habits of NSAIDs among pediatric medical and surgical practitioners, and to examine concerns and barriers to their use.

METHODS

A sample of 1289 pediatricians, pediatric rheumatologists, sports medicine physicians, pediatric surgeons and pediatric orthopedic surgeons in the United States and Canada were sent an email link to a 22-question web-based survey.

RESULTS

338 surveys (28%) were completed, 84 were undeliverable. Of all respondents, 164 (50%) had never prescribed a selective cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) NSAID. The most common reasons for ever prescribing an NSAID were musculoskeletal pain, soft-tissue injury, fever, arthritis, fracture, and headache. Compared to traditional NSAIDs, selective COX-2 NSAIDs were believed to be as safe (42%) or safer (24%); have equal (52%) to greater efficacy (20%) for pain; have equal (59%) to greater efficacy (15%) for inflammation; and have equal (39%) to improved (44%) tolerability. Pediatric rheumatologists reported significantly more frequent abdominal pain (81% vs. 23%), epistaxis (13% vs. 2%), easy bruising (64% vs. 8%), headaches (21% vs. 1%) and fatigue (12% vs. 1%) for traditional NSAIDs than for selective COX-2 NSAIDs. Prescribing habits of NSAIDs have changed since the voluntary withdrawal of rofecoxib and valdecoxib; 3% of pediatric rheumatologists reported giving fewer traditional NSAID prescriptions, and while 57% reported giving fewer selective COX-2 NSAIDs, 26% reported that they no longer prescribed these medications.

CONCLUSIONS

Traditional and selective COX-2 NSAIDs were perceived as safe by pediatric specialists. The data were compared to the published pediatric safety literature.

A prospective study comparing celecoxib with naproxen in children with juvenile rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy and safety of celecoxib and naproxen in children with juvenile rheumatoid arthritis (JRA).

METHODS

In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, noninferiority study, subjects with JRA were randomized to receive a target dose of celecoxib 3 mg/kg bid or 6 mg/kg bid, or a target dose of naproxen 7.5 mg/kg bid for 12 weeks (maximum allowed dose=600 mg total daily dose). The primary efficacy measure was the percentage of responders at Week 12 attaining the American College of Rheumatology pediatric 30% improvement criterion (ACR Pediatric-30).

RESULTS

Both celecoxib doses were at least as effective as naproxen at Week 12 [ACR Pediatric-30 treatment differences: celecoxib 3 mg/kg bid-naproxen=1.36% (95% CI -13.08 to 15.80); celecoxib 6 mg/kg bid-naproxen=13.02% (95% CI -0.22 to 26.25)]. Celecoxib 6 mg/kg bid had a numerically higher response rate than celecoxib 3 mg/kg bid at all postrandomization visits and a numerically higher response rate than naproxen 7.5 mg/kg bid at Weeks 4, 8, and 12. Improvement in each ACR Pediatric-30 core set measure was comparable to or numerically higher for celecoxib 6 mg/kg bid than naproxen or celecoxib 3 mg/kg bid. Adverse event rates were similar for all treatment groups, except that gastrointestinal adverse events were more common in the naproxen group, although the difference was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

Celecoxib 3 mg/kg bid and 6 mg/kg bid were at least as effective as naproxen 7.5 mg/kg bid in treating the signs and symptoms of JRA over 12 weeks. All treatments were generally well tolerated.

Optimal treatment of knee monarthritis in juvenile idiopathic arthritis: a decision analysis

OBJECTIVE

To identify the optimal initial treatment strategy for knee monarthritis in juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) using a decision model and parents' preferences.

METHODS

We utilized a decision analysis model with Markov states and a 6-month multi-attribute outcome with 7 dimensions pertinent to the treatment decision. The 3 most common treatment strategies for knee monarthritis were compared: nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) only, NSAID trial followed by intraarticular corticosteroid injection (IACI) if arthritis was not resolved after 2 months, and initial IACI. Probability estimates for the efficacy and adverse effects of NSAIDs and IACIs were derived from a systematic review of the literature. Parents' preferences for the 7 dimensions of the multi-attribute outcome were elicited by a unique hybrid of the time tradeoff and magnitude estimation techniques. These preferences were then combined with the outcomes of the decision analysis to determine an individual's preferred treatment.

RESULTS

The NSAID trial strategy may avert IACIs in some patients, but at a cost of continued active arthritis. The number of patients that need to be treated with the NSAID trial strategy to avoid a single IACI compared with the initial IACI strategy is 3.8 with an expected additional cost of 6.7 months of active arthritis. Of the 12 parent subjects, 11 (92%) preferred the initial IACI strategy and 1 preferred the NSAID-only strategy. These preferences were not sensitive to model assumptions or probability estimates.

CONCLUSION

Initial IACI appears to be the optimal treatment strategy for knee monarthritis in JIA.

The history of pediatric rheumatology

The care and study of children with rheumatic diseases began slowly in the 19th century, with the most attention centered on rheumatic fever. Other rheumatic diseases of children received little attention until the 1940s. Rheumatic diseases taken together remain a significant cause of chronic illness in children throughout the world. A number of other conditions that masquerade as rheumatic diseases in children also demand recognition and management. Although ultimate causes and cures of childhood rheumatic diseases remain elusive, advances in therapy have improved the outlook for affected children, and advances in biomedical research are adding to our basic understanding of the disease process involved. Pediatric rheumatology has become a well-organized, although underpopulated, specialty that enhances recognition and care of affected children and contributes to basic research knowledge in infectious disease, immunology, and genetics. This review focuses most prominently on the early history of pediatric rheumatology and its development as a specialty. The recent burgeoning of new biomedical science and new means of treatment will be better told in the historical perspective of years to come.

Pain management for the hospitalized pediatric patient

Pediatric hospitalists should make pain assessment and treatment a high priority and a central part of their daily practice. Efforts at improving pain treatment in pediatric hospitals should be multidisciplinary and should involve combined use of pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic approaches. Although available information can permit effective treatment of pain for most children in hospitals, there is a need for more research on pediatric analgesic pharmacology, various nonpharmacologic treatments, and different models of delivery of care.

Naproxen as an alternative to aspirin for the treatment of arthritis of rheumatic fever: a randomized trial

We performed a prospective, randomized, open-label equivalence study comparing the use of naproxen to aspirin in 33 patients with rheumatic fever. The mean time until resolution of arthritis was 2.9+/-2.9 days in both groups. Liver enzyme elevations were more frequent in the aspirin group (P=.002). We conclude that naproxen is as effective, is easier to use, and is safer than aspirin in the treatment of the arthritis of rheumatic fever.

Risks and benefits of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in children: a comparison with paracetamol

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) possess antipyretic, analgesic and anti-inflammatory effects. They are frequently used in children and have numerous therapeutic indications, the most common ones being fever, postoperative pain and inflammatory disorders, such as juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) and Kawasaki disease. Their major mechanism of action is through inhibition of prostaglandin biosynthesis by blockade of cyclo-oxygenase (COX). The disposition of most NSAIDs has been mainly studied in infants > or = 2 years of age. Compared with adults, the volume of distribution and clearance of NSAIDs such as diclofenac, ibuprofen (infants aged between 3 months and 2.5 years), ketorolac and nimesulide were increased in children. The elimination half-life was similar in children to that in adults. These pharmacokinetic differences might be clinically significant with the need for higher loading and/or maintenance doses in children. Ibuprofen, acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) and acetaminophen are the most frequently used agents for fever reduction in children. Over the past 20 years, because of the association between ASA use and Reye's syndrome, most of the interest has been directed toward ibuprofen and acetaminophen. In view of its comparable antipyretic efficacy, but superior tolerability profile, acetaminophen, when used appropriately with age-adapted formulations, should remain the first-line therapy in the treatment of childhood fever. At the moment, there is no scientific evidence to recommend simultaneous use of these two antipyretic drugs. Most NSAIDs provide mild to moderate analgesia, with the exception of ketorolac which has a strong analgesic activity. The analgesic efficacy of ketorolac, ketoprofen, diclofenac and ibuprofen in the treatment of postoperative pain has been mainly studied following a single dose, in children of > or = 1 year of age undergoing minor surgeries. In this setting, when used either alone or in adjunct to caudal or epidural anaesthesia, they were associated with an opioid-sparing effect and were well tolerated. With the exception of ketorolac use in children undergoing tonsillectomy, where controversy exists regarding the risk of postoperative haemorrhage, NSAIDs have not been associated with an increased risk of perioperative bleeding. NSAIDs are the first-line therapy in JIA. They appear to be equally effective and tolerated, with the exception of ASA which is associated with more adverse effects. ASA has been used for many years in the treatment of Kawasaki disease and is part of the standard modality of treatment in combination with intravenous gammaglobulins. More recently, lung inflammation associated with cystic fibrosis (CF) has become a new target for NSAIDs. Despite promising preliminary results with ibuprofen, numerous questions need to be answered before this new strategy becomes part of the conventional treatment of patients with CF. In summary, NSAIDs are effective in reducing fever, alleviating pain and reducing inflammation in children, with a good tolerance profile. Pharmacokinetic studies are needed to characterise the disposition of NSAIDs in very young infants in order to use them rationally. To date, no studies have been published on the disposition, tolerability and efficacy of specific COX-2 inhibitors in children. Further clinical experience with these agents in adults is warranted before undergoing trials with specific COX-2 inhibitors in children.

The use of naproxen in the treatment of children with rheumatic fever

We evaluated the efficacy and safety of naproxen (10-20 mg/kg/d) for the treatment of arthritis and fever related to rheumatic fever in 19 children. Fever and arthritis resolved within a median of 1 day of beginning treatment (range, 1-2 and 1-30 days, respectively). The sole patient with prolonged arthritis had small joint involvement. No gastrointestinal, dermatologic, liver, or renal side effects were observed. None of the patients developed carditis over the following 6 months. Naproxen appears to be effective for the treatment of arthritis and fever related to rheumatic fever and is well tolerated.

Treatment of pain in the neonatal intensive care unit

Pain is a disruptive influence on infants in the NICU. The most obvious and effective strategy to decrease infant pain in the NICU is to stringently limit the frequency of painful procedures, especially those that are most commonly reported (i.e., heel lances and endotracheal suctioning), and have these performed on infants that are most unstable or critically ill by the most experienced person available. Organizational concerns over the cost of NICU care have forced a re-evaluation of the necessity of certain diagnostic and care procedures and a limiting of procedures to those that can be documented to positively affect clinical outcome. Pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic strategies are essential to the prevention and management of neonatal pain, and these should be considered for complementary use for every infant. Research has shown the safety and effectiveness of some of the strategies in reducing mild pain caused by brief invasive procedures; however, many of the studies had methodologic limitations. Therefore, more research is required to determine the comparative efficacy of the various strategies and to document additive or synergistic effects when combined.

Medical management of children with juvenile rheumatoid arthritis

One of the most important and changing areas of research in paediatric rheumatology is the optimum approach to the treatment of children with chronic arthritis. Until recently all medications for children with arthritis were nonspecific in terms of our understanding, albeit poor, of the pathogenesis of these diseases. Of current therapies, low dose, once-a-week methotrexate has emerged as the therapeutic agent of choice for children who fail to respond adequately to administration of a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug. Thereby, it has displaced the more traditional slower acting anti-rheumatic drugs, although one or more of them are often combined with methotrexate in the polypharmaceutical approach to childhood arthritis. Better and more specific agents are needed, especially for systemic onset disease, unremitting polyarticular involvement, and certain complications such as resistant chronic uveitis. At this time the introduction of the cyclo-oxygenase 2 inhibitors and etanercept (soluble tumour necrosis factoralpha.p75 fusion protein) may herald an era of more specific and effective therapy.

Pyloric channel stricture secondary to high-dose ibuprofen therapy in a patient with cystic fibrosis

OBJECTIVE

To describe a case of pyloric channel stricture secondary to high-dose ibuprofen therapy in a pediatric patient with cystic fibrosis.

CASE SUMMARY

A 12-year-old white girl started taking high-dose ibuprofen to treat the pulmonary manifestations of cystic fibrosis. The peak plasma concentration at dose initiation was within the accepted therapeutic range. Approximately one month later, the patient developed emesis and intolerance of solid foods, which persisted for several months and resulted in a weight loss of seven kilograms. The patient was referred to a pediatric gastroenterologist, who performed an upper endoscopy and subsequently diagnosed a pyloric channel stricture. The patient's pyloric channel was successfully dilated with two balloons. It is felt that the pyloric stricture developed from healing antral/pyloric channel ulcers. Ibuprofen was discontinued and omeprazole therapy was begun. Over the course of the following year, the patient was asymptomatic. Follow-up upper gastrointestinal barium swallows were normal.

DISCUSSION

When used for analgesia and fever in the pediatric population, ibuprofen has been shown to be a relatively safe drug. While it is known that ibuprofen may cause gastrointestinal adverse effects, the pediatric population is at lower risk; however, large doses of ibuprofen increase the risk of gastrointestinal adverse effects. The use of large doses of ibuprofen in the treatment of cystic fibrosis is a relatively new therapy. Limited data thus far in cystic fibrosis patients do not suggest increased risk of gastrointestinal complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Limited data to date indicate that ibuprofen, when used in large doses to treat the pulmonary manifestations of cystic fibrosis, is relatively safe. However, because of the potential risks to the gastrointestinal tract of high-dose ibuprofen therapy, clinicians should be aware of its possible complications.

Toxicity of antirheumatic and anti-inflammatory drugs in children

The aim of the study was to describe the long-term toxicity of antirheumatic and anti-inflammatory drugs in a paediatric rheumatology clinic population. One hundred and seventeen children were studied on first admission to a paediatric rheumatology clinic and after a mean of 8.6 +/- 0.4 years of follow-up. Medical records from the intermediate period were reviewed. The patients had 155 exposures to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), 88 exposures to disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and 12 exposures of prednisolone during a total of 682 patient years. Drug toxicity was measured in terms of the number of toxic events, number of drug discontinuations due to toxicity, number of side-effects per patient year of drug exposure and as a toxicity index. Side-effects were seen in 69 (27%) of the drug exposures, corresponding to 0.10 toxic events per patient year of exposure. Abdominal pain was the most common side-effect, and was reported in 21 (14%) of the exposures to NSAIDs. Five severely toxic events, all leading to hospitalisation, occurred. The toxicity of NSAIDs was not significantly different from that of DMARDs with regard to the number of toxic events (21% and 31%, respectively, NS) and drug discontinuations due to toxicity (17% and 14%, respectively, NS). Piroxicam tended to be more toxic than ibuprofen (46% versus 18% toxic events, p <0.05; 36% versus 16% discontinuations due to toxicity, NS; 0.33 versus 0.05 side-effects per patient year and a toxicity index of 1.45 versus 0.20 units per patient year). Gold tended to be more toxic than antimalarials (41% versus 15% toxic events, p<0.05; 24% versus 12% discontinuations, NS; 0.37 versus 0.08 side-effects per patient year and a toxicity index of 1.56 versus 0.23 units per patient year). It was concluded that antirheumatic and anti-inflammatory drugs led to side-effects in 27% of the exposed children during 9 years of follow-up. There was an overlap of the toxicity of certain NSAIDs and the most commonly employed DMARDs.

Drug treatment in children with juvenile rheumatoid arthritis. Past, present, and future

Rheumatology made its debut as a legitimate subspecialty of pediatrics sometime in the 1940s in Europe, and in the 1970s in North America. Therapy of juvenile rheumatoid arthritis has evolved from salicylates and gold injections to newer, less toxic nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and methotrexate. Corticosteroids remain as important drugs when life-threatening complications or blinding iridocyclitis develop. Immune response modifiers and gene therapies offer considerable potential for eventually halting or curing the disease but have yet to make a substantial impact on therapy. Methods for the correct conduct and interpretation of data from clinical trials are discussed.

Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug-induced gastroduodenal injury in children

OBJECTIVE

To determine the incidence of abdominal pain and gastroduodenal injury in children with arthritis taking nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs).

METHODS

A retrospective review of the records of all children (570 patients) receiving followup care in an academic rheumatology clinic between 1991 and 1993 was performed.

RESULTS

There were 344 patients who used NSAIDs during the study period. Abdominal pain was recorded in 27.9% of patients taking NSAIDs and 14.6% of patients not taking NSAIDs. Abdominal pain in 47 patients (49%) taking NSAIDs and 14 patients (42%) not taking NSAIDs was evaluated radiographically and/or endoscopically. Among those patients evaluated, gastric or duodenal injury was found in 16 (34.0%) who were taking NSAIDs and 1 (7.1%) who were not. This represented a relative risk for gastroduodenal injury of 4.8 for patients taking NSAIDs (P = 0.09). The incidence of injury did not change when analyses were controlled for prednisone or slow-acting antirheumatic drug use. None of the children were hospitalized or died as a result of gastroduodenal injury during the 3-year period.

CONCLUSION

We conclude that NSAID use in children with arthritis frequently leads to gastroduodenal injury, with an estimated incidence and relative risk that are comparable to the rates found in adults with arthritis taking NSAIDs, but that hospitalization or death as a result of this injury is uncommon.

Comparative efficacy and tolerance of ibuprofen syrup and acetaminophen syrup in children with pyrexia associated with infectious diseases and treated with antibiotics

A double-blind, randomised, parallel group study has been done comparing the efficacy and tolerability of 7.5 mg/kg ibuprofen syrup (n = 77) and 10 mg.kg-1 acetaminophen syrup (n = 77) in 154 children (6 months to 5 years) with fever (> or = 38 degrees C) associated with infectious diseases and treated with antibiotic therapy. The area under the percentage reduction in temperature curve captured the net effect of each drug and provided the best estimate for comparison of efficacy during a defined period. Temperature evolution over time was not significantly different between the two groups. Nevertheless, the temperature reduction over the first 4 h of treatment (H0-H4) was significantly higher after ibuprofen (60%) than acetaminophen (45%). Both ibuprofen and acetaminophen were well tolerated. In conclusion, significant antipyretic activity, good tolerability and its availability as a syrup make ibuprofen an effective means of fever control in children.