Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, ulcers and risk: a collaborative meta-analysis

A case-control study of the risk of upper gastrointestinal mucosal injuries in patients prescribed concurrent NSAIDs and antithrombotic drugs based on data from the Japanese national claims database of 13 million accumulated patients

BACKGROUND

We aimed to identify the adverse effects of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and antithrombotics on the upper gastrointestinal (GI) mucosa in a clinical setting as a case-control study using a large-scale medical database in Japan.

METHODS

We evaluated the risk of upper GI mucosal injuries in patients receiving NSAIDs and antithrombotics using the Japan Medical Data Center claims database with data for 13 million accumulated patients, from January 2009 to December 2014. Endoscopically evaluated upper GI mucosal injuries were peptic ulcers (n = 143,271), upper GI bleeding (n = 10,545), and gastroesophageal reflux disease (n = 154,755). For each patient, ten controls were matched by age, sex, and diagnosis month.

RESULTS

The odds ratio (OR) for peptic ulcers was 1.45, 1.31, 1.50, 1.53, and 1.62; for upper GI bleeding: 1.76, 1.62, 1.96, 1.82, and 2.38; and for gastroesophageal reflux disease: 1.54, 1.41, 1.89, 1.67, and 1.91 for NSAIDs, COX-2 selective inhibitors, low-dose aspirin, antiplatelet drugs, and anticoagulants, respectively (all statistically significant: P < 0.001). Polypharmacy with NSAIDs and antithrombotic drugs increased the risk of upper GI injuries compared with single-drug therapy. The injury risk was also increased by lifestyle-related diseases, including diabetes mellitus and hyperlipidemia.

CONCLUSIONS

This case-control study using the large organized Japanese claims database provided the risk of upper GI mucosal injuries in patients receiving NSAIDs and antithrombotic drugs.

Management for non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding in elderly patients: the experience of a tertiary university hospital

BACKGROUND

Peptic ulcer bleeding (PUB) is the main cause of non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). Endoscopic treatment and acid suppression with proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) are most important in the management of PUB and these treatments have reduced mortality. However, elderly patients sometimes have a poor prognostic outcome due to severe comorbidities.

METHODS

A retrospective study was performed on 504 cases with acute non-variceal UGIB who were examined in our hospital, in order to reveal the risk factor of a poor outcome in elderly patients.

RESULTS

Two hundred and thirty-four cases needed hemostasis; 11 cases had unsuccessful endoscopic treatments; 31 cases had re-bleeding after endoscopic hemostasis. Forty-three cases died within 30 days after the initial urgent endoscopy, but only seven cases died from bleeding. Elderly patients aged over 65 years had more severe comorbidities, and were prescribed non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), antiplatelet agents and/or anticoagulation agents, more frequently, compared with non-elderly patients. The significant risk factor of needing hemostatic therapy was the taking of two or more NSAIDs, antiplatelet agents and/or anticoagulation agents. The most important risk of a poor outcome in elderly patients was various kinds of severe comorbidities. And so, it is important to predict such an outcome in these cases. AIMS65 is a simple and relatively useful scoring system that predicts the risk of a poor outcome in UGIB. High-score patients via AIMS65 were associated with a high mortality rate because of death from comorbidities.

CONCLUSIONS

The elderly patients in whom were prescribed two or more NSAIDs, antiplatelet agents and/or anticoagulation agents, should have UGIB prevented using a PPI. The most significant risk of a poor outcome in elderly patients was severe comorbidities. We recommend that elderly patients with UGIB should be estimated as having a poor outcome as soon as possible via the risk scoring system AIMS65.

New developments in the pharmacotherapy of neuropathic chronic pelvic pain

Advancements in further understanding the pathophysiology of chronic pelvic pain syndromes continue to direct therapy. The mechanisms of chronic pelvic pain are often multifactorial and therefore require a multidisciplinary approach. The final treatment plan is often an accumulation of organ-specific treatment and chronic pain medications directed to the CNS and PNS. This article is a review of commonly used medications for chronic pelvic neuropathic pain disorders as well as an introduction to recent innovative developments in pain medicine.

Frequency and predictors of bleeding events after 2nd generation drug-eluting stent implantation differ depending on time after implantation

BACKGROUND

Antiplatelet therapy is required after drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation, but bleeding events occur unexpectedly. We aimed to assess whether bleeding event predictors after 2nd generation DES (2nd DES) implantation differed by time after implantation.

METHODS

We studied 1912 consecutive patients who underwent successful 2nd DES implantation (70±10 years, 72% male). Bleeding events were recorded as early (≤1 year) and late (>1 year). Major bleeding events were defined as a composite of type 5, 3, and 2 bleeding in the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium criteria. Predictors were assessed using a Cox proportional hazard model.

RESULTS

Bleeding event rates were 3.3%, 5.1%, and 6.7% at 1, 2, and 3 years, respectively, with the highest 1-year rate in year 1 (p<0.001). Cause and severity of bleeding events were similar between early and late bleeding events. Prior history of gastrointestinal bleeding, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug use, and triple antithrombotic therapy [adjusted risk ratio (RR): 3.68, 3.21, 4.57, respectively; p<0.01] were independent predictors of early bleeding events. Age >80 years and severe renal dysfunction (adjusted RR: 2.27, 2.02, respectively; p<0.01) were independent predictors of late bleeding events. Survival rate was significantly lower in patients with bleeding events compared with patients without bleeding events (82.4% vs 90.1%; p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Frequency and predictors of bleeding events after 2nd DES implantation differ by time after implantation. Treatment strategies corresponding to individual patients are required.

Piroxicam-β-cyclodextrin: a GI safer piroxicam

Although NSAIDs are very effective drugs, their use is associated with a broad spectrum of adverse reactions in the liver, kidney, cardiovascular (CV) system, skin and gut. Gastrointestinal (GI) side effects are the most common and constitute a wide clinical spectrum ranging from dyspepsia, heartburn and abdominal discomfort to more serious events such as peptic ulcer with life-threatening complications of bleeding and perforation. The appreciation that CV risk is also increased further complicates the choices of physicians prescribing anti-inflammatory therapy. Despite prevention strategies should be implemented in patients at risk, gastroprotection is often underused and adherence to treatment is generally poor. A more appealing approach would be therefore to develop drugs that are devoid of or have reduced GI toxicity. Gastro-duodenal mucosa possesses many defensive mechanisms and NSAIDs have a deleterious effect on most of them. This results in a mucosa less able to cope with even a reduced acid load. NSAIDs cause gastro-duodenal damage, by two main mechanisms: a physiochemical disruption of the gastric mucosal barrier and systemic inhibition of gastric mucosal protection, through inhibition of cyclooxygenase (COX, PG endoperoxide G/H synthase) activity of the GI mucosa. However, against a background of COX inhibition by anti-inflammatory doses of NSAIDs, their physicochemical properties, in particular their acidity, underlie the topical effect leading to short-term damage. It has been shown that esterification of acidic NSAIDs suppresses their gastrotoxicity without adversely affecting anti-inflammatory activity. Another way to develop NSAIDs with better GI tolerability is to complex these molecules with cyclodextrins (CDs), giving rise to so-called “inclusion complexes” that can have physical, chemical and biological properties very different from either those of the drug or the cyclodextrin. Complexation of NSAIDs with β-cyclodextrin potentially leads to a more rapid onset of action after oral administration and improved GI tolerability because of minimization of the drug gastric effects. One such drug, piroxicam-β-cyclodextrin (PBC), has been used in Europe for 25 years. Preclinical and clinical pharmacology of PBC do show that the β-cyclodextrin inclusion complex of piroxicam is better tolerated from the upper GI tract than free piroxicam, while retaining all the analgesic and anti-inflammatory properties of the parent compound. In addition, the drug is endowed with a quick absorption rate, which translates into a faster onset of analgesic activity, an effect confirmed in several clinical studies. An analysis of the available trials show that PBC has a GI safety profile, which is better than that displayed by uncomplexed piroxicam. Being an inclusion complex of piroxicam, whose CV safety has been pointed out by several observational studies, PBC should be viewed as a CV safe anti-inflmmatory compound and a GI safer alternative to piroxicam. As a consequence, it should be considered as a useful addition to our therapeutic armamentarium.

Prevention of upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage: current controversies and clinical guidance

Acute upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding is a common medical emergency and associated with significant morbidly and mortality. The risk of bleeding from peptic ulceration and oesophagogastric varices can be reduced by appropriate primary and secondary preventative strategies. Helicobacter pylori eradication and risk stratification with appropriate gastroprotection strategies when used with antiplatelet drugs and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are effective in preventing peptic ulcer bleeding, whilst endoscopic screening and either nonselective beta blockade or endoscopic variceal ligation are effective at reducing the risk of variceal haemorrhage. For secondary prevention of variceal haemorrhage, the combination of beta blockade and endoscopic variceal ligation is more effective. Recent data on the possible interactions of aspirin and NSAIDs, clopidogrel and proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), and the increased risk of cardiovascular adverse events associated with all nonaspirin cyclo-oxygenase (COX) inhibitors have increased the complexity of choices for preventing peptic ulcer bleeding. Such choices should consider both the GI and cardiovascular risk profiles. In patients with a moderately increased risk of GI bleeding, a NSAID plus a PPI or a COX-2 selective agent alone appear equivalent but for those at highest risk of bleeding (especially those with previous ulcer or haemorrhage) the COX-2 inhibitor plus PPI combination is superior. However naproxen seems the safest NSAID for those at increased cardiovascular risk. Clopidogrel is associated with a significant risk of GI haemorrhage and the most recent data concerning the potential clinical interaction of clopidogrel and PPIs are reassuring. In clopidogrel-treated patients at highest risk of GI bleeding, some form of GI prevention is indicated.

Systematic review of methods used in meta-analyses where a primary outcome is an adverse or unintended event

BACKGROUND

Adverse consequences of medical interventions are a source of concern, but clinical trials may lack power to detect elevated rates of such events, while observational studies have inherent limitations. Meta-analysis allows the combination of individual studies, which can increase power and provide stronger evidence relating to adverse events. However, meta-analysis of adverse events has associated methodological challenges. The aim of this study was to systematically identify and review the methodology used in meta-analyses where a primary outcome is an adverse or unintended event, following a therapeutic intervention.

METHODS

Using a collection of reviews identified previously, 166 references including a meta-analysis were selected for review. At least one of the primary outcomes in each review was an adverse or unintended event. The nature of the intervention, source of funding, number of individual meta-analyses performed, number of primary studies included in the review, and use of meta-analytic methods were all recorded. Specific areas of interest relating to the methods used included the choice of outcome metric, methods of dealing with sparse events, heterogeneity, publication bias and use of individual patient data.

RESULTS

The 166 included reviews were published between 1994 and 2006. Interventions included drugs and surgery among other interventions. Many of the references being reviewed included multiple meta-analyses with 44.6% (74/166) including more than ten. Randomised trials only were included in 42.2% of meta-analyses (70/166), observational studies only in 33.7% (56/166) and a mix of observational studies and trials in 15.7% (26/166). Sparse data, in the form of zero events in one or both arms where the outcome was a count of events, was found in 64 reviews of two-arm studies, of which 41 (64.1%) had zero events in both arms.

CONCLUSIONS

Meta-analyses of adverse events data are common and useful in terms of increasing the power to detect an association with an intervention, especially when the events are infrequent. However, with regard to existing meta-analyses, a wide variety of different methods have been employed, often with no evident rationale for using a particular approach. More specifically, the approach to dealing with zero events varies, and guidelines on this issue would be desirable.

Impact of a health safety warning and prior authorisation on the use of piroxicam: a time-series study

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to assess the quantitative changes in systemic use of piroxicam after the issue of a health safety warning about its risks and the subsequent implementation of prior authorisation.

METHODS

We determined the number of monthly daily defined doses/1000 inhabitants/day (DHDs) of piroxicam in the period 2005-2008 in a health area in Spain. The data were analysed graphically, and the impact of the safety warning and introduction of prior authorisation were estimated by using segmented regression analysis.

RESULTS

The graph showed that the number of DHDs of piroxicam was stable both before and after the health safety warning but registered a very marked decrease after implementation of prior authorisation, after which DHDs of piroxicam remained stable at a 98% inferior level compared with previous to prior authorisation. Segmented regression analysis showed no statistically significant immediate jump in piroxicam utilisation after the safety warning nor a change in the slope afterwards, but it did show a significant immediate jump after prior authorisation.

CONCLUSION

Population exposure to systemic piroxicam remained unaffected by a previous health safety warning but declined sharply after the introduction of prior authorisation.

Over-the-counter analgesics in older adults: a call for improved labelling and consumer education

The use of analgesics increases with age and on any given day 20-30% of older adults take an analgesic medication. Over-the-counter (OTC) analgesics are generally well tolerated and effective when taken for brief periods of time and at recommended dosages. However, their long-term use, use at inappropriately high doses, or use by persons with contraindications may result in adverse effects, including gastrointestinal haemorrhage, cardiovascular toxicity, renal toxicity and hepatotoxicity. Many OTC drugs are also available through a prescription, for a broader range of indications and for longer durations of use and wider dose ranges, under the assumption that healthcare providers will help patients make safe choices about analgesics. Safe and effective use of medications is one of the greatest challenges faced by healthcare providers in medicine. More than 60% of people cannot identify the active ingredient in their brand of pain reliever. Additionally, about 40% of Americans believe that OTC drugs are too weak to cause any real harm. As a result of a recent US FDA policy, the conversion of prescription to OTC medications will result in a 50% increase of OTC medications. To reduce the risks of potential adverse effects from OTC drug therapy in older adults, we propose that the use of analgesics will be enhanced through the use of patient and healthcare provider education, as well as improved labelling of OTC analgesics. Improved labelling of OTC analgesics may help consumers distinguish common analgesic ingredients in a wide variety of preparations and facilitate informed decisions concerning the use of OTC drugs.

Safety profile of celecoxib as used in general practice in England: results of a prescription-event monitoring study

AIMS

A post-marketing surveillance study using the technique of Prescription Event Monitoring was undertaken to monitor the safety of celecoxib, a cyclo-oxygenase (COX)-2 inhibitor, as prescribed in primary care in England.

METHODS

Patients were identified from dispensed British National Health Service prescription data supplied in confidence by the Prescription Pricing Authority for celecoxib between May and December 2000. Simple questionnaires were sent to the prescribing general practitioner at least 6 months after the date of the first dispensed prescription for each individual patient. Event incidence densities (IDs) [the number of 1st reports per 1000 patient-months of exposure (pme)] were calculated. ID differences for events reported in month 1 (ID1) and months 2-6 (ID2) were examined for temporal changes in event rate. Information on suspected adverse drug reactions (ADRs), reasons for stopping treatment, outcome of pregnancies and cause of death were also requested. Data were gathered on potential gastrointestinal (GI) risk factors [recent use of other non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), past history of upper GI disorders and concomitant gastro-irritant agents or anti-ulcer drugs]. Crude IDs per 1000 pme and ID ratios were calculated according to potential risk factors, and age (> or = 65 years, < or = 64 years).

RESULTS

The cohort comprised of 17,458 patients [median age 62 years (IQR 51,73); 68.3% female]. The most common specified indication was osteoarthritis (28.1%, n = 4905). Not effective was the event with the highest ID1 (139.9 per 1000 pme). The clinical events with the highest ID1 were dyspepsia (25.4 per 1000 pme) followed by abdominal pain (10.6). These were also given frequently as reasons for stopping (551 and 174 of 9126 reports). Of 436 events in 325 patients (1.9% of total cohort) that were reported as ADRs, the most frequent were events within the alimentary system (186 reports). Uncommon events reported during treatment (not necessarily as ADRs) included allergy (0.10%, n = 17), anaphylaxis (0.01%, n = 2), angioneurotic oedema (0.02%, n = 3) and bronchospasm (0.05%, n = 9). There were 103 reports of events associated with thromboembolism and 111 reports of serious GI events [90 GI bleeds (upper and lower); 21 peptic ulcers] received during treatment or within 1 month of stopping. A past history of dyspeptic/other upper GI conditions and use of concomitant gastro-protective drugs were each associated with a significantly increased risk of dyspepsia and abdominal pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Frequently reported adverse events were those GI events commonly associated with treatment with other NSAIDS. Stratification by identified risk factors suggested that channelling of high-risk patients is likely. Serious upper and lower GI events, and thromboembolic events did occur during this study, although the incidence was low (< 1%). Doctors should continue to prescribe NSAIDs, including COX-2-specific inhibitors, with caution.

Reduced incidence of gastroduodenal ulcers associated with lumiracoxib compared with ibuprofen in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

BACKGROUND

Lumiracoxib (Prexige; Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland) is a cyclooxygenase-2 selective inhibitor associated with improved gastrointestinal safety compared with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, in patients with osteoarthritis.

AIM

To compare the gastroduodenal safety of lumiracoxib with ibuprofen and celecoxib in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

METHODS

A total of 893 patients with rheumatoid arthritis were randomized to lumiracoxib 400 mg once daily, lumiracoxib 800 mg once daily, ibuprofen 800 mg three times daily or celecoxib 200 mg twice daily for 13 weeks, in a double-blind randomised controlled clinical trial. The primary endpoint was the cumulative incidence of gastroduodenal ulcers over 13 weeks.

RESULTS

The incidence of gastroduodenal ulcers >/=3 mm with lumiracoxib 400 mg once daily (2.8%) or lumiracoxib 800 mg once daily (4.3%) was significantly lower than with ibuprofen (13.6%, all P < 0.01) and not different from celecoxib (1.9%). The incidence of adverse events was similar for lumiracoxib 400, 800 mg and celecoxib (78, 75 and 77%, respectively) and higher with ibuprofen (86%). Discontinuation for adverse events was highest for ibuprofen (12.5% vs. 7.9-8.8% for the other groups).

CONCLUSIONS

Lumiracoxib demonstrated gastroduodenal safety superior to ibuprofen and similar to celecoxib in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

Learning Pain Assessment and Management: A Goal of the End-of-Life Nursing Education Consortium

BACKGROUND

Relief of pain for patients requires that palliative care practitioners have knowledge and skill in both pain assessment and the use of pharmacologic and complementary therapies.

METHOD

Pain assessment and management and the teaching strategies suggested within the End-of-Life Nursing Education Consortium curriculum are presented.

RESULTS

By addressing the pain experienced by patients with life-limiting illnesses and those at the end of life, the quality of care can be greatly improved. As a multidimensional phenomenon that relates to physical, emotional, and spiritual well-being, the relief of pain enhances the quality of life of patients and lessens the stress experienced by family caregivers.

CONCLUSION

The relief of pain and suffering is consistent with the philosophy and goals of nursing as a profession and is a nursing responsibility.

Meta-analysis of dyspepsia and nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs

OBJECTIVE

Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug (NSAID) use is a known risk factor for gastrointestinal (GI) perforations, ulcers, and bleeds, but there are limited data on its association with the very common symptom of dyspepsia. Using published and unpublished data sources, we sought to determine estimates of the risks of dyspepsia associated with NSAIDs.

METHODS

We searched computerized databases (1966-1998) for primary studies of NSAIDs reporting on GI complications. We also obtained Food and Drug Administration (FDA) new drug application reviews for the 5 most common NSAIDs. We included studies reporting defined upper GI outcomes among subjects (>17 years old) who used oral NSAIDs for more than 4 days. Two reviewers evaluated 4,881 published titles, identifying 55 NSAID versus placebo randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 37 unpublished (FDA data) placebo-controlled RCTs; 86 NSAID versus NSAID RCTs (sample size >or=50); and 103 observational studies.

RESULTS

The majority of clinical trials were of good quality. Meta-regression identified an increased risk of dyspepsia for users of specific NSAIDs (adjusted odds ratio [OR] of indomethacin, meclofenamate, piroxicam = 2.8), and for high dosages of other NSAIDs (OR = 3.1), but not for other NSAIDs regardless of dosage (OR = 1.1). Dyspepsia was not reported as an outcome in the case control or cohort studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical trial data indicate that high dosages of any NSAID along with any dosage of indomethacin, meclofenamate, or piroxicam increase the risk of dyspepsia by about 3-fold. Other NSAIDs at lower dosages were not associated with an increased risk of dyspepsia.

The safety of drugs for OTC use: what evidence is required for an NSAID switch?

In recent years there has been a growing demand for safe and effective over-the-counter (OTC) drugs. The demonstration of the safety of OTC products in actual conditions of use is crucial for their wide distribution, since the circumstances of their use may be different from the prescription-only setting. A group of experts met in Geneva, Switzerland, with the aim of exploring the criteria required to show safety equivalence of OTC medications, with specific reference to low-dose non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) used for analgesia. It was agreed that an acceptable surrogate marker for safety as the primary endpoint in a study designed to show that a new NSAID was not inferior to a current NSAID would be any adverse event leading the patient to consult a physician. A sample size of 10,000 patients in each arm of a two-arm study would be sufficient to show non-inferiority with acceptable relative risk equal to 1.2 with at least 90% power for an event rate of 5%. An example of a possible pharmacy-based randomized study design to demonstrate safety equivalence of OTC analgesics is given.

Do NSAIDs cause dyspepsia? A meta-analysis evaluating alternative dyspepsia definitions

OBJECTIVE

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) may be associated with dyspepsia, but the relationship is obscured by variations in the terminology used to report GI symptoms. Using alternative definitions, we assessed the relationship between NSAID use and dyspepsia.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, HEALTHSTAR, and BIOSIS databases (1966-1997) and New Drug Application reviews, identifying randomized, placebo-controlled trials (5 days or more duration) of any NSAID, reporting original data on GI complications. Based upon reported terms describing upper GI symptoms, we derived three definitions: strict, using terms synonymous with epigastric pain/discomfort; loose, (containing the strict definition plus terms for heartburn, nausea, bloating, anorexia, and vomiting); and a loose definition without heartburn terms (the loose-less-heartburn definition). Using each definition, we performed a random-effects model meta-analysis of the relationship between NSAID exposure and dyspepsia.

RESULTS

Fifty-five published and 37 unpublished controlled NSAID trials met our inclusion criteria. The mean duration of the trials was 33.2 days (SD 40 days). Application of the strict definition resulted in a pooled risk ratio of dyspepsia for NSAIDs compared with placebo of 1.36 (95% CI = 1.11-1.67). For the loose definition, the pooled risk ratio was 1.13 (95% CI = 0.98-1.32). The loose-less-heartburn definition yielded a pooled risk ratio of 1.19 (95% CI = 1.03-1.39). In the placebo-treated control groups, the percent of patients reporting dyspepsia ranged from 2.3% (strict definition) to 4.2% (loose and loose-less-heartburn definitions).

CONCLUSIONS

Using the strict definition, based solely on epigastric pain-related symptoms, NSAIDs increased the risk of dyspepsia by 36% (p < 0.05). These findings may be useful in creating a standardized definition of NSAID-related dyspepsia.

Gastrointestinal tolerability of ibuprofen compared with paracetamol and aspirin at over-the-counter doses

This multicentre, randomized, investigator-blinded, parallel-group study compared the gastrointestinal (GI) tolerability of ibuprofen, paracetamol and aspirin at over-the-counter doses for common pain indications. Patients (of whom 8633 were evaluable) took either ibuprofen up to 1200 mg daily, or paracetamol or aspirin, each up to 3000 mg daily, for 1-7 days. The main outcome was the proportion of patients with GI adverse events. There were significantly more patients who suffered GI adverse events, principally abdominal pain, dyspepsia, nausea and diarrhoea, with aspirin (18.5%) than with ibuprofen (11.5%), but the difference between ibuprofen and paracetamol (13.1%) was not significant. Significantly more of those patients with a history of non-ulcer GI disease (n = 371) developed GI adverse events than did those with no such history; the incidence of GI adverse events in both groups was lowest with ibuprofen. More women than men experienced GI adverse events (15.5% versus 12.8%). The higher incidence of GI adverse events with aspirin was evident from the first day of treatment. In conclusion, the GI tolerability of ibuprofen, at over-the-counter doses of up to 1200 mg daily for up to 7 days, was at least as good as that of paracetamol and significantly better than that of aspirin.

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding among users of NSAIDs: a population-based cohort study in Denmark

AIMS

It is well-known that use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) increases the risk of upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB), but characteristics of the association and quantification of excess risk at the population level require clarification.

METHODS

All users of nonaspirin prescription NSAIDs in North Jutland County, Denmark during 1991-95 were identified in the regional Pharmaco-Epidemiologic Database. Using the Hospital Discharge Register, all hospitalizations for UGIBs were identified among the 156,138 users of NSAIDs and compared with the number of expected based on the North Jutland population who did not receive NSAID prescriptions.

RESULTS

During periods of NSAID use without use of other drugs associated with UGIB, we observed 365 UGIBs, a number 3.6 times higher than expected (95% CI = 3.3, 4.0). The excess risk varied by sex, type of NSAID and form and route of administration of the NSAID, but not by age at first NSAID prescription or number of prior prescriptions. Risk declined sharply following cessation of use. For ibuprofen and naproxen, there was a clear trend in rising risk by increasing dose, although the lowest doses were also associated with an excess of UGIB. Concurrent use of corticosteroids, anticoagulants and aspirin further increased the risk of UGIB.

CONCLUSIONS

All types and formulations of NSAIDs appear to increase the risk of UGIBs, but the effect appear not to be cumulative and diminish rapidly with discontinue of use. Up to 15% of the UGIBs in the entire population of the North Jutland County may be explained by use of this drug.

COX-2 inhibitors. Are they nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs with a better safety profile?

In the treatment of arthritis, NSAIDs are some of the most commonly used drugs, although the prescription of such drugs has been questioned due to their inherent risks for gastrointestinal compromise, platelet effects, and the potential for renal toxicity with long-term use. With the availability of celecoxib and rofecoxib, 2 cyclooxygenase (COX-2) inhibitors (or COX-1 sparing agents) as new forms of NSAIDs, these issues have become magnified not only in the context of risk-to-benefit ratios but also interms of pharmacoeconomics because they have been proven to be equally efficacious as the nonselective NSAIDs, with an improved safety profile particularly within the gastrointestinal tract, but at a significantly increased cost.

Gastrointestinal toxicity associated with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Epidemiologic and economic issues

The large body of literature on the gastrointestinal side effects of NSAIDs has shown consistently that populations can be identified that have a markedly elevated risk for these iatrogenic conditions. These groups include the elderly, persons with prior history of peptic ulcer disease and its complications, persons receiving anticoagulant and corticosteroid therapy, and persons who require long-term NSAID therapy, especially at high dose. It is possible that several comorbidities (e.g., rheumatoid arthritis) predispose patients to gastrointestinal complications caused by NSAIDs, but few studies have adjusted carefully for the possibility that concomitant medication use (e.g., oral anticoagulants, corticosteroids) or increased NSAID dose may account best for apparent association of comorbidities as a risk factor for serious gastrointestinal events. The role of H. pylori infection in affecting the risk of complicated ulcer disease among NSAID users remains to be fully elucidated. Low-dose aspirin for cardioprotective use is associated with an increased risk for PUBs; when used concomitantly with NSAIDs, this increases the risk of PUBs above that of the NSAID itself. Apart from the physical toll NSAID-related gastrotoxicity places on the patient, there are considerable economic consequences to patients, providers, and society. This cost presents a subject for research for those interested not only in improving the quality of patient care, but also in the prudent use of health care resources.

Epidemiologic assessment of the safety of conventional nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs

The use of conventional nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) has been associated with upper gastrointestinal bleeding and perforation (UGIB), acute liver injury, acute renal injury, heart failure, and adverse reproductive outcomes. This article summarizes the effects of various factors, such as NSAID dose, duration of treatment, patient age, and ulcer history, on the incidences of these adverse side effects. We used the UK General Practice Research Database to study further the principal safety concern related to NSAIDs, namely, UGIB.

The use of anti-inflammatory drugs in cancer pain

The role of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in cancer pain has been well established in the treatment of mild pain and also alone or in association with opioids for the treatment of moderate to severe pain. Acutely, NSAIDs may be more than mild analgesics, and may provide additional analgesia when combined with opioids. However, NSAIDs have ceiling effects and there is no therapeutic gain from increasing dosages beyond those recommended. As there is no clearly superior NSAID, the choice should be based on experience and the toxicity profile that probably relates to the COX-1:COX-2 ratio. Among the older drugs, ibuprofen seems to have these properties.Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs have been shown to have an opioid-sparing effect. Although the value of a simple narcotic-sparing effect may be questioned in cancer pain treatment, the use of NSAIDs may be useful when the increase in opioid dosage determine the occurrence of opioid toxicity. Like opioids, NSAIDs should not be considered analgesics for a specific type or cause of pain. There is a lack of evidence for any difference between different routes of NSAIDs administration. The long-term toxicity of NSAIDs in cancer pain is poorly defined due to a lack of studies. A variety of strategies have been used in an attempt to reduce the risks associated with NSAID therapy. Those NSAIDs that are weak COX-1 inhibitors may be preferred. In addition, concomitant administration of misoprostol is recommended in patients at increased risk for upper gastrointestinal complications.

Endoscopic evaluation of the gastrotolerance of short-term antalgic treatment with low dose k-diclofenac: a comparison of ibuprofen and aspirin

In a short-term gastro-duodenal endoscopic study in 12 healthy volunteers, the gastrotoxicity was not different after intake of diclofenac-K 12.5 mg (0.33) or ibuprofen 200 mg (0.42, P=0.66) but significantly higher after aspirin 500 mg (2.67, P=0.002).

Ibuprofen suppresses plaque pathology and inflammation in a mouse model for Alzheimer's disease

The brain in Alzheimer's disease (AD) shows a chronic inflammatory response characterized by activated glial cells and increased expression of cytokines and complement factors surrounding amyloid deposits. Several epidemiological studies have demonstrated a reduced risk for AD in patients using nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), prompting further inquiries about how NSAIDs might influence the development of AD pathology and inflammation in the CNS. We tested the impact of chronic orally administered ibuprofen, the most commonly used NSAID, in a transgenic model of AD displaying widespread microglial activation, age-related amyloid deposits, and dystrophic neurites. These mice were created by overexpressing a variant of the amyloid precursor protein found in familial AD. Transgene-positive (Tg+) and negative (Tg-) mice began receiving chow containing 375 ppm ibuprofen at 10 months of age, when amyloid plaques first appear, and were fed continuously for 6 months. This treatment produced significant reductions in final interleukin-1beta and glial fibrillary acidic protein levels, as well as a significant diminution in the ultimate number and total area of beta-amyloid deposits. Reductions in amyloid deposition were supported by ELISA measurements showing significantly decreased SDS-insoluble Abeta. Ibuprofen also decreased the numbers of ubiquitin-labeled dystrophic neurites and the percentage area per plaque of anti-phosphotyrosine-labeled microglia. Thus, the anti-inflammatory drug ibuprofen, which has been associated with reduced AD risk in human epidemiological studies, can significantly delay some forms of AD pathology, including amyloid deposition, when administered early in the disease course of a transgenic mouse model of AD.

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

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

Cytokines in rheumatoid arthritis: trials and tribulations

Biological agents that inhibit the activity of proinflammatory cytokines are being investigated for use in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. Thus far, two of these agents, both of which neutralize tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-alpha), have received US Food and Drug Administration approval for the treatment of the disease. Etanercept is a bioengineered fusion protein of the p75 soluble TNF receptor, and infliximab is a chimeric monoclonal antibody to TNF-alpha. Other agents that target proinflammatory cytokines are also being developed. By allowing earlier treatment and better-tolerated long-term therapy, biologics might help slow or prevent disease progression and joint destruction.

Are the biologic and clinical effects of the COX-2-specific inhibitors an advance compared with the effects of traditional NSAIDs?

This has been an unusual year for the accumulation of evidence regarding the clinical effects of inhibition of cyclooxygenase (COX)-1 and COX-2. This article reviews the available data regarding the clinical effects of the new COX-2-specific inhibitors, and speculates about the importance of the data as they relate to the treatment of patients with chronic pain and/or inflammation.

Safety and efficacy of nabumetone in osteoarthritis: emphasis on gastrointestinal safety

AIM

To compare the efficacy and gastrointestinal (GI) safety of nabumetone with two comparator non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), diclofenac SR and piroxicam.

METHODS

Two randomized, double-blind, multicentre, parallel group trials were carried out in patients with moderate to severe osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. During the 6 month treatment phase, the safety and efficacy of nabumetone (1500-2000 mg/day) was compared to diclofenac SR (100 mg/day) or piroxicam (20-30 mg/day). GI safety was evaluated by reviewing all adverse events reported during the trials and presenting all cases of ulcers (complicated and uncomplicated), as well as other bleeding events that may have been associated with NSAID administration.

RESULTS

Most of the efficacy parameters showed no significant differences between the NSAIDs, although diclofenac SR was significantly better than nabumetone in one of 18 efficacy parameters. Nabumetone-treated patients experienced significantly fewer ulcer and bleeding events compared to patients treated with the comparator NSAIDs [1.1% (4/348) vs. 4.3% (15/346), P = 0.01]. Bleeding events, including outright upper or lower GI bleeding or a significant decline in haemoglobin, occurred in significantly fewer patients treated with nabumetone than with the comparator NSAIDs [1.1% (4/348) vs. 3.5% (12/346), P < 0.05]. More importantly, complications associated with either ulcers (perforation) or bleeding (leading to hospitalization or withdrawal) occurred in significantly fewer patients receiving nabumetone [0% (0/348)] than with comparator NSAIDs [1.4% (5/346), (P < 0.05)].

CONCLUSION

The results suggest that nabumetone was similar in efficacy by most criteria to diclofenac SR and piroxicam in relieving the symptoms of osteoarthritis; however, nabumetone's GI safety profile was generally superior to that of both comparator NSAIDs. In the pooled analysis, nabumetone was associated with a significantly lower total incidence of ulcers and bleeding events, and a significantly lower incidence of complications associated with these events.

Prevention of chronic NSAID induced upper gastrointestinal toxicity

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH STRATEGY

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

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

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

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

Gastrointestinal safety profile of nabumetone: a meta-analysis

Individual comparative studies suggest that nabumetone has a gastrointestinal (GI) safety profile superior to comparator NSAIDs but lack power to show a statistical difference. The aim of this study was to evaluate systematically the difference in GI adverse events--especially the rate of perforations, ulcers, and bleeds (PUBs)-- between studies, meta-analyses of comparative trials of nabumetone and conventional NSAIDs, and postmarketing, open-label studies of nabumetone meeting predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. A fully recursive literature search identified 13 studies consisting of 29 treatment arms and 49,501 patients that met the predefined criteria. Tests for heterogeneity found no significant difference between studies of each subgroup. Overall, the dyspeptic symptoms flatulence, constipation, and diarrhea were the most commonly reported adverse events accounting for 98.6% of the total GI adverse events. Significantly more patients treated with a comparator NSAID experienced GI adverse events than did those taking nabumetone (P = 0.007). After adjustment for patient-exposure years, PUBs were 10 to 36 times more likely to develop in patients treated with a comparator NSAID than with nabumetone. This was consistently seen in patients in nonendoscopic (n = 7,468) and endoscopic studies (n = 244). In the analysis of postmarketing or open-label studies of nabumetone, only one PUB was reported per 500 patient-exposure years over 17,502 treatment years (n = 39,389). GI adverse event-related dropouts and hospitalizations were increased by 1.3- and 3.7-fold if patients were treated with a comparator NSAID than with nabumetone. Significantly fewer treatment-related GI adverse events, especially PUBs, are seen in patients treated with nabumetone than with a comparator NSAID. Nabumetone is very safe for the GI tract.

The cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors: safety and effectiveness

OBJECTIVE

To review the development of cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors and discuss specific agents that are currently under investigation or have been marketed.

DATA SOURCES

Primary literature on selective COX inhibitors was identified from a comprehensive MEDLINE, English-literature search from January 1966 through September 1998, with additional studies selected by review of the references. Abstracts from recent meetings and package insert literature from approved agents were also used as source material. Indexing terms included COX-2 inhibitors, meloxicam, celecoxib, rofecoxib, flosulide, SC-58635, and MK-966.

STUDY SELECTION

Human clinical, pharmacokinetic, and dose-ranging trials performed in Europe and the US and randomized comparative trials were reviewed.

DATA SYNTHESIS

With the discovery of at least two COX isoforms, a better understanding of the mechanism of action and gastrointestinal toxicity of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) has been realized. While COX-1 is involved in physiologic maintenance, COX-2 seems to be involved in inflammation, mitogenesis, and specialized signal transductions. Selective COX-2 inhibitors may allow maximum antiinflammatory activity while improving the safety profile associated with NSAID therapy. Celecoxib and rofecoxib have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of osteo- and rheumatoid arthritis; meloxicam is undergoing Phase III clinical trials. Preliminary data indicate that the selective COX-2 inhibitors provide analgesic and antiinflammatory efficacy comparable with older NSAIDs, with fewer adverse gastrointestinal effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Specific COX-2 inhibitors offer promising benefits over older NSAIDs with regard to gastrointestinal safety while maintaining analgesic and antiinflammatory efficacy. Further study is required to determine long-term efficacy and safety in clinical use.

The effects of high-dose ibuprofen and pancreatic enzymes on the intestine of the rat

BACKGROUND

High-dose ibuprofen therapy limits the progression of lung disease in patients with cystic fibrosis. However, ibuprofen increases intestinal permeability, which potentiates intestinal damage caused by high-dose pancreatic enzyme treatment, as was shown in a previous study by this group. In the present study, the combined effects of ibuprofen and pancreatic enzyme treatment on the intestine and liver were examined.

METHODS

Using a chronically catheterized rat model, high-dose ibuprofen (60 mg/kg x day in two doses), with or without pancreatic enzyme treatment was infused into gastric and duodenal catheters, respectively, for 20 days. Six groups were studied: control group; ibuprofen treatment alone; pancreatic enzyme treatment alone (two groups: normal dose, 10,000 U lipase/kg x day and high dose, 40,000 U lipase/kg x day); and ibuprofen combined with pancreatic enzyme (two groups: ibuprofen with high-dose pancreatic enzyme and ibuprofen and low-dose pancreatic enzyme). After treatment, rats were autopsied, and complete histologic analyses of the entire intestine and liver were performed.

RESULTS

Ibuprofen caused mild ulceration of the small intestine in 50% of rats. Pancreatic enzyme treatment alone did not induce ulceration of the intestine. The combination of pancreatic enzyme and ibuprofen treatment increased the severity of the ulcers in the small intestine but not the number of ulcers or the percentage of rats affected. Ibuprofen treatment alone did not cause ulcers in the large intestine, but with the addition of pancreatic enzymes, ulceration and fibrosis were present.

CONCLUSIONS

Ibuprofen at doses used to limit progression of cystic fibrosis lung disease caused enteropathy in 50% of rats. There was synergism between ibuprofen and pancreatic enzyme treatment in the production of severe ulcers. Ulcers in the cecum and colon were increased with combined ibuprofen and pancreatic enzyme treatment compared with incidence in control animals.

Gastrointestinal safety and tolerance of ibuprofen at maximum over-the-counter dose

BACKGROUND

Delineation of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) gastrointestinal toxicity has largely depended on retrospective epidemiologic studies which demonstrate that lower doses of NSAIDs pose a lower risk of gastrointestinal toxicity. Ibuprofen, a propionic acid NSAID, has, in most such studies, exhibited a favourable profile in terms of gastrointestinal bleeding. Since 1984, ibuprofen has been available as a non-prescription analgesic/antipyretic with a limit of 1200 mg/day for 10 days of continuous use. Trials and spontaneously reported adverse experiences suggest that gastrointestinal symptoms and bleeding are rare.

METHODS

This study prospectively evaluated the gastrointestinal tolerability, as compared to placebo, of the maximum non-prescription dose and duration of ibuprofen use in healthy subjects representative of a non-prescription analgesic user population.

RESULTS

Gastrointestinal adverse experiences were similar in the placebo and ibuprofen groups (67 out of 413, 16% with placebo vs. 161 out of 833, 19% with ibuprofen). There was no difference between the two groups in the proportion discontinuing due to a gastrointestinal event. Gastrointestinal adverse experiences reported by >/= 1% of subjects were: dyspepsia, abdominal pain, nausea, diarrhoea, flatulence, and constipation. Seventeen (1.4%) subjects had positive occult blood tests: their frequency was comparable between treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

When used as directed to treat episodic pain, non-prescription ibuprofen at the maximum dose of 1200 mg/day for 10 days, is well-tolerated.

Selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors

The identification of COX-2 less than a decade ago has been followed by an unprecedented period of discovery and drug development. An awareness of the existence of two COX isoforms has led to potential novel insights into disease pathogenesis (arthritis, Alzheimer's disease, cancer) and the regulation of normal physiology (brain, kidney). The preliminary in vivo experience with COX-2-selective inhibitors has provided evidence for proof of concept for the COX-1 and COX-2 hypothesis, namely that the selective inhibition of COX-2-derived prostaglandins is sufficient to inhibit inflammation and is nonulcerogenic. It may be that we have moved closer to the "better aspirin" envisioned by Sir John Vane for the treatment of degenerative and inflammatory arthritides; however, caution is still warranted. Some toxicities of current NSAIDs may result from COX-2 inhibition, as in the kidney and brain; such side effects may be shared by the selective compounds. In addition, unexpected toxicities may arise simply because new chemical compounds will be widely prescribed. Finally, since the efficacy of traditional NSAIDs derives largely from their capacity to inhibit COX-2, it may be that the COX-2 selective drugs will not prove to be therapeutically superior to available agents. Given the well-recognized toxicity of NSAIDs, however, the availability of COX-2-selective agents promises to provide significant advantage to patients with chronic diseases, such as RA and OA.

The use of analgesics in the management of pain in rheumatic diseases

Pain is the most common complaint of patients who see rheumatologists. In this article, the current treatment options for pain are reviewed; these include acetaminophen, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, new specific cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors, opioid analgesics, centrally acting muscle relaxants, antidepressants, and topical analgesics and counterirritants. The doses of medication and known adverse effects of these medications are highlighted.