Valdecoxib does not impair platelet function

Common Medications Which Should Be Stopped Prior to Platelet-Rich Plasma Injection

Osteoarthritis (OA) is an extremely prevalent joint condition in the United States, affecting over 30 million people [...]

Valdecoxib improves lipid-induced skeletal muscle insulin resistance via simultaneous suppression of inflammation and endoplasmic reticulum stress

Valdecoxib (VAL), a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug, has been widely used for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, osteoarthritis, and menstrual pain. It is a selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor. The suppressive effects of VAL on cardiovascular diseases and neuroinflammation have been documented; however, its impact on insulin signaling in skeletal muscle has not been studied in detail. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of VAL on insulin resistance in mouse skeletal muscle. Treatment of C2C12 myocytes with VAL reversed palmitate-induced aggravation of insulin signaling and glucose uptake. Further, VAL attenuated palmitate-induced inflammation and endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress in a concentration-dependent manner. Treatment with VAL concentration-dependently upregulated AMP-activated protein kinase (AMPK) and heat shock protein beta 1 (HSPB1) expression. In line with in vitro experiments, treatment with VAL augmented AMPK phosphorylation and HSPB1 expression, thereby alleviating high-fat diet-induced insulin resistance along with inflammation and ER stress in mouse skeletal muscle. However, small interfering RNA-mediated inhibition of AMPK abolished the effects of VAL on insulin resistance, inflammation, and ER stress. These results suggest that VAL alleviates insulin resistance through AMPK/HSPB1-mediated inhibition of inflammation and ER stress in skeletal muscle under hyperlipidemic conditions. Hence, VAL could be used as an effective pharmacotherapeutic agent for management of insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes.

Efficacy of celecoxib for acute pain management following total hip arthroplasty in elderly patients: A prospective, randomized, placebo-control trial

The aim of the present study was to determine whether celecoxib is able to ameliorate pain intensity, provide a narcotic-sparing effect, achieve early ambulation and improve rehabilitation following total hip arthroplasty (THA) in elderly patients. Peri- and post-operative oral celecoxib was administered to verify the efficacy of celecoxib for acute pain management in a multimodal analgesic strategy. All 64 eligible patients were randomly allocated to either the celecoxib group, who took an oral 400 mg capsule of celecoxib peri-operatively and 200 mg per 12 h post-operatively for the first 5 days, or the control group, who were orally treated with a placebo capsule having the same appearance. A multimodal analgesic technique was used in which oral celecoxib or placebo capsule was combined with intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) morphine pump for peri- and post-operative pain management. Pain assessments were recorded at 6, 12, 24, 48 and 72 h, and 7 and 14 days after THA using the visual analog scale (VAS). PCA morphine consumption; 6, 12, 24 and 48-h post-operative Harris hip score (HHS); time interval until initial ambulation; rates of urinary retention and post-operative nausea and vomiting (PONV) within 72 h; and intra- and post-operative blood loss were also documented. The celecoxib and control groups comprised 34 and 30 patients, respectively. Baseline demographics were comparable between the two groups. The post-operative VAS in the celecoxib group was significantly lower than that in the control group at 12, 24, 48 and 72 h after THA. The post-operative HHS had no significant difference between the two groups, while the time interval until initial ambulation in the celecoxib group (4.5±1.2 days) was significantly less than that in the control group (5.83±2.04 days; P<0.05). Morphine consumption was significantly decreased in the celecoxib group when compared with the control group at 6, 12, 24 and 24 h. Although the 72-h post-operative rates of urinary retention and PONV were lower in the celecoxib group than in the control group, there were no significant differences in these rates between the two groups. The intra- or post-operative blood loss was not significantly different between groups. In conclusion, pre-and post-operative oral celecoxib in a multimodal analgesic strategy can achieve favorable pain relief, reduce opioid consumption, and provide earlier ambulation and improved rehabilitation when compared with PCA morphine alone following THA in elderly patients.

Valdecoxib for the management of chronic and acute pain

Cyclooxygenase-2 specific inhibitors have anti-inflammatory and analgesic properties, and are effective in managing a wide range of chronic and acute painful conditions such as adult rheumatoid arthritis, osteoarthritis, migraine, primary dysmenorrhea and postoperative pain. Valdecoxib, an orally administered cyclooxygenase-2 specific inhibitor, provides effective pain relief for both chronic and acute conditions, and reduces postoperative opioid use, with a concomitant reduction in opioid-related adverse events. Valdecoxib also has superior gastrointestinal safety compared with nonspecific nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and at therapeutic doses, it is generally safe and well tolerated in terms of renal and cardiovascular events. This drug profile reviews the efficacy, safety and tolerability of valdecoxib for the management of chronic and acute pain.

Parecoxib Sodium, an Injectable COX-2-Specific Inhibitor, Does Not Affect Unfractionated Heparin-Regulated Blood Coagulation Parameters

The objective of this study was to evaluate the potential for hemostatic interaction between a full analgesic dose of parecoxib sodium (parecoxib), a prodrug of the COX-2 specific inhibitor valdecoxib, and unfractionated heparin (UFH) in healthy male subjects. This open-label, single-center study comprised two treatment periods. In treatment period I, fasted, eligible subjects (n = 18) received a UFH bolus (4000 U) followed by a 36-hour UFH infusion (start dose 10-14 U/kg). Activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT), prothrombin time (PT), and platelet counts were measured at regular intervals up to 24 hours after the end of the UFH infusion. After a 2-day washout, patients randomized to treatment period II received a full analgesic dosage of parecoxib 40 mg bid intravenously (IV) for 6 days (n = 18), with concomitant UFH (same regimen as treatment period I) on day 5 (n = 18). APTT, PT, and platelet counts were evaluated at regular intervals up to 24 hours after UFH infusion. Coadministration of parecoxib 40 mg bid IV with UFH (treatment period II) had no significant effect on aPTT, PT, or platelet counts, which were similar to those of participants receiving UFH alone (treatment period I) at all time points. These results show that a full analgesic dose of parecoxib, a COX-2-specific inhibitor available for parenteral administration, can be coadministered with UFH without affecting blood coagulation parameters. Therefore, parecoxib may be administered to patients who are receiving UFH for thromboprophylaxis.

Lumiracoxib Does Not Affect the Ex Vivo Antiplatelet Aggregation Activity of Low-Dose Aspirin in Healthy Subjects

This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study evaluated the pharmacodynamic effects of concomitant low-dose aspirin and lumiracoxib in healthy subjects. Participants received lumiracoxib 400 mg once daily (n = 14) or placebo (n = 14) for 11 days, with concomitant low-dose aspirin (75 mg once daily) from days 5 to 11. Ex vivo pharmacodynamic assessments included assays of platelet aggregation and urinary thromboxane and prostacyclin metabolite profile. Arachidonic acid-stimulated platelet aggregation was reduced from 76.3% on day 4 to 4.8% on day 11 in the placebo group and from 75.8% on day 4 to 5.1% on day 11 in the lumiracoxib group. Collagen-induced platelet aggregation was reduced from 77.5% on day 4 to 52.8% on day 11 in the placebo group and from 79.5% on day 4 to 55.9% on day 11 in the lumiracoxib group. Urinary thromboxane and prostacyclin were unaffected by lumiracoxib. In conclusion, concomitant lumiracoxib did not interfere with the cyclooxygenase-1-mediated antiplatelet effects of low-dose aspirin.

Prostaglandins: modulators of inflammation and cardiovascular risk

Cyclooxygenase (COX)-2-specific drugs such as rofecoxib and celecoxib and the newer agents, etoricoxib and valdecoxib, were developed to provide a safer alternative to traditional nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (tNSAIDs). These drugs have been shown significantly to reduce endoscopically visualized gastrointestinal ulcers, and one of them, rofecoxib, has demonstrated a 50% reduction in clinically important gastrointestinal outcomes compared with a tNSAID. However, COX-derived prostaglandins also have complex interactions with the cardiovascular system. This article briefly reviews our current understanding of the interactions between prostaglandins and cardiovascular physiology, and addresses some of the concerns that recently have been raised regarding coxibs and the risk of cardiovascular events.

Nordic guidelines for neuraxial blocks in disturbed haemostasis from the Scandinavian Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine

BACKGROUND

Central neuraxial blocks (CNBs) for surgery and analgesia are an important part of anaesthesia practice in the Nordic countries. More active thromboprophylaxis with potent antihaemostatic drugs has increased the risk of bleeding into the spinal canal. National guidelines for minimizing this risk in patients who benefit from such blocks vary in their recommendations for safe practice.

METHODS

The Scandinavian Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine (SSAI) appointed a task force of experts to establish a Nordic consensus on recommendations for best clinical practice in providing effective and safe CNBs in patients with an increased risk of bleeding. We performed a literature search and expert evaluation of evidence for (1) the possible benefits of CNBs on the outcome of anaesthesia and surgery, for (2) risks of spinal bleeding from hereditary and acquired bleeding disorders and antihaemostatic drugs used in surgical patients for thromboprophylaxis, for (3) risk evaluation in published case reports, and for (4) recommendations in published national guidelines. Proposals from the taskforce were available for feedback on the SSAI web-page during the summer of 2008.

RESULTS

Neuraxial blocks can improve comfort and reduce morbidity (strong evidence) and mortality (moderate evidence) after surgical procedures. Haemostatic disorders, antihaemostatic drugs, anatomical abnormalities of the spine and spinal blood vessels, elderly patients, and renal and hepatic impairment are risk factors for spinal bleeding (strong evidence). Published national guidelines are mainly based on experts' opinions (weak evidence). The task force reached a consensus on Nordic guidelines, mainly based on our experts' opinions, but we acknowledge different practices in heparinization during vascular surgery and peri-operative administration of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs during neuraxial blocks.

CONCLUSIONS

Experts from the five Nordic countries offer consensus recommendations for safe clinical practice of neuraxial blocks and how to minimize the risks of serious complications from spinal bleeding. A brief version of the recommendations is available on http://www.ssai.info.

Parecoxib and indomethacin delay early fracture healing: a study in rats

Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are used to reduce inflammatory response and pain. These drugs have been reported to impair bone metabolism. Parecoxib, a specific COX-2 inhibitor, exerts an inhibitory effect on the mineralization of fracture callus after a tibial fracture in rats. Decreased bone mineral density (BMD) at a fracture site may indicate impairment of early healing, casting doubt on the safety of using COX-2 inhibitors during the early treatment of diaphyseal fractures. Forty-two female Wistar rats were randomly allocated to three groups. They were given parecoxib, indomethacin, or saline intraperitoneally for 7 days after being subjected to a closed tibial fracture stabilized with an intramedullary nail. Two and 3 weeks after surgery, the bone density at the fracture site was measured using dual energy xray absorptiometry (DEXA). Three weeks after the operation the rats were euthanized and the healing fractures were mechanically tested in three-point cantilever bending. Parecoxib decreased BMD at the fracture site for 3 weeks after fracture, indomethacin for 2 weeks. Both parecoxib and indomethacin reduced the ultimate bending moment and the bending stiffness of the healing fractures after 3 weeks. These results suggest COX inhibitors should be avoided in the early phase after fractures.

Effect of parecoxib on postoperative pain after lumbar spine surgery: a bicenter, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial

STUDY DESIGN

A bicenter randomized, patients, healthcare providers, and data collectors blind placebo-controlled trial in multimodal analgesia for postoperative lumbar spine surgery was conducted.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy and safety of parecoxib on postoperative pain management after posterior lumbar spine surgery.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Systematic reviews suggest that cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors are an effective treatment for acute postoperative pain. However, previous trials on lumbar spine surgery showed equivocal efficacy of cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors for postoperative pain relief.

METHODS

In this study, 120 patients undergoing posterior lumbar discectomy, spinal decompression, or spinal fusion were stratified based on the surgical procedure to 3 groups (n = 40) and randomly allocated to receive multidoses of parecoxib 40 mg/dose or placebo. Efficacy was assessed by total morphine used from patient-controlled analgesic pump, pain intensity, pain relief, and the patient's subjective rating of the medication.

RESULTS

Parecoxib 40 mg reduced the total amount of morphine required over 48 hours by 39% relative morphine reduction compared with placebo (P = 0.0001). Pain at rest was reduced by 30% (P = 0.0001). Ninety percent of patients given parecoxib experienced at least 50% maximum total pain relief compared with 58% treated with placebo. The number-needed-to-treat for 1 patient to have at least half pain relief was 3.1 (2.0-4.6). Patients' subjective rating of the medication was described as "excellent, good, and fair" by 48%, 43%, and 8% in the parecoxib group, respectively, compared with 21%, 50%, and 28% of placebo patients (P = 0.004). Overall adverse effects of patients receiving parecoxib and morphine were comparable to those receiving morphine alone.

CONCLUSION

The present study demonstrates that the perioperative administration of parecoxib with patient-controlled analgesic morphine after lumber spine surgery resulted in significantly improved postoperative analgesic management as defined by reduction in opioid requirement, lower pain scores, and higher patients' subjective rating of the medication.

Valdecoxib provides effective pain relief following acute ankle sprain

We sought to determine whether valdecoxib is as effective as diclofenac in treating acute ankle sprain. Patients (n=202) with acute first- and second-degree ankle sprain were randomized to valdecoxib (40 mg twice daily on day 1 followed by 40 mg once daily on days 2-7) or diclofenac (75 mg twice daily). The primary efficacy end-point was the Patient's Assessment of Ankle Pain visual analogue scale (VAS, 0-100 mm) value on day 4. Valdecoxib was as efficacious as diclofenac in treating the signs and symptoms of acute ankle sprain. The mean VAS reduction in ankle pain on day 4 was not different between groups; the two-sided 95% confidence interval for the between-group difference was within the prespecified limit for non-inferiority (10 mm). There were no significant differences between groups for all secondary efficacy end-points. The two treatments were similarly effective and well tolerated for treatment of acute ankle sprain.

Cost analysis applied to postoperative analgesia regimens: a comparison between parecoxib and propacetamol

BACKGROUND

Postoperative pain management represents a significant part of perioperative costs. Non-opioid analgesics are often used in combination with opiates to improve pain relief and reduce opioid-related side effects.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the costs and cost efficacy of intravenous (i.v.) parecoxib versus i.v. propacetamol in postoperative pain.

METHODS

A prospective, randomised, double-blind, clinical evaluation was performed to compare the efficacy of a single bolus injection of 40 mg parecoxib and 2 g propacetamol, administered twice within 12 h following surgical repair of inguinal hernia. Resources for each arm of treatment were collected, and total costs were determined, including costs of drug acquisition, devices and labour for preparation of the two analgesic drugs. Cost-efficacy analysis was performed as the cost to achieve complete satisfaction with analgesia. Incremental cost efficacy was determined as the ratio between the differential costs and the differential patient satisfaction. The analysis was performed from an institutional perspective over a 12 h time frame.

RESULTS

A total of 182 patients was evaluated. Pain at rest and morphine consumption were observed to be reduced in the parecoxib group. The percentages of patients totally satisfied with their pain management 12 h after surgery were 87% in the parecoxib-treated group and 70% in the propacetamol-treated group (P < 0.01). The average cost per patient was higher in the parecoxib group, 6.65 euros vs 5.28 euros in the propacetamol group). Cost per patient satisfied was calculated at a mean value of 7.64 euros for parecoxib and 7.54 euros for propacetamol. Incremental cost per additional patient satisfied was 8.02 euros in the parecoxib-treated group when preparation costs were included. Sensitivity analysis (+/-15%), including a bootstrap method applied to costs and efficacy, did not modify these conclusions.

CONCLUSION

Parecoxib exhibits higher cost and greater patient satisfaction than does propacetamol. From a cost-efficacy approach, incremental cost per additional patient satisfied for parecoxib treatment must be analysed in light of overall perioperative pharmaceutical cost.

Valdecoxib for Postoperative Pain Management After Cesarean Delivery: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study

Although nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) improve postoperative pain relief after cesarean delivery, they carry potential side effects (e.g., bleeding). Perioperative cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 inhibitors show similar analgesic efficacy to nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs in many surgical models but have not been studied after cesarean delivery. We designed this randomized double-blind study to determine the analgesic efficacy and opioid-sparing effects of valdecoxib after cesarean delivery. Healthy patients undergoing elective cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia were randomized to receive oral valdecoxib 20 mg or placebo every 12 h for 72 h postoperatively. As a result of cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors safety concerns that became apparent during this study, the study was terminated early after evaluating 48 patients. We found no differences in total analgesic consumption between the valdecoxib and placebo groups (121 +/- 70 versus 143 +/- 77 morphine mg-equivalents, respectively; P = 0.26). Pain at rest and during activity were similar between the groups despite adequate post hoc power to have detected a clinically significant difference. There were also no differences in IV morphine requirements, time to first analgesic request, patient satisfaction, side effects, breast-feeding success, or functional activity. Postoperative pain was generally well controlled. Adding valdecoxib after cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia with intrathecal morphine is not supported at this time.

Parecoxib vs. lornoxicam in the treatment of postoperative pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a prospective randomized placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are considered as an effective treatment of postoperative pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. COX-2 inhibitors are newer drugs having less adverse effects. Data supporting their efficacy postoperatively in comparison to older non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are scarce. Our study is a prospective, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial comparing the efficacy of lornoxicam vs. parecoxib for the management of pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We enrolled 76 patients, ASA I and II, scheduled for elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The patients were randomized to receive before induction parecoxib 40 mg i.v., lornoxicam 8 mg i.v. or placebo. Pain at rest and on movement was assessed using a visual analogue scale at 0, 6, 12 h postoperatively. Total meperidine consumption and adverse effects were also recorded.

RESULTS

At 12 h, visual analogue scale scores at rest and on movement were significantly lower with parecoxib and lornoxicam compared with control ( P = 0.047). The percentage of patients needing meperidine and the average dose of meperidine administered was significantly lower with parecoxib and lornoxicam compared with control (P < 0.001 and P = 0.018). There was no difference between parecoxib and lornoxicam. One patient receiving lornoxicam vomited.

CONCLUSIONS

Parecoxib 40 mg i.v. and lornoxicam 8 mg i.v. were equianalgesic and both were more efficacious than placebo for the management of pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

The COX-2 specific inhibitor Valdecoxib versus tramadol in acute ankle sprain: a multicenter randomized, controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The cyclooxygenase-2 specific inhibitor valdecoxib has not been approved in the United States for treatment of acute pain.

HYPOTHESIS

Valdecoxib 20 mg twice daily or once daily (both with a 40-mg loading dose) is not clinically inferior to tramadol for treating the signs and symptoms of acute ankle pain.

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized, controlled clinical trial; Level of evidence, 1.

METHODS

Patients (N = 829) with acute first- or second-degree ankle sprain received 7 days' treatment with valdecoxib 20 mg either twice daily or once daily (both with 40-mg loading dose), tramadol 50 mg 4 times daily, or placebo. The primary end point was Patient's Assessment of Ankle Pain visual analog scale on day 4; a test of noninferiority compared valdecoxib with tramadol.

RESULTS

On day 4, both valdecoxib doses were significantly better versus placebo and were comparable with tramadol in relieving ankle pain. On day 7, valdecoxib, but not tramadol, significantly reduced pain versus placebo. On days 4 and 7, more patients resumed normal walking with valdecoxib (45%-47% and 73%-79%, respectively) than with placebo (35% and 64%, respectively) or tramadol (38% and 67%, respectively). In contrast to valdecoxib, the number of withdrawals due to adverse events was significantly higher in the tramadol group (12.2% vs 3.4%; P = .0005).

CONCLUSIONS

Valdecoxib was comparable with tramadol and was significantly better than placebo in treating acute ankle sprain, and it enabled more patients to resume normal walking on days 4 and 7. Both valdecoxib and tramadol were well tolerated.

Methylprednisolone reduces pain, emesis, and fatigue after breast augmentation surgery: a single-dose, randomized, parallel-group study with methylprednisolone 125 mg, parecoxib 40 mg, and placebo

We compared methylprednisolone 125 mg IV (n = 68) and parecoxib 40 mg IV (n = 68) with placebo (n = 68) given before breast augmentation surgery in a randomized, double-blind parallel group study. Surgery was performed under local anesthesia combined with propofol/fentanyl sedation. Methylprednisolone and parecoxib decreased pain at rest and dynamic pain intensity from 1 to 6 h after surgery compared with placebo (mean summed pain intensity(1-6 h): methylprednisolone [17.25; 95% confidence interval [CI], 14.85-19.65] versus placebo [21.7; 95% CI, 19.3-24.1]; P < 0.03; parecoxib [15.25; 95% CI, 13.25-17.25] versus placebo; P < 0.001; mean summed dynamic pain intensity(1-6 h): methylprednisolone [22.7; 95% CI, 20.1-23.3] versus placebo [28.4; 95% CI, 26.0-30.8]; P < 0.01; parecoxib [20.9; 95% CI, 18.6-23.2] versus placebo; P < 0.001). Both rescue drug consumption and actual pain (all observations before and after rescue) during the first 6 h were similar in the two active drug groups and significantly reduced compared with placebo. Using a composite score of actual pain intensity and rescue analgesic use, the active drugs were significantly superior to placebo (P < 0.001 for both active drugs). Postoperative nausea and vomiting was reduced after methylprednisolone administration (incidence, 30%), but not after parecoxib (incidence, 37%), during the first 24 h compared with placebo (incidence, 60%; P < 0.001). Fatigue was reduced by methylprednisolone (incidence, 44%), but not by parecoxib (incidence, 59%), compared with placebo (incidence, 66%; P < 0.05). In conclusion, methylprednisolone 125 mg IV given before breast augmentation surgery had analgesic and rescue analgesic-sparing effects comparable with those of parecoxib 40 mg IV. Methylprednisolone, but not parecoxib, reduced nausea, vomiting, and fatigue.

A procedure-specific systematic review and consensus recommendations for analgesia after total hip replacement

Total hip replacement is a major surgical procedure usually associated with significant pain in the early postoperative period. Several anaesthetic and analgesic techniques are in common clinical use for this procedure but, to date, clinical studies of pain after total hip replacement have not been systematically assessed. Using the Cochrane protocol, we have conducted a systematic review of analgesic, anaesthetic and surgical interventions affecting postoperative pain after total hip replacement. In addition to the review, transferable evidence from other relevant procedures and clinical practice observations collated by the Delphi method were used to develop evidence-based recommendations for the treatment of postoperative pain. For primary total hip replacement, PROSPECT recommends either general anaesthesia combined with a peripheral nerve block that is continued after surgery or an intrathecal (spinal) injection of local anaesthetic and opioid. The primary analgesic technique should be combined with a step-down approach using paracetamol plus conventional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, with strong or weak opioids as required.

Selective COX-2 inhibitors and risk of myocardial infarction

Selective inhibitors of cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2, 'coxibs') are highly effective anti-inflammatory and analgesic drugs that exert their action by preventing the formation of prostanoids. Recently some coxibs, which were designed to exploit the advantageous effects of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs while evading their side effects, have been reported to increase the risk of myo cardial infarction and atherothrombotic events. This has led to the withdrawal of rofecoxib from global markets, and warnings have been issued by drug authorities about similar events during the use of celecoxib or valdecoxib/parecoxib, bringing about questions of an inherent atherothrombotic risk of all coxibs and consequences that should be drawn by health care professionals. These questions need to be addressed in light of the known effects of selective inhibition of COX-2 on the cardiovascular system. Although COX-2, in contrast to the cyclooxygenase-1 (COX-1) isoform, is regarded as an inducible enzyme that only has a role in pathophysiological processes like pain and inflammation, experimental and clinical studies have shown that COX-2 is constitutively expressed in tissues like the kidney or vascular endothelium, where it executes important physiological functions. COX-2-dependent formation of prostanoids not only results in the mediation of pain or inflammatory signals but also in the maintenance of vascular integrity. Especially prostacyclin (PGI(2)), which exerts vasodilatory and antiplatelet properties, is formed to a significant extent by COX-2, and its levels are reduced to less than half of normal when COX-2 is inhibited. This review outlines the rationale for the development of selective COX-2 inhibitors and the pathophysiological consequences of selective inhibition of COX-2 with special regard to vasoactive prostaglandins. It describes coxibs that are current ly available, evaluates the current knowledge on the risk of atherothrombotic events associated with their intake and critically discusses the consequences that should be drawn from these insights.

Role of cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors in postoperative pain management

Cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 inhibitors are as efficacious as nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for the treatment of postoperative pain but have the advantages of a better gastrointestinal side-effect profile as well as a lack of antiplatelet effects. There have been recent concerns regarding the cardiovascular side effects of COX-2 inhibitors. Nonetheless, they remain a valuable option for postoperative pain management. The pharmacology of these agents and available studies are reviewed.

Video capsule endoscopy to prospectively assess small bowel injury with celecoxib, naproxen plus omeprazole, and placebo

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Data indicate that cyclooxygenase-2-specific inhibitors cause less gastroduodenal mucosal damage than nonspecific NSAIDS, but their effects on the small bowel mucosa are less well recognized. In a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with video capsule endoscopy (VCE) we prospectively evaluated the incidence of small bowel injury in healthy subjects treated with celecoxib compared to naproxen plus omeprazole.

METHODS

We randomly assigned subjects with normal baseline VCEs to celecoxib 200 mg twice daily (n = 120), naproxen 500 mg twice daily plus omeprazole 20 mg once daily (n = 118), or placebo (n = 118) for 2 weeks. The primary end point was the mean number of small bowel mucosal breaks per subject.

RESULTS

Baseline VCE found small bowel lesions in 13.8% (57/413) of screened subjects, who became ineligible for randomization. The mean number of small bowel mucosal breaks per subject and the percentage of subjects with these mucosal breaks were 2.99 +/- 0.51, 55% for naproxen/omeprazole compared to 0.32 +/- 0.10, 16% for celecoxib and 0.11 +/- 0.04, 7% for placebo (P < .001, both comparisons). The magnitude of the difference between celecoxib and placebo was small but statistically significant (P = .04).

CONCLUSIONS

Among healthy subjects with lesion-free baseline VCEs, celecoxib was associated with significantly fewer small bowel mucosal breaks than naproxen plus omeprazole. This study also showed that the background incidence of small bowel lesions in healthy adults is not insignificant and should be considered in future trials with VCE.

Valdecoxib for treatment of primary dysmenorrhea. A randomized, double-blind comparison with placebo and naproxen

OBJECTIVE

To compare the analgesic efficacy of valdecoxib with placebo and naproxen sodium for relieving menstrual cramping and pain due to primary dysmenorrhea.

DESIGN

Single-center, double-blind study with a 4-period, 4-sequence crossover design. Patients assessed pain intensity and pain relief at regular intervals up to 12 hours following the initial dose.

SETTING

Privately owned outpatient clinic.

PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS

One hundred twenty patients with moderate to severe menstrual cramping were randomized. Eighty-seven patients completed all treatment cycles.

INTERVENTIONS

Valdecoxib 20 mg or 40 mg, naproxen sodium 550 mg, or placebo twice a day as required for < or =3 days in a single menstrual cycle.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Both doses of valdecoxib (20 and 40 mg) were comparable to naproxen sodium and superior to placebo at all time points assessed for each of the primary end points. Valdecoxib and naproxen sodium had comparable onset and duration of action. Although the study design allowed patients 2 doses per day, only 15% and 20% of patients in the valdecoxib 20 mg and valdecoxib 40 mg groups, respectively, required remedication within the first 12 hours. The incidence of adverse events was similar between active and placebo groups.

CONCLUSION

Valdecoxib provided a fast onset of analgesic action, a level of efficacy similar to naproxen sodium, and a high level of patient satisfaction in the relief of menstrual pain due to primary dysmenorrhea. Valdecoxib was effective and well tolerated and thus appears to be a viable treatment for menstrual pain due to primary dysmenorrhea.

Making Progress in the Management of Postoperative Pain: A Review of the Cyclooxygenase 2–Specific Inhibitors

Postoperative pain is one of the most common forms of acute pain. Optimal pain management decreases the stress response to surgery, reduces complications, improves recovery time, and results in improved economic and quality-of-life outcomes. A preoperative, multimodal approach to postoperative analgesia can be achieved through a combination of therapies that continue beyond the immediate perioperative time frame. This multimodal approach provides superior analgesia with opioid-sparing effects and reduced opioid-related adverse events. Although the use of nonspecific nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs in a surgical setting has been limited owing to concerns of renal and gastrointestinal complications as well as platelet dysfunction, cyclooxygenase (COX)-2-specific inhibitors appear to be safe and effective alone and in combination with opioids for a variety of surgical procedures. The COX-2-specific inhibitors may have an important role in extending the use of balanced, multimodal analgesia to a broad surgical population, thus ultimately improving patient outcomes after surgery.

Dose-ranging analgesic study of Prosorb diclofenac potassium in postsurgical dental pain

BACKGROUND

ProSorb diclofenac potassium (K) is a novel, liquid-filled rapid-dispersion formulation of the nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug diclofenac, placed into soft gelatin capsules. Its time to maximal plasma drug concentration has been shown to be approximately half, and its maximal plasma drug concentration nearly twice, that of immediate-release diclofenac K tablets.

OBJECTIVE

This study compared the analgesic dose-response relationship and tolerability of 3 doses of ProSorb diclofenac K and placebo in the treatment of pain after dental impaction surgery.

METHODS

This randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled parallel-group study was conducted at 6 centers across the United States. Patients aged 18 to 65 years with moderate or severe pain after the removal of > or =1 impacted mandibular third molar were randomly assigned to receive a single dose of ProSorb diclofenac K 25, 50, or 100 mg or placebo. Pain intensity and relief were assessed up to 6 hours after dosing. Rescue treatment was allowed after 1 hour. Efficacy end points included the summed pain intensity difference over 3 and 6 hours (SPID3 and 6); total pain relief at 3 and 6 hours (TOTPAR3 and 6); median times to onset of perceptible and meaningful relief (analgesic onset) and rescue medication use (analgesic duration); and cumulative percentage of patients using rescue medication. Tolerability was assessed using vital sign measurements and spontaneous reporting of adverse events.

RESULTS

A total of 265 patients (154 women, 111 men; mean age, 23.3 years) were enrolled. All 3 ProSorb diclofenac K groups showed higher SPID6 and TOTPAR6 scores and longer median times to rescue medication use than the placebo group (all, P < 0.001). For these end points, a dose-response relationship was evident between the 100-mg dose and the 25- and 50-mg doses (P < or = 0.05); the 25- and 50-mg doses were similar. In the diclofenac groups, median onset times for first perceptible (< or =22.5 min) and meaningful (< or =53.0 min) relief were significantly more rapid than placebo (P < or = 0.01). Proportions of patients requiring rescue analgesic were < or =50.8% with diclofenac compared with 79.4% with placebo. Proportions of patients assigning a global evaluation of good or better was > or =68% with diclofenac compared with 21% for placebo. Tolerability was similar across all treatment groups.

CONCLUSION

In this study of patients treated for pain following dental impaction surgery, single doses of ProSorb diclofenac K 25, 50, and 100 mg were more efficacious than placebo with respect to reduction of pain. All 3 doses provided a rapid analgesic onset and were well tolerated.

Reduced incidence of upper gastrointestinal ulcer complications with the COX-2 selective inhibitor, valdecoxib

AIM

In a predefined analysis, data were pooled from eight blinded, randomized, controlled trials, and separately from three long-term, open-label trials to determine the rate of upper gastrointestinal ulcer complications with the cyclo-oxygenase-2 selective inhibitor, valdecoxib, vs. non-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.

METHODS

In randomized, controlled trials, 7434 osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis patients received placebo (n = 973), valdecoxib 5-80 mg daily (n = 4362), or a non-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (naproxen, ibuprofen or diclofenac; n = 2099) for 12-26 weeks. In long-term, open-label trials, 2871 patients received valdecoxib 10-80 mg daily for up to 1 year. All potential events were reviewed by a blinded, independent review committee based on a priori definitions of ulcer complications (perforations, obstructions, bleeds).

RESULTS

In randomized, controlled trials, 19 of 955 potential events were adjudicated to be ulcer complications. Valdecoxib was associated with a significantly lower ulcer complication rate than non-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (0.68% vs. 1.96%, all patients; 0.29% vs. 2.08%, non-aspirin users; P < 0.05). In long-term, open-label trials, seven of 310 potential events were adjudicated to be ulcer complications; the annualized incidence for valdecoxib was 0.39% (seven of 1791 patient-years) for all patients and 0.2% (three of 1472 patient-years) for non-aspirin users.

CONCLUSIONS

Valdecoxib, including above recommended doses, is associated with a significantly lower rate of upper gastrointestinal ulcer complications than therapeutic doses of non-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.

Dose-response relationship between opioid use and adverse effects after ambulatory surgery

This health outcomes analysis based on data from a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial determined dose-response relationship between opioid use and related symptoms. All patients received intravenous fentanyl on demand for pain predischarge, and oral acetaminophen 500 mg/hydrocodone 5 mg every 4-6 hours as needed postdischarge for up to 7 days postsurgery. Patients completed an opioid-related Symptom Distress Scale (SDS) questionnaire every 24 hours postdischarge for 7 days, which assessed 12 opioid-related symptoms by 3 ordinal measures: frequency, severity, and bothersomeness. Clinically meaningful events (CMEs) were defined based on the responses to this questionnaire. Opioid use was converted to morphine equivalent dose (MED). The dose-response relationship between composite SDS scores and MED on Day 1, on Days 0 and 1, and on Days 1-4, was assessed. SDS scores for all 12 symptoms within the 3 dimensions were significantly associated with MED on Day 1 (F-value=1.56; P=0.04), as well as cumulative MED used on Days 0 and 1 (F-value=1.85; P<0.01). Patients with a specific CME used a higher MED than those without a CME on Day 1 (P<0.001). Between Days 1 and 4, patients with a higher number of patient-CME-days used a significantly higher MED. Regression analyses suggested that once the MED reached a threshold, approximately every 4 mg increase in MED was related to 1 additional patient-CME-day (P<0.01). A dose-response relationship empirically exists between MED and directly assessed opioid-related CMEs after ambulatory laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Once daily MED reaches a threshold, every 3-4 mg increase will be associated with 1 additional clinically meaningful opioid-related symptom, or 1 additional patient-day with an opioid-related CME.

Preoperative Parenteral Parecoxib and Follow-Up Oral Valdecoxib Reduce Length of Stay and Improve Quality of Patient Recovery After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Surgery

In this randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study, we evaluated the effects of preoperative IV parecoxib sodium (parecoxib) followed by postoperative oral valdecoxib on length of stay, resource utilization, opioid-related side effects, and patient recovery after elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Patients were randomized to receive a single IV dose of parecoxib 40 mg (n = 134) or placebo (n = 129) 30-45 min before the induction of anesthesia. Six to 12 h after the IV dose, the parecoxib group received a single oral dose of valdecoxib 40 mg, followed by valdecoxib 40 mg once daily on postoperative Days 1-4 and then 40 mg once daily as needed on Days 5-7. Patients in the parecoxib/valdecoxib group had a shorter length of stay in the postanesthesia care unit (78 +/- 47 min) compared with those taking placebo (90 +/- 49 min; P < 0.05). Patients in the parecoxib/valdecoxib group also had reduced pain intensity and, after discharge, experienced a significant reduction in vomiting in the first 24 h, slept better, returned to normal activity earlier, and expressed greater satisfaction than placebo patients (P < 0.05). Preoperative parecoxib followed by postoperative valdecoxib is a valuable adjunct for treating pain and improving patient outcome after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

IMPLICATIONS

The administration of preoperative IV parecoxib followed by oral valdecoxib after surgery resulted in a shorter length of stay in the postoperative anesthesia care unit, a better quality of postoperative recovery, and a faster return to normal activity, with greater patient satisfaction, after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Contemporary trends in acute pain management

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In the management of acute pain, the ability to prevent the onset of pain in the immediate postoperative period, lessen its intensity, and interfere with the development of sensitization contributing to hyperalgesia for days following a procedure can greatly benefit the patient, rather than postoperative attempts to decrease pain after it has reached full intensity.

RECENT FINDINGS

Patients benefit from receiving optimal NSAID doses. These agents are effective, relatively safe, and reduce the need for opioids. In situations where pain can be anticipated, the NSAID may be optimized by preoperative administration and continuing to dose the NSAID on a regular schedule to minimize pain and inflammation. Selective COX-2 inhibitors can also prevent pain but without concern for effects on platelet function and have a longer duration of action than traditional NSAIDs. Once the dose of NSAID has been optimized, but pain persists, opioid use may be a consideration. A commercially available combination product containing opioid and acetaminophen may be a good option and is easy to prescribe. Acetaminophen's site of action differs from that of NSAIDs, and acetaminophen's analgesic effect is considered synergistic when combined with NSAIDs and opioids. When prescribing combination opioid and acetaminophen analgesic products or acetaminophen alone, the practitioner must caution the patient not to exceed 4 g of acetaminophen per day due to concerns with hepatic injury. Given that the patient has already been prescribed an optimal and/or ceiling dose of NSAID, combination products containing aspirin, an NSAID, should be avoided. As opioids have no ceiling dose, there are some situations where opioid dosing is better done with the opioid prescribed separately. This permits increasing the opioid to the needed analgesic dose with no concerns for acetaminophen toxicity.

SUMMARY

Careful selection of an effective analgesic regimen can prevent the stress and anxiety associated with acute postoperative pain and breakthrough pain. Pain prevention has greater benefits than attempts at rescue therapy when pain exacerbation occurs. A variety of pain management regimens are presented based on empirical estimates of pain intensity and an application of sound pharmacological principles.

[Non-opioid analgesics for perioperative pain therapy. Risks and rational basis for use]

Non-opioid analgesics play a central role in the management of postoperative pain. In this review, the pharmacology, the analgesic efficacy and the side-effects of non-opioid analgesics are summarized. First, the pharmacology of diclofenac, acetyl salicylic acid, dipyrone, acetaminophen and the COX-2 inhibitors is described. Second, the analgesic efficacy of non-opioid analgesics is analyzed for moderate pain (e.g. ambulatory surgery) and for moderate to severe pain (e.g. abdominal surgery-in combination with opioids). There is limited evidence for an additive analgesic effect of two non-opioid analgesics. Third, the major side-effects of non-opioid analgesics are discussed in relation to the pathophysiology, the frequency and the clinical relevance of these effects. In particular, side-effects on the gastrointestinal tract (ulcus formation), on coagulation (bleeding and thrombosis), on the renal (renal insufficiency), the pulmonary (bronchospasm) and the hematopoetic systems (agranulocytosis) are described. Recommendations for the clinical use of non-opioid analgesics for perioperative pain therapy are given.

Valdecoxib versus rofecoxib in acute postsurgical pain: results of a randomized controlled trial

The analgesic efficacy of the cyclooxygenase-2 specific inhibitors, valdecoxib and rofecoxib, were evaluated in patients following oral surgery. In a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial, patients experiencing moderate or severe pain received single-dose valdecoxib 40 mg (n=99), rofecoxib 50 mg (n=101), or placebo (n=50) within 4 hours after multiple third molar extraction with bone removal. Onset of action was significantly faster with valdecoxib 40 mg (30 minutes) compared with rofecoxib 50 mg (45 minutes), as measured by pain intensity difference and pain relief scores (P <or= 0.05). Valdecoxib and rofecoxib provided a similar magnitude of analgesic effect, as measured by time-weighted sum of total pain relief, at 6 hours post dosing. However, valdecoxib was significantly superior to rofecoxib with respect to mean time-specific pain intensity difference and pain relief scores from 30 minutes to 1.5 hours post dose (P < 0.05). All treatments were well tolerated.

Effect of rofecoxib on platelet aggregation and blood loss in gynaecological and breast surgery compared with diclofenac

BACKGROUND

Non-selective cyclooxygenase (COX) inhibitors or non-steroidal anti- inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are frequently omitted for perioperative pain relief because of potential side-effects. COX-2-selective inhibitors may have a more favourable side-effect profile. This study tested the hypothesis that the COX-2-selective inhibitor rofecoxib has less influence on platelet function than the NSAID diclofenac in gynaecological surgery. In addition, analgesic efficacy and side-effects of the two drugs were compared.

METHODS

In this single-centre, prospective, double-blind, active controlled study, women undergoing vaginal hysterectomy (n=25) or breast surgery (n=25) under general anaesthesia received preoperatively 50 mg of rofecoxib p.o. followed 8 and 16 h later by two doses of placebo or three doses of diclofenac 50 mg p.o. at the same time points. We assessed arachidonic acid-stimulated platelet aggregation before and 4 h after the first dose of study medication, estimated intraoperative blood loss, and haemoglobin loss until the first morning after surgery. Analgesic efficacy, use of rescue analgesics, and side-effects were also recorded.

RESULTS

In the rofecoxib group, stimulated platelet aggregation was disturbed less (P=0.02), and estimated intraoperative blood loss (P=0.01) and the decrease in haemoglobin were lower (P=0.01). At similar pain ratings, the use of anti-emetic drugs was less in the rofecoxib group (P=0.03).

CONCLUSION

Besides having a smaller effect on platelet aggregation, one oral dose of rofecoxib 50 mg given before surgery provided postoperative analgesia similar to that given by three doses of diclofenac 50 mg and was associated with less use of anti-emetics and less surgical blood loss in gynaecological surgery compared with diclofenac.

COX-2 selective inhibitors: a literature review of analgesic efficacy and safety in oral-maxillofacial surgery

BACKGROUND

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are the most commonly prescribed analgesic agents in surgical outpatients. Major limitations of NSAIDs are their gastrointestinal (GI) adverse events (perforation, ulceration, and bleeding), impairment of hemostatic function, and renal failure (with long-term therapy). A new class of NSAIDs, the COX-2 selective inhibitors (CSIs or Coxibs), have been developed with the aim of reducing the GI adverse events of traditional NSAIDs while maintaining their effective anti-inflammatory and analgesic properties.

OBJECTIVE

This is a narrative review of the literature aimed to discuss analgesic efficacy, clinical safety and cost-benefit ratio of CSIs in the treatment of post-oral surgery pain.

METHODS

Relevant drug and clinical studies of analgesic efficacy and safety of CSIs in the management of postoperative dental pain were identified through searches of MEDLINE/PubMed, in peer-reviewed journals of medicine and dentistry. The Food and Drug Administration Web site was searched for data of tolerability. Hand-searching included several dental journals and bibliographies of relevant studies. The last electronic search was conducted in April 2003.

RESULTS

Data from well-designed, randomized, controlled trials of CSIs on the management of post-oral surgery pain indicate that these drugs are as well-effective analgesic agents as traditional NSAIDs and offer clinical advantages in terms of GI safety and unimpaired platelet function. CSIs do not offer advantages of renal safety over traditional NSAIDs.

CONCLUSION

Although CSIs display analgesic efficacy similar to that of traditional NSAIDs in the treatment of acute, post-oral surgery pain, there is reasonable evidence that these new drugs are preferable in patients who are at an increased risk of developing serious upper-GI complications, in patients who take aspirin for cardiovascular comorbid conditions, and in those allergic to aspirin. Furthermore, CSIs may be given more safely than NSAIDs in perioperative settings, because of their lack of impairment of the blood-clotting. However, the high costs of CSIs available at present limit their routine use in the short period of postoperative dental pain-in most cases 2 to 4 days after surgery-because there is not an increased risk of developing serious GI complications with the use of cost-saving NSAIDs. The GI safety advantages of CSIs may improve the tolerability of long-duration analgesic therapies, such as cases of painful temporomandibular joint disorders and chronic orofacial pain. Further studies are needed to determine the cost-benefit ratio of using CSIs for the management of acute pain.

Valdecoxib

Letrozole (Femara), a nonsteroidal, third-generation aromatase inhibitor administered orally once daily, has shown efficacy in the treatment of postmenopausal women with early-stage or advanced, hormone-sensitive breast cancer. In early-stage disease, extending adjuvant endocrine therapy with letrozole (beyond the standard 5-year period of tamoxifen) improved disease-free survival; compared with placebo there was a 43% relative reduction in disease recurrences or new contralateral breast tumours at a median follow-up of 2.4 years. The results of 4 months' neoadjuvant treatment with letrozole or tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with untreated primary disease favour letrozole. In advanced breast cancer, letrozole was superior to tamoxifen as first-line treatment; time to disease progression was significantly longer (9.4 vs 6.0 months, p < 0.0001) and objective response rate was significantly greater with letrozole, but median overall survival was similar between groups. For second-line therapy of advanced breast cancer that had progressed on antiestrogen therapy, letrozole showed efficacy equivalent to that of anastrozole and similar to or better than that of megestrol acetate. Letrozole is generally well tolerated and has a similar tolerability profile to tamoxifen; the most common treatment-related adverse events were hot flushes, nausea and hair thinning. In patients with tumours that had progressed on antiestrogen therapy, letrozole was tolerated as least as well as, or better than, anastrozole or megestrol acetate. In the trial of extended adjuvant therapy, adverse events reported more frequently with letrozole than placebo were hot flushes, arthralgia, myalgia and arthritis. The long-term effects of letrozole on bone mineral density or lipid profile have not been determined and these parameters may require monitoring. In several pharmacoeconomic modelling studies from various public healthcare system perspectives, letrozole was considered a cost effective choice for first-line (vs tamoxifen) or second-line (vs megestrol acetate) treatment for advanced breast cancer in postmenopausal women. In conclusion, letrozole 2.5 mg/day is effective in the treatment of postmenopausal women with early-stage or advanced breast cancer. The efficacy, cost effectiveness and favourable tolerability profile of letrozole are reflected in current treatment guidelines recommending the drug as first-line therapy for advanced breast cancer. Letrozole is superior to tamoxifen for first-line treatment and is at least as effective as standard second-line treatments in disease that has progressed on antiestrogen therapy. For early-stage disease, letrozole is superior to tamoxifen in the neoadjuvant setting, and prolongs disease-free survival when administered after the standard 5-year period of adjuvant tamoxifen therapy.

Assessment of the safety of selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors: where are we in 2003?

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are among the most widely used drugs worldwide despite their well-documented adverse gastrointestinal (GI) effects. The risk of developing a severe GI event varies from patient to patient and NSAID to NSAID. Selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors (coxibs) have been designed to have similar efficacy but less GI toxicity than traditional NSAIDs, and have been shown to have an improved GI tolerability and less adverse events across a range of different GI safety assessments. In clinical trials, particularly VIGOR and CLASS, rofecoxib and celecoxib, respectively, significantly reduce the risk of ulcers and ulcer complications than nonselective NSAID comparators with ulcer rates comparable to placebo. The real benefit of a coxib comes from the sparing of the thromboxane and hence preservation of normal platelet function. Thus, there is less risk of bleeding with selective inhibition of COX-2, which is the most common and serious complication of non-selective NSAIDs. Moreover, bleeding can occur anywhere in the GI tract. Although some concern has been raised about the cardiovascular safety of coxibs, when used in recommended doses, there is no convincing evidence that patients treated with a coxib have an increased risk of cardiovascular thrombotic events. Different approaches have been advocated to minimize NSAID-related GI toxicity. Choice of less harmful NSAIDs such as coxib has been one of the strategies promoted in guidelines. The introduction of coxibs with a higher benefit-risk ratio has dramatically changed the therapeutic scenario for anti-inflammatory treatment in the clinical practice.

Cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor treatment of older osteoarthritis patients

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are often prescribed to treat osteoarthritis. Two cyclooxygenase isoenzymes prompted the development selective COX-2 inhibitors. The development, efficacy, and toxicity of COX-2 inhibitor treatment of osteoarthritis are summarized.

Valdecoxib: a review

BACKGROUND

Traditional nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) such as diclofenac, ibuprofen, naproxen, and related agents are nonselective inhibitors of both cyclooxygenase-1 (COX-1) and COX-2, which catalyze prostaglandin synthesis. This inhibition accounts not only for the analgesic, anti-inflammatory, and antipyretic effects of these agents, but also for side effects such as gastric mucosal damage and renal toxicity. Substantial evidence suggests that sparing COX-1 is advantageous for gastric safety.

OBJECTIVE

This article reviews available information on the new COX-2-selective inhibitor valdecoxib, including its clinical pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, adverse effects, potential drug interactions, and contraindications and warnings. Results of clinical trials of efficacy and tolerability are summarized.

METHODS

Articles for inclusion in this review were identified through searches of PubMed and MEDLINE (1966-December 2002) and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (1970-December 2002). Search terms included valdecoxib, Bextra, COX-2-selective inhibitors, coxibs, and selective cyclooxygenase inhibitors. The reference lists of identified articles were reviewed for additional publications. Product information was also obtained from the manufacturer of valdecoxib.

RESULTS

Fourteen clinical studies involving > 4000 patients have been conducted. Valdecoxib was significantly more effective than placebo in the treatment of adult rheumatoid arthritis, osteoarthritis, pain associated with primary dysmenorrhea, and postoperative pain. Valdecoxib was comparable to naproxen for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in 1 study and equivalent to naproxen for the treatment of osteoarthritis in other studies. Three studies found valdecoxib comparable to naproxen sodium for the relief of moderate to severe pain due to primary dysmenorrhea, and others found valdecoxib comparable to oxycodone plus acetaminophen and significantly more effective than rofecoxib for the relief of pain associated with dental surgery (P < 0.05). Four safety studies and 2 reviews of clinical trials documented lower rates of endoscopic gastroduodenal ulcer formation with valdecoxib compared with ibuprofen, naproxen, and diclofenac (P < 0.001 to P < 0.05). Valdecoxib did not inhibit platelet function (bleeding time and platelet aggregation) in healthy adults or in the elderly. Due to the risk of potentially serious skin and allergic reactions, patients who are allergic to sulfa-containing drugs should not take valdecoxib. The drug should be discontinued immediately if rash develops.

CONCLUSIONS

In clinical trials, valdecoxib was effective for the treatment of osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, and moderate to severe pain associated with primary dysmenorrhea. As with the other COX-2-selective inhibitors (celecoxib and rofecoxib), valdecoxib appears to produce less gastrointestinal toxicity than conventional nonselective NSAIDs, although some of the relevant clinical studies have been published only as abstracts. Use of valdecoxib should be reserved for patients at risk for NSAID-induced gastrointestinal problems.

Review article: The pharmacological properties and clinical use of valdecoxib, a new cyclo-oxygenase-2-selective inhibitor

Cyclo-oxygenase-2-selective inhibitors produce less gastric damage than conventional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Valdecoxib is a new orally administered cyclo-oxygenase-2-selective inhibitor, recently approved for use in osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis and primary dysmenorrhoea in the USA. The drug has been evaluated in more than 60 clinical studies involving more than 14 000 patients and healthy volunteers. The analgesic efficacy of valdecoxib at a dose of 10 mg once daily in both osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis is superior to that of placebo and similar to that of traditional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Valdecoxib is effective in single doses of up to 40 mg for the alleviation of acute menstrual pain and has a rapid onset of action (within 30 min) and a long duration of analgesia (up to 24 h). Valdecoxib is well tolerated and has safety advantages compared with traditional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in terms of less gastrointestinal toxicity and a lack of an effect on platelet function. The incidence of adverse effects involving the kidney (fluid retention, oedema and hypertension) is similar to that of non-selective, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.

The COX-2 specific inhibitor, valdecoxib, is an effective, opioid-sparing analgesic in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty

This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study evaluated the analgesic efficacy and opioid-sparing effects of valdecoxib, a potent COX-2 specific inhibitor, in patients undergoing knee replacement. Patients received morphine by patient-controlled analgesia (PCA), and valdecoxib 40 mg or 80 mg daily, or placebo, for up to two days. Efficacy was assessed by the cumulative amount of morphine administered over 48 hours, pain intensity and patient's evaluation of medication. Morphine consumption over 48 hours by patients receiving valdecoxib 40 mg or 80 mg daily plus morphine was 83.7% and 75.8% (P < 0.05) of the total amount consumed by patients receiving morphine alone. Patients receiving valdecoxib 40 mg and 80 mg daily experienced significantly lower maximum pain intensity on Day 2 (P < 0.05), and rated their study medication significantly higher than patients receiving morphine alone. Valdecoxib plus morphine was well tolerated. Thus, valdecoxib in combination with morphine provides multi-modal analgesia that reduces pain and opioid use and increases patient satisfaction following knee replacement surgery.