Low frequency of upper gastrointestinal complications in a cohort of high-risk patients taking low-dose aspirin or NSAIDS and omeprazole

Gastroduodenal Perforation in Cancer Patients: Association with Chemotherapy and Prognosis

Background: Gastroduodenal perforation stands out as one of the complications in cancer patients. Despite its high mortality, its characteristics are still poorly described. This study aimed to evaluate the characteristics and outcomes of cancer patients who had gastroduodenal perforation, and the influence of chemotherapy (CMT) in these cases. Method: A retrospective analysis of patients who underwent emergency surgery with an intraoperative finding of gastroduodenal perforation. Patients who performed CMT within 60 days before perforation were considered as the CMT group. Results: Among 45 patients included, 16 (35.5%) were classified as the CMT group and the remaining 29 (64.5%) patients as the non-CMT group. There was no difference between the groups regarding sex, age, BMI, comorbidity, and laboratory exams. ECOG 2-3 was significantly more frequent in the CMT group (68.8% vs. 34.5% p = 0.027). Major postoperative complications were similar between both groups (75% vs. 58.6%, p = 0.272). The sepsis of abdominal focus was the main postoperative complication. The 30-day mortality was 55.6%, with no difference between non-CMT and CMT groups (62.5% vs. 51.7%, respectively; p = 0.486). A multivariate analysis of risk factors showed that only an age of ≥65 years was related to 30-day mortality. Conclusions: Patients with gastroduodenal perforation and oncologic treatment present high mortality, regardless of receiving recent CMT.

Preventive effect of ecabet sodium on low-dose aspirin-induced small intestinal mucosal injury: a randomized, double-blind, pilot study

Background

We aimed to investigate how high-dose ecabet sodium affects low-dose aspirin-induced small intestinal mucosal injury in healthy volunteers.

Methods

Healthy volunteers were enrolled randomly into one of two groups with the following drug regimens for 2 weeks: group A, low-dose aspirin once per day and group B, low-dose aspirin and 4.0 g of ecabet sodium. Small bowel capsule endoscopy was performed before and 2 weeks after low-dose aspirin administration.

Results

A significant difference was found in the median number [range] of small intestinal lesions between baseline and two weeks after low-dose aspirin administration in group A (baseline: 1 [0–5], after: 5 [1–11]; p = 0.0059) but not in group B (baseline: 0.5 [0–9], after: 3 [0–23]; p = 0.0586). In group B, although the median number [range] of lesions in the first tertile of the small intestine did not increase two weeks after low-dose aspirin administration (baseline: 0 [0–4], after: 1.5 [0–8]; p = 0.2969), the number of lesions in the second and third tertiles of the small intestine increased significantly (baseline: 0 [0–5], after: 2 [0–15]; p = 0.0469).

Conclusions

Ecabet sodium had a preventive effect on low-dose aspirin-induced small intestinal mucosal injury in the upper part of the small intestine.

Trial registration

ISRCTN 99322160, 01/10/2018.

Dual antiplatelet therapy does not affect the incidence of low-dose aspirin-induced small intestinal mucosal injury in patients after percutaneous coronary intervention for coronary stenosis: a multicenter cross-sectional study

Although low-dose aspirin (LDA) is known to induce small intestinal mucosal injury, the effect of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT; LDA + clopidogrel) on small intestinal mucosa in patients after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for coronary stenosis is unknown. Fifty-one patients with a history of PCI and LDA use were enrolled, and 45 eligible patients were analyzed. Patients were grouped based on DAPT (DAPT: n = 10 and non-DAPT: n = 35) and proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use (PPI user: n = 22 and PPI-free patients: n = 23) to compare small intestinal endoscopic findings. The relationship between LDA-use period and small intestinal endoscopic findings was also examined. Multivariate analysis was performed to identify risk factors for LDA-induced mucosal injury using age, sex, DAPT, PPI, gastric mucoprotective drug, and LDA-use period. The rate of small intestinal mucosal injury incidence did not significantly differ between DAPT and non-DAPT patients (50% vs 51.1%, respectively; p = 0.94), or PPI users and PPI-free patients (50% vs 52.2%, respectively; p = 0.88). Additionally, LDA-use period of ≤24 months (n = 15) yielded a significantly higher rate of small intestinal mucosal injury incidence than LDA-use period >24 months (n = 30) (80% vs 36.7%, respectively; p = 0.006). Multivariate analysis revealed that a LDA-use period of ≤24 months was a significant risk factor for small intestinal mucosal injury (odds ratio: 19.5, 95% confidence interval: 2.48–154.00, p = 0.005). Following PCI for coronary stenosis, neither DAPT nor PPI affected LDA-induced small intestinal mucosal injury. Moreover, patients who used LDA within the last 24 months were at a greater risk of small intestinal mucosal injury.

Aspirin and omeprazole for secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease in patients at risk for aspirin-associated gastric ulcers

INTRODUCTION

Cardiovascular disease is the most important cause of morbidity and mortality in the world and low-dose aspirin is considered the cornerstone of the cardiovascular disease prevention. However, low-dose aspirin use is associated with gastrointestinal adverse effects in the whole gastrointestinal tract. In this setting, co-therapy with a proton pump inhibitor is the most accepted strategy to reduce aspirin related upper gastrointestinal damage. In addition, some adverse effects have been described with proton pump inhibitors long term use. Areas covered: Low-dose aspirin related beneficial and adverse effects in cardiovascular system and gastrointestinal tract are reviewed. In addition, this manuscript summarizes current data on upper gastrointestinal damage prevention and adverse events with proton pump inhibition. Finally, we discuss the benefit/risk ratio of proton pump inhibitor use in patients at risk of gastrointestinal damage taking low-dose aspirin. Expert commentary: Nowadays, with the current available evidence, the combination of low-dose aspirin with proton pump inhibitor is the most effective therapy for cardiovascular prevention in patients at high gastrointestinal risk. However, further studies are needed to discover new effective strategies with less related adverse events.

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.

Should patients prescribed long-term low-dose aspirin receive proton pump inhibitors? A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Several clinical guidelines recommend the use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) in patients taking low-dose aspirin but report no or limited supporting data. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the effects of co-administration of PPIs in patients taking low-dose aspirin on the risks of adverse gastrointestinal (GI) and cardiovascular (CV) events, and on patient adherence to aspirin.

METHODS

We searched PUBMED, EMBASE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases for relevant articles published through November 2013. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies in patients taking low-dose aspirin with and without PPIs. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool (for RCTs) and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (for observational studies). Pooled risk ratios (RRs) were computed using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

We included 13 studies, of which 12 (2 RCTs and 10 observational studies) reported on GI events, and one (cohort study) on both GI bleeding and CV events. No study reported on adherence to aspirin. Co-administration of PPIs in patients receiving low-dose aspirin was associated with risk reductions of 73% (RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.17-0.42) and 50% (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.32-0.80) in the occurrence of peptic ulcer and GI bleeding respectively. There was evidence of bias in publications reporting on the GI events.

CONCLUSIONS

The practice of co-prescribing PPIs in patients taking low-dose aspirin is supported by some data, but the evidence is rather weak. It currently remains unclear whether the benefits of co-administration of PPIs in users of low-dose aspirin outweigh their potential harms.

Primary non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding in NSAID and low-dose aspirin users: development and validation of risk scores for either medication in two large Dutch cohorts

BACKGROUND

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and low-dose acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) have several adverse gastrointestinal (GI) effects, including upper GI bleeding. We aimed to develop a simple risk score to identify high risk NSAID and ASA users for primary upper GI bleeding.

METHODS

Using data from two large anonymized health insurance databases, we defined a development and validation cohort with NSAID and ASA users which were followed-up for the occurrence of a primary upper GI bleeding. Cox regression analyses identified risk factors which were combined into simple risk scores. C-statistics were used to evaluate the discriminative ability of these scores in a validation cohort.

RESULTS

In total, 421 cases of upper GI bleeding were identified in the initial cohort of 784,263 NSAID users (incidence rate 54.2 per 10,000 person-years), while 1,295 cases of upper GI bleeding were identified in 235,531 ASA users (incidence rate 37.9 per 10,000 person-years). The risk of upper GI bleeding increased with a higher risk score, which for NSAID users included age, male gender, anemia and concomitant use of ASA or anticoagulants. For ASA users, age, anemia, diabetes and concomitant use of other antiplatelet drugs or anticoagulants were included in the risk score. The C-statistics in the validation cohort were 0.68 and 0.63 or NSAID and ASA users, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Risk factors for primary upper GI bleeding are to a large extent similar for NSAID and ASA users. Using a risk score based on these risk factors, patients at the highest risk can be identified with moderate accuracy.

PA tablets: investigational compounds combining aspirin and omeprazole for cardioprotection

For most patients with prior cardiovascular events, preventing future secondary cardiovascular events requires life-long persistence with antiplatelet therapy. PA tablets (P: proton pump inhibitors; A: aspirin) are investigational compounds that were developed to provide the cardioprotective benefits of aspirin with the upper gastrointestinal protection of a proton pump inhibitor (e.g., omeprazole). The tablets are film-coated, coordinated-release tablets for oral administration that contain 40 mg immediate-release omeprazole and either 81 or 325 mg delayed-release aspirin. The goals of the clinical development program were to demonstrate the following: improved gastrointestinal safety of PA relative to enteric-coated aspirin alone; bioequivalence and comparative bioavailability between the PA compounds and currently marketed enteric-coated aspirin; and long-term safety. Two clinical pharmacology studies were also conducted to study the potential for interaction between PA32540 and clopidogrel.

Burden of upper gastrointestinal symptoms in patients receiving low-dose acetylsalicylic acid for cardiovascular risk management: a prospective observational study

BACKGROUND

Continuous low-dose acetylsalicylic acid (aspirin; ASA) is a mainstay of cardiovascular (CV) risk management. It is well established, however, that troublesome upper gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms are commonly experienced among low-dose ASA users.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to investigate the occurrence of upper GI symptoms, and their impact on well-being, among patients taking low-dose ASA for CV risk management.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a multicenter, non-interventional, 12-week study carried out in primary-care, cardiology, and practice group centers in the USA, Canada, and France.

PATIENTS

Eligible patients were adults (age ≥18 years) at risk of or with confirmed CV disease, with physician-prescribed/-recommended low-dose ASA (75-325 mg) use.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

An electronic device (eDiary) was used to collect patient-reported outcome data three times per day (morning, afternoon, and evening; regular reports), including upper GI (gastroesophageal disease [GERD]-like or dyspepsia-like) symptoms and the impact of such symptoms on sleep quality, perceived stress, and emotions. In addition to regular reports, patients were able to self-initiate a report of upper GI symptoms (spontaneous reports).

RESULTS

Overall, 81,282 eDiary reports (including 4,407 spontaneous reports of upper GI symptoms) were collected from 340 patients. Upper GI symptoms (most commonly GERD-like) were commonly blamed on food/drink (39 %), and around one-third of patients (37 %) used medication to relieve their symptoms. Analysis showed that upper GI symptoms had a negative impact on sleep quality, perceived stress, and emotions (all p < 0.01). Overall, GI medication use was infrequent, but was more common among low-dose ASA-experienced patients (41 % vs. 12 % of evening reports in patients naïve to low-dose ASA at baseline; p < 0.01); adherence to prescribed daily proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) was poor (47 %).

CONCLUSION

Upper GI symptoms impact negatively on well-being among low-dose ASA users, in terms of decreased quality of sleep, increases in perceived stress, and negative impact on emotions. Despite this, patients may not necessarily associate these symptoms with their low-dose ASA therapy and do not readily take steps to manage such symptoms, which extends to poor adherence to prescribed daily PPIs.

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and gastroprotection with proton pump inhibitors: a focus on ketoprofen/omeprazole

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are among the most commonly prescribed agents for rheumatic disorders such as osteoarthritis (OA), rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and ankylosing spondylitis (AS). Despite the known association between NSAID use and gastropathy, however, only around one-third of patients at risk of NSAID-induced gastrointestinal toxicity receive adequate gastroprotection, and as many as 44% of these patients are non-adherent. We review the co-prescription of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) for the prevention of NSAID-induced gastropathy, with a particular focus on the first fixed-dose NSAID/PPI formulation: ketoprofen/omeprazole modified-release capsules. The ketoprofen/omeprazole fixed-dose combination is available in doses of 100 mg/20 mg, 150 mg/20 mg or 200 mg/20 mg as a single capsule for once-daily administration. Ketoprofen monotherapy has been shown to be generally equivalent to other NSAIDs when used in the treatment of OA. In RA, ketoprofen has demonstrated equivalent efficacy to diclofenac, indometacin, piroxicam, aceclofenac, phenylbutazone, naproxen and flurbiprofen. Studies comparing ketoprofen with ibuprofen and sulindac in patients with RA have, in general, favoured ketoprofen. Studies in AS have generally reported similar efficacy between ketoprofen and phenylbutazone and pirprofen. Prophylaxis with omeprazole is effective for the prevention of gastroduodenal ulcers, maintenance of remission and alleviation of dyspeptic symptoms in NSAID recipients. Omeprazole is well tolerated, and adverse events are generally gastrointestinal in nature. The fixed-dose combination of ketoprofen and omeprazole has demonstrated bioequivalence to the respective monotherapies. The incidence of digestive symptoms and the need for dose reduction was reported to be lower with the combination than with its components. Ketoprofen/omeprazole modified-release capsules are the first fixed-dose NSAID/PPI formulation to be approved. This formulation ensures compliance with the gastroprotective prophylaxis, as whenever the NSAID is taken, the PPI is co-administered. Additionally, the once-daily formulation has the potential to improve adherence to anti-inflammatory therapy.

Balancing the risk and benefits of low-dose aspirin in clinical practice

Antiplatelet agents are widely used in primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular events. The scientific evidence has provided strong support for the benefits of aspirin in decreasing the risk of cardiovascular events in a wide range of pathologies. The relatively rare occurrence of major bleeding complications should not be underestimated, mainly due to its high morbi-mortality. The assessment of both gastrointestinal risk and cardiovascular benefits of low-dose aspirin for any individual patient may be difficult in clinical practice. In this review, we summarize the evidence supporting the efficacy of aspirin and the risks of side effects due to hemorrhagic complications. This article proposes a unifying framework for application to help the clinician in the decision making process of individuals who have different risk of cardiovascular and bleeding events with different examples. Finally, new developments in the field directed towards individualized risk assessment strategies are described.

Association of gastric acid and mucus secretion level with low-dose aspirin-induced gastropathy

BACKGROUND

Low-dose aspirin is known to cause upper gastrointestinal complications. The mechanism by which the aspirin disrupts gastric mucosal integrity remains to be clarified. In this study we investigated the temporal association of gastric secretory parameters (acid and mucus) with aspirin-induced gastropathy.

METHODS

In 42 long-term low-dose aspirin-takers and the same number of sex- and age-matched controls, pentagastrin-stimulated gastric juice was collected for 10 min during endoscopic examination. The collected gastric juice was divided and half was submitted to analysis for gastric acid (mEq/10 min) and the other half was analyzed for mucin (mg hexose/10 min) output. The grade of gastric mucosal injury was assessed endoscopically according to the modified Lanza score, and a score of more than 4 was defined as the presence of severe gastropathy.

RESULTS

While gastric acid secretion did not differ significantly between aspirin-takers and controls, gastric mucus secretion, in terms of mucin output, was significantly increased in aspirin-takers compared to controls (4.1 (SD 4.8) vs. 2.3 (1.4) mg hexose/10 min, P < 0.05). Consequently, the acid/mucin ratio was significantly decreased in aspirin-takers compared to controls (1.2 (1.0) vs. 1.7 (1.4), P < 0.05). In the subanalysis of 25 aspirin-takers without severe gastropathy, gastric mucus secretion was increased and the acid/mucus ratio was decreased compared with controls, but there was no such association in the remaining 17 aspirin-takers with severe gastropathy.

CONCLUSION

Overall, gastric mucus secretion is increased in aspirin-takers, suggesting a functional adaptive response to long-term administration of the drug. However, it is possible that the adaptive response is impaired in some aspirin takers, who might be susceptible to severe upper gastrointestinal complication.

Gastric acid secretion level modulates the association between Helicobacter pylori infection and low-dose aspirin-induced gastropathy

BACKGROUND

The relative contribution of gastric acid secretion and Helicobacter pylori infection to low-dose aspirin-induced gastropathy remains to be clarified. This is partly because the capability of the infection to modify gastric acid secretion complicates the interaction. The aim of this study was to estimate the association of aspirin-induced mucosal injury, as well as H. pylori infection, with gastric acid output.

METHODS

A total of 186 male outpatients, comprising 60 aspirin takers, on 100 mg of enteric-coated aspirin daily and 126 non-aspirin takers were prospectively enrolled in this study. Gastrin-stimulated acid output was estimated by the endoscopic gastrin test. The grade of gastric mucosal injury was assessed endoscopically according to the modified Lanza score. Multiple logistic regression analyses were used to adjust for potential confounders.

RESULTS

The gastric acid secretion level, with an odds ratio (OR) (95% confidence interval [CI]) of 10.5 (3.0-36.9) and aspirin administration, with an OR (95% CI) of 7.4 (3.0-18.3) were independently associated with gastric mucosal injury, and the co-existence of both factors greatly elevated the risk of mucosal injury, with an OR (95% CI) of 77.0 (13.5-440.0). H. pylori infection, itself, did not show any significant effect on the aspirin-induced mucosal injury after adjusting for gastric acid secretion.

CONCLUSIONS

This study has demonstrated that aspirin-induced gastropathy is directly associated with gastric acid secretion. In addition, it also suggested that the gastric acid secretion level modulates the association between H. pylori infection and aspirin-induced gastropathy.

Critical appraisal of a fixed combination of esomeprazole and low dose aspirin in risk reduction

Low dose aspirin (≤325 mg) is routinely used for primary and secondary prophylaxis of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events. The use of low dose aspirin is associated with two- to four-fold greater risk of symptomatic or complicated peptic ulcers. Risk factors associated with low dose aspirin induced gastrointestinal toxicity includes prior history of ulcer or upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding, concomitant use of other nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, corticosteroid or warfarin, dual antiplatelet therapy, Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection, and advanced age. Esomeprazole, like other proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) is very effective in decreasing the risk of aspirin induced gastrointestinal toxicity. Although evidence to support esomeprazole or other PPIs for primary prophylaxis in aspirin induced gastrointestinal toxicity is limited, its role in secondary prophylaxis is well established.

Famotidine for the prevention of peptic ulcers and oesophagitis in patients taking low-dose aspirin (FAMOUS): a phase III, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

There are few therapeutic options for the prevention of gastrointestinal mucosal damage caused by low-dose aspirin. We therefore investigated the efficacy of famotidine, a well-tolerated histamine H(2)-receptor antagonist, in the prevention of peptic ulcers and erosive oesophagitis in patients receiving low-dose aspirin for vascular protection.

METHODS

Adult patients (aged >/=18 years) from the cardiovascular, cerebrovascular, and diabetes clinics at Crosshouse Hospital, Kilmarnock, UK, were eligible for enrolment in this phase III, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial if they were taking aspirin 75-325 mg per day with or without other cardioprotective drugs. Patients without ulcers or erosive oesophagitis on endoscopy at baseline were randomly assigned by computer-generated randomisation sequence to receive famotidine 20 mg twice daily (n=204) or placebo twice daily (n=200). Patients had a final endoscopic examination at 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was the development of new ulcers in the stomach or duodenum or erosive oesophagitis at 12 weeks after randomisation. Analysis was by intention to treat, including all randomised patients who received at least one dose of study drug (famotidine or placebo). This trial is registered as an International Standard Randomised Clinical Trial, number ISRCTN96975557.

FINDINGS

All randomised patients received at least one dose and were included in the ITT population. 82 patients (famotidine, n=33; placebo, n=49) did not have the final endoscopic examination and were assumed to have had normal findings; the main reason for participant withdrawal was refusal to continue. At 12 weeks, comparing patients assigned to famotidine with patients assigned to placebo, gastric ulcers had developed in seven (3.4%) of 204 patients compared with 30 (15.0%) of 200 patients (odds ratio [OR] 0.20, 95% CI 0.09-0.47; p=0.0002); duodenal ulcers had developed in one (0.5%) patient compared with 17 (8.5%; OR 0.05, 0.01-0.40; p=0.0045); and erosive oesophagitis in nine (4.4%) compared with 38 (19.0%; OR 0.20, 0.09-0.42; p<0.0001), respectively. There were fewer adverse events in the famotidine group than in the placebo group (nine vs 15); four patients in the placebo group were admitted to hospital with upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage. The other most common adverse event was angina (famotidine, n=2; placebo, n=4).

INTERPRETATION

Famotidine is effective in the prevention of gastric and duodenal ulcers, and erosive oesophagitis in patients taking low-dose aspirin. These findings widen the therapeutic options for the prevention of gastrointestinal damage in patients needing vascular protection.

FUNDING

Merck Laboratories and Astellas Pharma.

Management of NSAID-induced gastrointestinal toxicity: focus on proton pump inhibitors

The association between NSAIDs and the presence of upper gastrointestinal (GI) complications is well established. Evidence that acid aggravates NSAID-induced injury provides a rationale for minimizing such damage by acid suppression. Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) appear to be very effective in treating NSAID-related dyspepsia, and also in healing gastric and duodenal ulcers in patients continuing to receive the NSAID. An analysis of data from comparative studies of PPIs versus ranitidine, misoprostol and sucralfate shows a therapeutic advantage in favour of the PPI. Several studies now confirm the efficacy of co-therapy with PPIs in the short- and long-term prevention of NSAID-induced upper GI injury. PPIs are more effective than histamine H(2)-receptor antagonists at standard dosages in reducing the risk of gastric and duodenal ulcer, and are superior to misoprostol in preventing duodenal but not gastric lesions. However, when balancing effectiveness and tolerance, PPIs may be considered the treatment of choice in the short- and long-term prevention of NSAID-related mucosal lesions. To date, there are only a few published articles dealing with the role of PPIs in the prevention of upper GI complications. Recent epidemiological and interventional studies provide some evidence that PPIs are of benefit. However, more controlled studies using clinical outcomes are needed to establish the best management strategy (PPIs combined with traditional NSAIDs or with cyclo-oxygenase-2 selective inhibitors) especially in patients with multiple risk factors, in patients using concomitant low-dose aspirin, corticosteroids or anticoagulants (high risk group), or in patients with a history of ulcer complications (very high risk group). Furthermore, it should be underlined that Helicobacter pylori infection positively interacts with the gastroprotective effect of PPIs; therefore, the true efficacy of these drugs in preventing NSAID-related ulcer complications should be reassessed without the confounding influence of this microorganism.

Gastrointestinal bleeding in the setting of anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapy

GOAL

To review the literature on the significance, risk factors, and management of occult and gross gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding in patients on antiplatelets and/or anticoagulants.

STUDY

Relevant original and review articles and their bibliographies were analyzed. Estimates of risks and therapeutic outcomes were obtained from randomized trials, whereas risk factor identification was gathered from cross-control and prospective cohort studies.

RESULTS

Antiplatelets and anticoagulants do not diminish the positive predictive value of fecal occult blood testing to find GI pathology. They increase the risk of gross GI bleeding, and predictors of hemorrhage include history of GI bleeding or ulcer disease, higher intensity of anticoagulation, combination therapy, and presence of comorbid conditions. A bleeding site is identified in most patients with peptic ulcer being the most common. In case of significant bleeding, complete or partial reversal of anticoagulation is undertaken on the basis of the balance of risks between bleeding and thromboembolic events. Early endoscopy can reveal lesions requiring endoscopic hemostasis, which can be performed in the setting of low-intensity anticoagulation. In patients with history of peptic disease or bleeding from an acid-related lesion, proton-pump inhibitors and Helicobacter pylori eradication reduce the risk of upper GI bleeding even when antiplatelet therapy is continued.

CONCLUSIONS

Predictors of bleeding on antiplatelets and/or antithrombotics therapy have been identified, but formulation and validation of a GI bleeding index for stratification of risk in individual patients is suggested. Reversal of anticoagulation in bleeding patients is associated with a low risk of thromboembolic events and permits the performance of diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopy. Proton-pump inhibitors and H. pylori eradication reduce the risk of rebleeding in those with acid-related disease.

Efficacy of esomeprazole (20 mg once daily) for reducing the risk of gastroduodenal ulcers associated with continuous use of low-dose aspirin

OBJECTIVES

Low-dose aspirin is standard treatment for prevention of cardiovascular events in at-risk patients. However, long-term administration of low-dose aspirin is associated with a greater risk of adverse events, including gastroduodenal ulcers. This study determined the efficacy of esomeprazole for reducing the risk of gastric and/or duodenal ulcers and dyspeptic symptoms in patients receiving continuous, low-dose aspirin therapy.

METHODS

Patients aged > or =60 yr, without baseline gastroduodenal ulcer at endoscopy, who were receiving aspirin 75-325 mg once daily, were randomized to esomeprazole 20 mg once daily or placebo for 26 wk. The presence of endoscopic gastric and/or duodenal ulcers and esophageal lesions was assessed at weeks 8 and 26. Upper gastrointestinal symptoms were assessed at weeks 8, 16, and 26.

RESULTS

The intention-to-treat population comprised 991 patients (esomeprazole, N = 493; placebo, N = 498). Twenty-seven patients (5.4%) in the placebo group developed a gastric or duodenal ulcer during 26 weeks' treatment compared with eight patients (1.6%) in the esomeprazole group (life-table estimates: 6.2%vs 1.8%; P= 0.0007). At 26 wk, the cumulative proportion of patients with erosive esophagitis was significantly lower for esomeprazole versus placebo (4.4% and 18.3%, respectively; P < 0.0001). At 26 wk, esomeprazole-treated patients were more likely to experience resolution of heartburn, acid regurgitation, and epigastric pain (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Esomeprazole 20 mg once daily reduces the risk of developing gastric and/or duodenal ulcers and symptoms associated with the continuous use of low-dose aspirin in patients aged > or =60 yr without preexisting gastroduodenal ulcers.

Acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: endoscopic diagnosis and therapy

Acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding is a relatively common,potentially life-threatening condition that causes more than 300,000 hospital admissions and about 30,000 deaths per annum in America. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy is the procedure of choice for the diagnosis and therapy of upper gastrointestinal bleeding lesions. Endoscopic therapy is indicated for lesions with high risk stigmata of recent hemorrhage, including active bleeding, oozing, a visible vessel, and possibly an adherent clot. Endoscopic therapies include injection therapy, such as epinephrine or sclerosant injection; ablative therapy, such as heater probe or argon plasma coagulation; and mechanical therapy, such as endoclips or endoscopic banding. Endoscopic therapy reduces the risk of rebleeding,the need for blood transfusions, the requirement for surgery, and patient morbidity.

Future expectations in the prophylaxis of intestinal bleeding

Prophylaxis of gastrointestinal bleeding is attempted in widely varying situations. In NSAID-induced peptic ulcer, the advantage of selective cyclooxygenase 2 inhibitors with regard to gastrointestinal damage has yet to be translated into an advantage in overall morbidity. Strategies for primary and secondary prevention of variceal bleeding have been established. Therapy tailored to hepatic venous pressure gradient has the potential to achieve clinical relevance. Several methods have been developed to prevent postpolypectomy bleeding, but their optimal risk-tailored application has yet to be demonstrated. Although octreotide treatment seems to be beneficial in reducing the blood loss from angiodysplasias, controlled studies to determine its optimal use are awaited. Stress-ulcer prophylaxis is commonly applied in critically ill patients. Although data indicate that H2-receptor antagonists and omeprazole are effective in preventing clinically significant bleeding, evidence for an advantage with respect to length of hospital or intensive-care-unit stay, as well as mortality, is still lacking. Since there is misuse of acid-suppressing drugs on regular wards, in-house guidelines may offer the potential for saving costs and reducing inappropriate prescription.

Low-dose aspirin and upper gastrointestinal damage: epidemiology, prevention and treatment

BACKGROUND

Low-dose aspirin (75-325 mg/day) is widely used for the prevention of cardiovascular disease. However, due to its action on cyclo-oxygenase (COX), aspirin is associated with upper gastrointestinal (GI) side effects including ulcers and bleeding.

SCOPE

This was a comprehensive review of the literature available on the side effects associated with low-dose aspirin, together with the available treatment and prevention options, which was based on the authors' expertise in the field and a supplementary PubMed search limited to papers published in English during the last 10 years, up to November 2006.

FINDINGS

Although the risk of upper GI side effects is smaller with low-dose aspirin compared with non-selective, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), it is nevertheless a substantial healthcare issue. Factors associated with an increased risk of upper GI complications during low-dose aspirin therapy include aspirin dose, history of ulcer or upper GI bleeding, age > 70 years, concomitant use of NSAIDs (including COX-2-selective NSAIDs), and Helicobacter pylori infection. Co-administration of a gastroprotective agent such as proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) may be useful for alleviating the upper GI side effects associated with use of low-dose aspirin. Eradication of H. pylori also appears to reduce the risk of these side effects, especially in those at high risk. The use of other antiplatelet agents such as clopidogrel does not seem to provide a safer alternative to low-dose aspirin in at-risk patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic low-dose aspirin therapy is associated with an increased risk of developing upper GI side effects. Administration of a PPI seems the most effective therapy for the prevention and/or relief of such side effects in at-risk patients. H. pylori eradication therapy further reduces the risk of upper GI bleeding in these patients.

My health: whose responsibility? Low-dose aspirin and older people

The benefit of aspirin as a prophylactic after a thrombotic event was first observed 30 years ago. Its use after coronary or cerebral thrombosis, and in patients judged to be at increased risk of a thrombotic event, is now virtually mandatory, unless there are signs of intolerance. The present policy in the UK for cardiovascular protection by low-dose aspirin is dependent upon the identification of people at high vascular risk. The policy has had only very limited success, partly owing to the fact that only a relatively small proportion of people with levels of vascular risk factors that would justify aspirin prophylaxis are identified. In fact, it has been demonstrated that the application of accepted guidelines for aspirin prophylaxis to risk factor data in representative UK population samples gives a cost-effective evidence-base for a reasonable extension of prophylaxis to all people aged over approximately 50 years. It is possible that reductions in both dementia and cancer incidence could also follow the wider use of low-dose aspirin but further research on these outcomes is urgently required. The evidence on possible benefits and harm from low-dose aspirin should therefore be publicized widely, and everything possible should be done to stimulate discussion involving the general public. In the end, however, the preservation of health is one's own responsibility and, therefore, people should generally be encouraged to evaluate the evidence on health-promotion measures, including low-dose aspirin, and take responsibility for their own health.

Optimising acid inhibition treatment

Acid inhibition is safe and useful in several clinical settings. Proton pump inhibitors are more effective than H2-receptor antagonists in virtually all cases. Proton pump inhibitors should be used in: the eradication of Helicobacter pylori; the treatment of non-H. pylori-related peptic ulcer healing; for the prevention and treatment of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug-induced upper digestive lesions; for bleeding peptic lesions; and, especially, in the short-term and long-term control of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. The timing, the dosing and the specific drugs should be adapted to the particular patient, clinical situation and local factors. For instance, in a patient with active bleeding from a duodenal ulcer, intravenous constant infusion should be the preferred treatment. When seeking oral 'potent' acid inhibition (refractory gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, and perhaps Barrett's oesophagus), available data suggest that the pharmacological and clinical profiles of esomeprazole are slightly better.

Balancing the gastrointestinal benefits and risks of nonselective NSAIDs

Nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are among the most widely used classes of medications to treat pain and inflammation. However, gastrointestinal complications associated with NSAIDs are prevalent, largely due to the frequent use of these agents. Adverse events associated with NSAIDs include minor side effects, such as dyspepsia, as well as serious complications, such as bleeding and perforation. Although the probability that any given individual user of an NSAID will suffer a serious gastrointestinal complication is fairly low, widespread patient exposure can translate into a major national health burden. The increasing use of aspirin in the prevention of cardiovascular events and the availability of select over-the-counter NSAIDs represent additional challenges to clinicians in their efforts to make the most appropriate therapeutic decisions while minimizing the potential gastrointestinal risks associated with the use of these agents. Side effects such as dyspepsia do not provide adequate warning of gastrointestinal complications, because most complications occur without the presence of antecedent symptoms. Therefore, accurate risk assessment and the management of controllable risk factors are crucial to the safe administration of NSAIDs. This review focuses on the gastrointestinal effects of aspirin, acetaminophen, and other nonselective NSAIDs, and discusses those factors that are associated with increased risk for adverse gastrointestinal events in certain individuals.

Clinical trends in ulcer diagnosis in a population with high prevalence of Helicobacter pylori infection

BACKGROUND

It is unknown whether the incidence of peptic ulcer changes in areas with a high prevalence of Helicobacter pylori infection.

AIM

To determine trends in peptic ulcer complications in a community with a high prevalence of H. pylori infection.

METHODS

New endoscopic diagnoses of peptic ulcers and their complications from 1985 to 2000 were obtained. H. pylori infection in the adult population, the number of prescriptions for anti-secretory drugs and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Although the global prevalence of H. pylori infection remains high in this population (>60%), a 41.4 to 25.4% decrease in the incidence of peptic ulcers and ulcer complications was observed. This was associated with a decrease in the prevalence of H. pylori infection in people under 65 years of age, a 3.5-fold increase in the number of prescriptions of proton-pump inhibitors and an increase in the number of prescriptions of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, especially coxibs.

CONCLUSIONS

In an area with a high prevalence of H. pylori infection, the incidence of peptic ulcer and associated complications is declining rapidly. This was associated with a reduction of the prevalence of H. pylori infection in the young and a widespread use of proton-pump inhibitors. The increase in the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, especially coxibs, has not changed the tendency.

Is no NSAID a good NSAID? Approaches to NSAID-associated upper gastrointestinal disease

Upper gastrointestinal disease induced by use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) remains a major problem that affects a broad segment of the population, given the frequent use of these drugs by prescription and over the counter. The emergence of the cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 selective inhibitors (coxibs) has introduced a new option that may result in less upper gastrointestinal disease. Recent large studies have demonstrated this advantage, with the caveat that concurrent use of low-dose aspirin may mitigate this benefit. Unfortunately, the relatively high cost of the coxibs makes them not cost-effective unless confined to certain higher-risk populations. Finally, even newer versions of NSAIDs, such as nitric oxide (NO)-releasing aspirin and the COX-inhibiting NO donors, are potential alternatives to traditional NSAIDs with less upper gastrointestinal toxicity.

Lack of effect of omeprazole or of an aluminium hydroxide/magnesium hydroxide antacid on the pharmacokinetics of lumiracoxib

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effects of multiple doses of omeprazole and of a single dose of an aluminium hydroxide/magnesium hydroxide (Al/Mg) antacid on the single-dose plasma pharmacokinetics of lumiracoxib.

STUDY DESIGN

Open-label, randomised, three-period, crossover study.

POPULATION STUDIED

Healthy subjects aged 18-65 years.

METHODS

Fourteen subjects who met eligibility criteria were each administered three treatments in random order: (A) lumiracoxib 400 mg as a single oral dose; (B) oral omeprazole 20 mg once daily for 4 consecutive days, then lumiracoxib 400 mg as a single oral dose just prior to oral omeprazole 20 mg on day 5; and (C) lumiracoxib 400 mg as a single oral dose immediately prior to a 20 mL dose of Al/Mg antacid (magnesium hydroxide 800 mg and aluminium hydroxide 900 mg). The interval between each lumiracoxib dose was 7 days. Analysis of variance was performed to determine whether lumiracoxib alone differed from lumiracoxib plus omeprazole or from lumiracoxib plus Al/Mg antacid for overall exposure (area under the concentration-time curve from zero to infinity [AUC( infinity )]) and peak concentration (C(max)), with treatment sequence, subject, period and treatment as factors. Ratios of geometric means between lumiracoxib plus omeprazole and lumiracoxib plus Al/Mg antacid to lumiracoxib alone (reference) were calculated for AUC( infinity ) and C(max). If the mean ratios, with 90% CIs, fell within the interval 0.80-1.25, the treatments were considered equivalent.

RESULTS

Arithmetic mean plasma lumiracoxib concentration-time profiles were similar for all treatments, with a rapid rise in concentration after administration, reaching C(max) values (mean +/- SD) of 9.24 +/- 1.96, 8.81 +/- 2.30, and 10.43 +/- 3.24 mg/L within 2-3 hours for treatments A, B and C, respectively. AUC( infinity ) was similar for the three treatments (36.75 +/- 7.73, 34.88 +/- 8.40 and 35.50 +/- 5.72 mg. h/L). All ratios of geometric means with 90% CIs fell within the interval used for establishing bioequivalence, except for the C(max) comparison between lumiracoxib plus Al/Mg antacid and lumiracoxib alone, which was 1.11 (0.95, 1.31).

CONCLUSIONS

Coadministration of lumiracoxib with omeprazole or with an Al/Mg antacid had no clinically significant effect on lumiracoxib single-dose plasma pharmacokinetics. Lumiracoxib can, therefore, be administered concurrently with either of these agents without need for lumiracoxib dosage alteration.