A long-term, open-label study to confirm the safety of topical diclofenac solution containing dimethyl sulfoxide in the treatment of the osteoarthritic knee

Development and Challenges of Diclofenac-Based Novel Therapeutics: Targeting Cancer and Complex Diseases

Simple Summary

Diclofenac is a widely used drug for its anti-inflammatory and pain alleviating properties. This review summarizes the current understanding about the drug diclofenac. The potential applications of diclofenac beyond its well-known anti-inflammatory properties for other diseases such as cancer are discussed, along with existing limitations.

Abstract

Diclofenac is a highly prescribed non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) that relieves inflammation, pain, fever, and aches, used at different doses depending on clinical conditions. This drug inhibits cyclooxygenase-1 and cyclooxygenase-2 enzymes, which are responsible for the generation of prostaglandin synthesis. To improve current diclofenac-based therapies, we require new molecular systematic therapeutic approaches to reduce complex multifactorial effects. However, the critical challenge that appears with diclofenac and other drugs of the same class is their side effects, such as signs of stomach injuries, kidney problems, cardiovascular issues, hepatic issues, and diarrhea. In this article, we discuss why defining diclofenac-based mechanisms, pharmacological features, and its medicinal properties are needed to direct future drug development against neurodegeneration and imperfect ageing and to improve cancer therapy. In addition, we describe various advance molecular mechanisms and fundamental aspects linked with diclofenac which can strengthen and enable the better designing of new derivatives of diclofenac to overcome critical challenges and improve their applications.

Enhanced Skin Permeation of Estradiol by Dimethyl Sulfoxide Containing Transdermal Patches

Dimethyl sulfoxide is a well-known and widely used dermal penetration enhancer. Its incorporation in transdermal patches would be highly desirable; however, due to its volatility this is extremely challenging. Here, we report on the feasibility of a dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) containing transdermal system containing estradiol as a model compound. Transdermal patches were prepared from duro-tak® 387-2510 containing various DMSO concentrations at different drying temperatures. The resulting patches were analyzed for DMSO content, estradiol and DMSO release, estradiol and DMSO permeation through excised porcine skin, and recrystallization during stability testing. Drying conditions in the range of 35° to 40° allowed a complete polymer solvents removal while retaining significant amounts of DMSO (≤10 mg/patch). Estradiol skin permeation increased 4-fold (Jss = 4.12 µg/cm-2·h-1) compared to DMSO-negative control (Jss = 1.1 ± 0.2 µg/cm-2·h-1). As additional benefit, estradiol recrystallization was inhibited by DMSO at even lowest solvent concentrations. Storage stability was limited to 6 months at 25 °C with a surprising discrepancy between DMSO content (significantly lower) and flux (not significantly different). Although the technical feasibility range is relatively narrow, such DMSO-containing matrix-type patches are able to significantly enhance drug permeation through the skin while ameliorating the product stability against recrystallization.

Survey of Australasian Renal and Rheumatology Specialists investigating topical NSAID use and adverse renal outcomes

INTRODUCTION

A survey investigated physician reported use, prescribing practices and adverse renal events of topical NSAIDs.

METHOD

This survey was sent to members of the Australian Rheumatology Association and the Australian and New Zealand Society of Nephrology.

RESULTS

Sixty physicians responded, 55% (n = 33) were nephrologists; 45% (n = 27) rheumatologists. Nearly all (n = 56, 93.3%) had managed at least one patient using topical NSAIDs, including those with an eGFR <45 mL/min (n = 55, 91.7%). Concern was expressed that patients may use topical NSAIDs without the physician's knowledge. The majority (n = 40, 66.6%) have prescribed (or recommended) a topical NSAID, slightly less in patients with a reduced eGFR <45 mL/min (n = 36, 60.0%). Participants would advise topical NSAIDs for osteoarthritis and musculoskeletal pain, though be mindful to monitor the renal function and blood pressure. There was a variance in comments in advising use in CKD (eGFR <45 mL/min) from avoidance in those with an eGFR <30 mL/min to minimal concern. Most respondents (n = 55, 91.7%) had not encountered an acute kidney injury (AKI) suspected from topical NSAID use. Of the five that did, three were thought to be an adverse renovascular event and two were uncertain. All patients had an eGFR <45 mL/min, all had recovery f their renal function with NSAID cessation.

DISCUSSION

Patients commonly use topical NSAIDs, often without the physician's knowledge. Most respondents would recommend their use in osteoarthritis and musculoskeletal pain, though with caution in CKD. While an AKI is uncommon due to topical NSAIDs, it may occur, especially in those with CKD.

Adverse reactions of dimethyl sulfoxide in humans: a systematic review

Background: Dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) has been used for medical treatment and as a pharmacological agent in humans since the 1960s. Today, DMSO is used mostly for cryopreservation of stem cells, treatment of interstitial cystitis, and as a penetrating vehicle for various drugs. Many adverse reactions have been described in relation to the use of DMSO, but to our knowledge, no overview of the existing literature has been made. Our aim was to conduct a systematic review describing the adverse reactions observed in humans in relation to the use of DMSO. Methods: This systematic review was reported according to the PRISMA-harms (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis) guidelines. The primary outcome was any adverse reactions occurring in humans in relation to the use of DMSO. We included all original studies that reported adverse events due to the administration of DMSO, and that had a population of five or more. Results: We included a total of 109 studies. Gastrointestinal and skin reactions were the commonest reported adverse reactions to DMSO. Most reactions were transient without need for intervention. A relationship between the dose of DMSO given and the occurrence of adverse reactions was seen. Conclusions: DMSO may cause a variety of adverse reactions that are mostly transient and mild. The dose of DMSO plays an important role in the occurrence of adverse reactions. DMSO seems to be safe to use in small doses. Registration: PROSPERO CRD42018096117.

Adverse reactions of dimethyl sulfoxide in humans: a systematic review

Background: Dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) has been used for medical treatment and as a pharmacological agent in humans since the 1960s. Today, DMSO is used mostly for cryopreservation of stem cells, treatment of interstitial cystitis, and as a penetrating vehicle for various drugs. Many adverse reactions have been described in relation to the use of DMSO, but to our knowledge, no overview of the existing literature has been made. Our aim was to conduct a systematic review describing the adverse reactions observed in humans in relation to the use of DMSO.

Methods: This systematic review was reported according to the PRISMA-harms (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis) guidelines. The primary outcome was any adverse reactions occurring in humans in relation to the use of DMSO. We included all original studies that reported adverse events due to the administration of DMSO, and that had a population of five or more.

Results: We included a total of 109 studies. Gastrointestinal and skin reactions were the commonest reported adverse reactions to DMSO. Most reactions were transient without need for intervention. A relationship between the dose of DMSO given and the occurrence of adverse reactions was seen.

Conclusions: DMSO may cause a variety of adverse reactions that are mostly transient and mild. The dose of DMSO plays an important role in the occurrence of adverse reactions. DMSO seems to be safe to use in small doses.

Registration: PROSPERO CRD42018096117.

[Pharmacological action and clinical outcome of newly developed NSAIDs patch, "LOQOA® tape"]

Topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) patches are indispensable for the treatment of musculoskeletal diseases, while they are considered less effective than oral NSAIDs. LOQOA^® tape is a tape-type patch containing esflurbiprofen (SFP) as a major active ingredient with potent cyclooxygenase inhibition and sufficient skin permeability. SFP patch (SFPP) showed higher percutaneous absorption rate, rapid pain relief, and potent anti-inflammatory efficacy comparing with existing NSAIDs patches in rat. SFPP showed dramatically higher synovial fluid and tissue concentration on SFP than that of flurbiprofen (FP) patch after single application to knee osteoarthritis (OA) patients. On the other hand, clinical dosage of SFPP was determined as not more than two patches a day from the estimation of systemic exposure to SFP of SFPP and oral FP. SFPP showed statistically significant differences in pain relief and all the other efficacy end points compared to inactive placebo or FP patch in knee OA patients. Efficacy on OA other than knee joint was also observed. In long-term study of SFPP, using up to two patches a day, a total of 201 patients was included and 161 patients achieved 52-week application. Among drug-related side effects, skin reaction at the application sites was observed in 46.8% and discontinued in 4.3%. Although gastro-intestinal reaction and abnormal changes in laboratory tests related to kidney function were observed as systemic drug-related side effects, most of them were mild in severity. SFPP, the new generation NSAIDs patch, would be one of effective options for the treatment of symptomatic OA patients.

The Long-Term Safety of S-Flurbiprofen Plaster for Osteoarthritis Patients: An Open-Label, 52-Week Study

Background and objectives

The newly developed S-flurbiprofen plaster (SFPP) is a tape-type patch that shows innovative percutaneous absorption. This study was designed to evaluate the safety of a long-term 52-week SFPP application to osteoarthritis (OA) patients.

Methods

This was a multi-center, open-label, uncontrolled prospective study that included 201 OA patients. SFPP at 40 mg/day was applied to the site of pain in 101 patients and at 80 mg/day (2 patches) in 100 patients at a total of 301 sites for 52 weeks. The affected sites assessed included the knee (192), lumbar spine (66), cervical spine (26), and others (17). Drug safety was evaluated by medical examination, laboratory tests, and examination of vital signs. Efficacy was evaluated by the patient’s and clinician’s global assessments and clinical symptoms.

Results

Most patients (80.1 %) completed the 52-week SFPP application. The majority of drug-related adverse events (AEs) included mild dermatitis at the application sites and occurred in 46.8 % of the sites. No photosensitive dermatitis was observed. Systemic AEs occurred in 9.0 % of the patients; a serious AE (gastric ulcer hemorrhage) occurred in one patient. No clinically significant changes in the laboratory tests and vital signs were observed. The efficacy evaluation showed an improvement from 2 weeks after the SFPP application, which continued during the 52 weeks’ treatment.

Conclusions

No apparent safety concerns were observed, even during the long-term SFPP application. Therefore, SFPP could be an additional pharmacotherapy in OA treatment.

Topical Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs: The Importance of Drug, Delivery, and Therapeutic Outcome

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are widely used in the treatment of pain associated with a variety of indications, including arthritic conditions, but their usefulness is often limited by dose-dependent adverse events (AEs), such as gastrointestinal disturbances, cardiovascular events, and renal toxicity. The risk of such effects could be reduced by the use of topical formulations, which offer the potential to deliver analgesic concentrations locally, at the site of inflammation, while minimizing systemic concentrations. The topical preparations currently approved in the United States are diclofenac sodium 1.5% topical solution (containing dimethyl sulfoxide as a penetration enhancer), diclofenac sodium gel 1%, and a diclofenac hydroxyethylpyrrolidine 1.3% patch. Each of these topical NSAIDs provide drug delivery to subcutaneous tissues for the management of pain associated with osteoarthritis or soft-tissue injuries. Furthermore, these formulations are not significantly associated with the systemic AEs associated with oral NSAIDs; the most common AEs associated with topical formulations are local skin reactions, which are usually mild and self-limiting. Other topical NSAID preparations approved in the European Union include ibuprofen creams and gels, ketoprofen gel, felbinac gel and cutaneous foam, and piroxicam gel. Meta-analyses have confirmed the efficacy and safety of these preparations. However, it is important to recognize that pharmacokinetic absorption from topical formulations can vary markedly, even between different formulations of the same drug, depending on the agent, the underlying disorder, and the site of application. It is therefore essential to consider the patient, the drug, and the drug delivery mechanism when selecting a topical NSAID preparation.

Topical NSAIDs for chronic musculoskeletal pain in adults

BACKGROUND

Use of topical nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) to treat chronic musculoskeletal conditions has become widely accepted because they can provide pain relief without associated systemic adverse events. This review is an update of 'Topical NSAIDs for chronic musculoskeletal pain in adults', originally published in Issue 9, 2012.

OBJECTIVES

To review the evidence from randomised, double-blind, controlled trials on the efficacy and safety of topically applied NSAIDs for chronic musculoskeletal pain in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and our own in-house database; the date of the last search was February 2016. We also searched the references lists of included studies and reviews, and sought unpublished studies by asking personal contacts and searching online clinical trial registers and manufacturers' web sites.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised, double-blind, active or inert carrier (placebo) controlled trials in which treatments were administered to adults with chronic musculoskeletal pain of moderate or severe intensity. Studies had to meet stringent quality criteria and there had to be at least 10 participants in each treatment arm, with application of treatment at least once daily.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion and extracted data. We used numbers of participants achieving each outcome to calculate risk ratio and numbers needed to treat (NNT) or harm (NNH) compared to carrier or other active treatment. We were particularly interested to compare different formulations (gel, cream, plaster) of individual NSAIDs. The primary outcome was 'clinical success', defined as at least a 50% reduction in pain, or an equivalent measure such as a 'very good' or 'excellent' global assessment of treatment, or 'none' or 'slight' pain on rest or movement, measured on a categorical scale.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified five new studies for this update, which now has information from 10,631 participants in 39 studies, a 38% increase in participants from the earlier review; 33 studies compared a topical NSAID with carrier. All studies examined topical NSAIDs for treatment of osteoarthritis, and for pooled analyses studies were generally of moderate or high methodological quality, although we considered some at risk of bias from short duration and small size.In studies lasting 6 to 12 weeks, topical diclofenac and topical ketoprofen were significantly more effective than carrier for reducing pain; about 60% of participants had much reduced pain. With topical diclofenac, the NNT for clinical success in six trials (2343 participants) was 9.8 (95% confidence interval (CI) 7.1 to 16) (moderate quality evidence). With topical ketoprofen, the NNT for clinical success in four trials (2573 participants) was 6.9 (5.4 to 9.3) (moderate quality evidence). There was too little information for analysis of other individual topical NSAIDs compared with carrier. Few trials compared a topical NSAID to an oral NSAID, but overall they showed similar efficacy (low quality evidence). These efficacy results were almost completely derived from people with knee osteoarthritis.There was an increase in local adverse events (mostly mild skin reactions) with topical diclofenac compared with carrier or oral NSAIDs, but no increase with topical ketoprofen (moderate quality evidence). Reporting of systemic adverse events (such as gastrointestinal upsets) was poor, but where reported there was no difference between topical NSAID and carrier (very low quality evidence). Serious adverse events were infrequent and not different between topical NSAID and carrier (very low quality evidence).Clinical success with carrier occurred commonly - in around half the participants in studies lasting 6 to 12 weeks. Both direct and indirect comparison of clinical success with oral placebo indicates that response rates with carrier (topical placebo) are about twice those seen with oral placebo.A substantial amount of data from completed, unpublished studies was unavailable (up to 6000 participants). To the best of our knowledge, much of this probably relates to formulations that have never been marketed.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Topical diclofenac and topical ketoprofen can provide good levels of pain relief beyond carrier in osteoarthritis for a minority of people, but there is no evidence for other chronic painful conditions. There is emerging evidence that at least some of the substantial placebo effects seen in longer duration studies derive from effects imparted by the NSAID carrier itself, and that NSAIDs add to that.

Skin Matters: A Review of Topical Treatments for Chronic Pain. Part Two: Treatments and Applications

In Part One of this two-part series, we discussed skin physiology and anatomy as well as generalities concerning topical analgesics. This modality of therapy has lesser side effects and drug-drug interactions, and patients tolerate this form of therapy better than many oral options. Unfortunately, this modality is not used as often as it could be in chronic pain states, such as that from neuropathic pain. Part Two discusses specific therapies, local anesthetics, and other drugs, as well as how a clinician might use specific aspects of a patient's neuropathic pain presentation to help guide them in the selection of a topical agent.

Advances in NSAID development: evolution of diclofenac products using pharmaceutical technology

Diclofenac is a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) of the phenylacetic acid class with anti-inflammatory, analgesic, and antipyretic properties. Contrary to the action of many traditional NSAIDs, diclofenac inhibits cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 enzyme with greater potency than it does COX-1. Similar to other NSAIDs, diclofenac is associated with serious dose-dependent gastrointestinal, cardiovascular, and renal adverse effects. Since its introduction in 1973, a number of different diclofenac-containing drug products have been developed with the goal of improving efficacy, tolerability, and patient convenience. Delayed- and extended-release forms of diclofenac sodium were initially developed with the goal of improving the safety profile of diclofenac and providing convenient, once-daily dosing for the treatment of patients with chronic pain. New drug products consisting of diclofenac potassium salt were associated with faster absorption and rapid onset of pain relief. These include diclofenac potassium immediate-release tablets, diclofenac potassium liquid-filled soft gel capsules, and diclofenac potassium powder for oral solution. The advent of topical formulations of diclofenac enabled local treatment of pain and inflammation while minimizing systemic absorption of diclofenac. SoluMatrix diclofenac, consisting of submicron particles of diclofenac free acid and a proprietary combination of excipients, was developed to provide analgesic efficacy at reduced doses associated with lower systemic absorption. This review illustrates how pharmaceutical technology has been used to modify the pharmacokinetic properties of diclofenac, leading to the creation of novel drug products with improved clinical utility.

Pharmaceutical therapy for osteoarthritis

There are a variety of oral and topical pharmaceutical agents for the treatment of osteoarthritis. To date there is no pharmacologic agent proved to prevent disease progression. This article focuses primarily on the medications used for symptomatic relief and palliation of pain. The article reviews the medications' mechanisms of action and the available efficacy literature, as well as indications, contraindications, and common adverse effects.

Topical NSAIDs for chronic musculoskeletal pain in adults

BACKGROUND

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are commonly taken orally, but they are also available in topical preparations to be applied to or rubbed onto the skin of a painful joint, typically one affected by arthritis, with the aim of relieving pain locally. Topical NSAIDs are widely used in some parts of the world for acute and chronic painful conditions, but have not been universally accepted until recently. One of the problems has been that older clinical studies were generally short, lasting four weeks or less, and short duration studies are not regarded as adequate in ongoing painful conditions.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the use of topical NSAIDs in chronic musculoskeletal pain, focusing on studies of high methodological quality, and examining the measured effect of the preparations according to study duration. The principal aim was to estimate treatment efficacy in longer duration studies of at least 8 weeks.

SEARCH METHODS

A series of electronic searches, together with bibliographic searches, and searches of in-house databases were combined with electronic searches of clinical trial registers and manufacturers of topical NSAIDs, or companies known to be actively researching topical NSAIDs. There had to be at least 10 participants in each treatment arm, with application of treatment at least once daily.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised, double blind studies with placebo or active comparators, where at least one treatment was a topical NSAID product, in any topical formulation (cream, gel, patch, solution), in studies lasting at least two weeks.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed study quality and validity, and extracted data. Numbers of participants achieving each outcome were used to calculate relative risk (RR) and numbers needed to treat (NNT) or harm (NNH) compared to placebo or other active treatment.

MAIN RESULTS

Information was available from 7688 participants in 34 studies from 32 publications; 23 studies compared a topical NSAID with placebo. Topical NSAIDs were significantly more effective than placebo for reducing pain due to chronic musculoskeletal conditions. The best data were for topical diclofenac in osteoarthritis, where the NNT for at least 50% pain relief over 8 to 12 weeks compared with placebo was 6.4 for the solution, and 11 for the gel formulation. There were too few data of good quality to calculate NNTs for other individual topical NSAIDs compared with placebo. Direct comparison of topical NSAID with an oral NSAID did not show any difference in efficacy. There was an increase in local adverse events (mostly mild skin reactions) with topical NSAIDs compared with placebo or oral NSAIDs, but no increase in serious adverse events. Gastrointestinal adverse events with topical NSAID did not differ from placebo, but were less frequent than with oral NSAIDs.A substantial amount of data from unpublished studies was unavailable. Much of this probably relates to formulations that have never been marketed.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Topical NSAIDs can provide good levels of pain relief; topical diclofenac solution is equivalent to that of oral NSAIDs in knee and hand osteoarthritis, but there is no evidence for other chronic painful conditions. Formulation can influence efficacy. The incidence of local adverse events is increased with topical NSAIDs, but gastrointestinal adverse events are reduced compared with oral NSAIDs.

Pooled safety analysis of diclofenac sodium topical solution 1.5% (w/w) in the treatment of osteoarthritis in patients aged 75 years or older

Background

This study aimed to determine the safety of diclofenac sodium topical solution 1.5% (w/w) in 45.5% dimethyl sulfoxide (TDiclo) for the treatment of knee or hand osteoarthritis in persons aged 75 years or older.

Methods

A pooled analysis of safety data from seven multicenter, randomized, blinded, Phase III clinical trials (4–12 weeks’ duration) of TDiclo was conducted. The analysis focused on a subset of patients (n = 280) aged 75 years or older with a primary diagnosis of osteoarthritis of the knee (six trials) or hand (one trial). Patients received one of three topical treatments: TDiclo (n = 138); placebo (2.33% or 4.55% dimethyl sulfoxide, n = 39); or control (45.5% dimethyl sulfoxide, n = 103). Treatment groups were compared using Chi-square analysis, Fisher’s Exact test, or analysis of variance.

Results

The most common adverse events involved the skin or subcutaneous tissue, primarily at the application site. The incidence of dry skin was higher in the TDiclo (36.2%; P < 0.0001) and dimethyl sulfoxide control (18.4%; P = 0.0142) groups than in the placebo group (2.6%); the incidence of other skin or subcutaneous tissue adverse events was similar between the groups. Relatively few patients (<18%) experienced gastrointestinal adverse events, and group differences were not detected. In the TDiclo group, constipation (3.6%), diarrhea (3.6%), and nausea (3.6%) were the most common gastrointestinal adverse events. Cardiovascular and renal/ urinary adverse events were rare, and group differences were not detected. There was one case (0.7%) each of hypertension, spider veins, and vasodilation in the TDiclo group. Changes from baseline to the final visit in blood pressure and hepatic/renal enzyme levels were also similar between the groups.

Conclusion

TDiclo appears to be well tolerated for the treatment of osteoarthritis in persons aged 75 years or older.

Recent advances in multimodal analgesia

Greater understanding of the pathophysiology and mechanism of acute pain has led to advances in pharmacologic therapy. Understanding the principles of multimodal therapy along with surgical-specific protocols leads to improved outcome in patients. However, further large-scale randomized trials need to be performed to further establish and demonstrate the long-term benefit of multimodal therapy for patients undergoing surgery.

Topical nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for management of osteoarthritis in long-term care patients

Osteoarthritis is common in patients ≥65 years of age. Although nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are often prescribed for osteoarthritis pain, they pose age-related cardiovascular, renal, and gastrointestinal risks. Two topical NSAIDs, diclofenac sodium 1% gel (DSG) and diclofenac sodium 1.5% in 45.5% dimethylsulfoxide solution (D-DMSO), are approved in the US for the treatment of osteoarthritis pain. Topical NSAIDs have shown efficacy and safety in knee (DSG, D-DMSO) and hand (DSG) osteoarthritis. Analyses of data from randomized controlled trials of DSG in hand and knee osteoarthritis demonstrate significant improvement of pain and function in both younger patients (<65 years) and older patients (≥65 years) and suggest good safety and tolerability. However, long-term safety data in older patients are limited. Topical NSAIDs can ease medication administration and help address barriers to pain management in older patients, such as taking multiple medications and inability to swallow, and are a valuable option for long-term care providers.

Diclofenac sodium topical solution with dimethyl sulfoxide, a viable alternative to oral nonsteroidal anti-inflammatories in osteoarthritis: review of current evidence

Topical nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) may offer a safer alternative to their oral counterparts for the management of osteoarthritis. Diclofenac sodium topical solution with dimethyl sulfoxide (TDiclo) was evaluated in five randomized, controlled trials and is indicated for treatment of the signs and symptoms associated with osteoarthritis of the knee. Three studies showed that TDiclo is superior to placebo and vehicle control with respect to pain, physical function, and perception of osteoarthritis symptoms. Two studies showed that benefits are similar to those of oral diclofenac, with one study demonstrating statistical equivalence. The most common adverse event associated with TDiclo in these studies was dry skin. Incidences of gastrointestinal adverse events and abnormal levels of liver enzymes were lower with TDiclo compared with oral diclofenac in active-controlled studies. Based on these studies, TDiclo represents a practical, evidence-based option for the management of osteoarthritis of the knee.

Recent developments in the treatment of osteoarthritis with NSAIDs

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a systematic review of evidence supporting the efficacy and safety profiles of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) introduced in the last decade for the treatment of patients with osteoarthritis (OA), including their analgesic effects, ability to improve function, and adverse event profiles relative to current standards of care.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Systematic search of the literature for NSAIDs approved by the FDA (2000-2010).

RESULTS

One new orally-administered NSAID molecule (meloxicam), two orally-administered NSAID formulations (naproxen plus lansoprazole; oxycodone/ibuprofen), and three topical NSAID formulations (diclofenac patch, gel, and solution) were approved by the FDA (2000-2010). A systematic literature review found evidence to support efficacy in treating patients with OA for all agents except oxycodone/ibuprofen, which has not been studied in this patient population, although ibuprofen and immediate-release oxycodone have been studied individually for OA pain. Evidence quality was inconsistent, with several agents lacking long-term, controlled trials against active comparators, and functional end points inconsistently met. Although low-dose meloxicam and naproxen plus lansoprazole offer a reduced risk of adverse gastrointestinal (GI) events, cardiovascular and renal risks remain similar to traditional oral NSAID therapy. Further, only lower doses of meloxicam appear to carry a reduced risk of GI events. Diclofenac patch, gel, and solution preparations offer the potential for reduced GI, cardiovascular, and renal adverse events. The level of evidence available to support the efficacy and safety of these agents for long-term treatment of patients with OA differs, with some having only short-term trials, while others have longer-duration trials with active comparators.

CONCLUSIONS

By expanding the treatment armamentarium, newly-approved NSAID agents may improve the ability of clinicians to tailor analgesic therapy for their diverse patient populations and to achieve realistic functional improvements. The comparisons in this article were limited to drugs that received approval after 2000 and should be considered accordingly.

A Review of Topical Diclofenac Use in Musculoskeletal Disease

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are commonly prescribed medications for the treatment of musculoskeletal disorders. Osteoarthritis is the most common form of arthritis in humans and its prevalence rises with age. Oral NSAIDs have potential associated toxicities that must be monitored for and can limit the use of these drugs in certain populations including people of older age. Topical NSAIDs are now being recognized as an option for the treatment strategy of osteoarthritis. We review the efficacy and safety of one of the most common topical NSAIDS, topical diclofenac, for the treatment of osteoarthritis.