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

Economic impact of potentially inappropriate prescribing and related adverse events in older people: a cost-utility analysis using Markov models

OBJECTIVES

To determine the economic impact of three drugs commonly involved in potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) in adults aged ≥65 years, including their adverse effects (AEs): long-term use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), benzodiazepines and proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) at maximal dose; to assess cost-effectiveness of potential interventions to reduce PIP of each drug.

DESIGN

Cost-utility analysis. We developed Markov models incorporating the AEs of each PIP, populated with published estimates of probabilities, health system costs (in 2014 euro) and utilities.

PARTICIPANTS

A hypothetical cohort of 65 year olds analysed over 35 1-year cycles with discounting at 5% per year.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Incremental cost, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios with 95% credible intervals (CIs, generated in probabilistic sensitivity analysis) between each PIP and an appropriate alternative strategy. Models were then used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of potential interventions to reduce PIP for each of the three drug classes.

RESULTS

All three PIP drugs and their AEs are associated with greater cost and fewer QALYs compared with alternatives. The largest reduction in QALYs and incremental cost was for benzodiazepines compared with no sedative medication (€3470, 95% CI €2434 to €5001; -0.07 QALYs, 95% CI -0.089 to -0.047), followed by NSAIDs relative to paracetamol (€806, 95% CI €415 and €1346; -0.07 QALYs, 95% CI -0.131 to -0.026), and maximal dose PPIs compared with maintenance dose PPIs (€989, 95% CI -€69 and €2127; -0.01 QALYs, 95% CI -0.029 to 0.003). For interventions to reduce PIP, at a willingness-to-pay of €45 000 per QALY, targeting NSAIDs would be cost-effective up to the highest intervention cost per person of €1971. For benzodiazepine and PPI interventions, the equivalent cost was €1480 and €831, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term benzodiazepine and NSAID prescribing are associated with significantly increased costs and reduced QALYs. Targeting inappropriate NSAID prescribing appears to be the most cost-effective PIP intervention.

Dyspepsia in non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug users and the effect of preventive measures

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate regular non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) users for dyspepsia, as well as to assess the effect of preventive measures, and the reasons for non-adherence to gastroprotective agents (GPA) from a real-world perspective.

METHODS

A prospective longitudinal study was conducted among outpatients with regular NSAID usage. The presence of dyspepsia was assessed by locally validated versions of the Leeds dyspepsia questionnaire (LDQ), GPA and the participants' adherence to the drugs were assessed at recruitment and 2 weeks later. GPA was defined as the use of antisecretory medications or cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors.

RESULTS

Initially, 409 participants (mean age 52.3 ± 14.6 years, 60.6% females, 48.4% treated for musculoskeletal pain) were recruited. At recruitment, 50.9% of the participants had at least one upper gastrointestinal symptom. Complete data for follow-up analysis were collected from 158 participants who were naive NSAID users, had no prior gastrointestinal medication and who could be contacted. At 2-week follow-up there was no significant difference in the LDQ score change between NSAID users treated with GPA and those did not. However, there was a greater reduction in abdominal pain/discomfort (8.8% vs 5.0%, P < 0.001) and burping (8.8% vs 4.0%, P < 0.001) among participants using GPA compared with those who were not. Adherence to GPA was poor, with study participants citing the absence of gastrointestinal symptoms as their main reason for non-adherence.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of GPA in patients on regular NSAIDs does not improve their overall dyspepsia, but it reduces abdominal pain and burping. Poor adherence to GPA may be a contributing factor.

Gastrointestinal toxicity among patients taking selective COX-2 inhibitors or conventional NSAIDs, alone or combined with proton pump inhibitors: a case-control study

PURPOSE

To assess the risk of gastrointestinal perforation, ulcers, or bleeding (PUB) associated with the use of conventional nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and selective COX-2 inhibitors, with or without PPIs compared with conventional NSAIDs.

METHODS

A case-control study was performed within conventional NSAIDs and/or selective COX-2 inhibitors users identified from the Dutch PHARMO Record Linkage System in the period 1998-2012. Cases were patients aged ≥18 years with a first hospital admission for PUB. For each case, up to four controls were matched for age and sex at the date a case was hospitalized (index date). Logistic regression analysis was used to calculate odds ratios (ORs).

RESULTS

At the index date, 2634 cases and 5074 controls were current users of conventional NSAIDs or selective COX-2 inhibitors. Compared with conventional NSAIDs, selective COX-2 inhibitors with PPIs had the lowest risk of PUB (adjusted OR 0.51, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.35-0.73) followed by selective COX-2 inhibitors (adjusted OR 0.66, 95%CI: 0.48-0.89) and conventional NSAIDs with PPIs (adjusted OR 0.79, 95%CI: 0.68-0.92). Compared with conventional NSAIDs, the risk of PUB was lower for those aged ≥75 years taking conventional NSAIDs with PPIs compared with younger patients (adjusted interaction OR 0.79, 95%CI: 0.64-0.99). However, those aged ≥75 years taking selective COX-2 inhibitors, the risk was higher compared with younger patients (adjusted interaction OR 1.22, 95%CI: 1.01-1.47).

CONCLUSIONS

Selective COX-2 inhibitors with PPIs, selective COX-2 inhibitors, and conventional NSAIDs with PPIs were associated with lower risks of PUB compared with conventional NSAIDs. These effects were modified by age. © 2017 The Authors. Pharmacoepidemiology & Drug Safety Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for functional dyspepsia

General interest in functional gastrointestinal disorders is increasing among Japanese doctors as well as patients. This increase can be attributed to a number of factors, including recent increased interest in quality of life and advances in our understanding of the pathophysiology of gastrointestinal disease. Japan recently became the world's first country to list "functional dyspepsia" as a disease name for national insurance billing purposes. However, recognition and understanding of functional dyspepsia (FD) remain poor, and no standard treatment strategy has yet been established. Accordingly, the Japanese Society of Gastroenterology (JSGE) developed an evidence-based clinical practice guideline for FD, consisting of five sections: concept, definition, and epidemiology; pathophysiology; diagnosis; treatment; and prognosis and complications. This article summarizes the Japanese guideline, with particular focus on the treatment section. Once a patient is diagnosed with FD, the doctor should carefully explain the pathophysiology and benign nature of this condition, establish a good doctor-patient relationship, and then provide advice for daily living (diet and lifestyle modifications, explanations, and reassurance). The proposed pharmacological treatment is divided into two steps: initial treatment including an acid inhibitory drug (H2RA or PPI) or prokinetics, (strong recommendation); second-line treatment including anxiolytics, antidepressants, and Japanese traditional medicine (weak recommendation). H. pylori eradication, strongly recommended with a high evidence level, is positioned separately from other treatment flows. Conditions that do not respond to these treatment regimens are regarded as refractory FD. Patients will be further examined for other organic disorders or will be referred to specialists using other approaches such as psychosomatic treatment.

Gastrointestinal adverse effects of short-term aspirin use: a meta-analysis of published randomized controlled trials

Background and Objectives

Aspirin is widely used for short-term treatment of pain, fever or colds, but there are only limited data regarding the safety of this use. To summarize the available data on this topic, we conducted a meta-analysis of the published clinical trial literature regarding the gastrointestinal adverse effects of short-term use of aspirin in comparison with placebo and other medications commonly used for the same purpose.

Data Sources and Methods

An extensive literature search identified 119,310 articles regarding possible adverse effects of aspirin, among which 23,131 appeared to possibly include relevant data. An automated text-mining procedure was used to score the references for potential relevance for the meta-analysis. The 3,983 highest-scoring articles were reviewed individually to identify those with data that could be included in this analysis. Ultimately, 78 relevant articles were identified that contained gastrointestinal adverse event data from clinical trials of aspirin versus placebo or an active comparator. Odds ratios (ORs) computed using a Mantel–Haenszel estimator were used to summarize the comparative effects on dyspepsia, nausea/vomiting, and abdominal pain, considered separately and also aggregated as ‘minor gastrointestinal events’. Gastrointestinal bleeds, ulcers, and perforations were also investigated.

Results

Data were obtained regarding 19,829 subjects (34 % treated with aspirin, 17 % placebo, and 49 % an active comparator). About half of the aspirin subjects took a single dose. Aspirin was associated with a higher risk of minor gastrointestinal events than placebo or active comparators: the summary ORs were 1.46 (95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.15–1.86) and 1.81 (95 % CI 1.61–2.04), respectively. Ulcers, perforation, and serious bleeding were not seen after use of aspirin or any of the other interventions.

Conclusions

During short-term use, aspirin is associated with a higher frequency of gastrointestinal complaints than other medications commonly used for treatment of pain, colds, and fever. Serious adverse events were not observed with aspirin or any of the comparators.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s40268-013-0011-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Evidence-based approach to dyspepsia: from Helicobacter pylori to functional disease

Patients with dyspepsia may present with associated complaints of abdominal pain, bloating, fullness, acid reflux, and epigastric tenderness on examination. The evaluation of patients with dyspepsia includes taking a comprehensive history and performing a physical examination. Although taking a patient history has its limitations in making an accurate diagnosis, it is useful in guiding the selection of subsequent diagnostic tests. Differential diagnoses of dyspepsia are best addressed using an anatomical approach. Patients with chronic dyspepsia lasting > 1 month should be evaluated for the presence of alarm features. Alarm features mandate an upper gastrointestinal endoscopy examination, as these may be suggestive of a malignancy. In patients without alarm features, a Helicobacter pylori test-and-treat strategy is cost-effective if the prevalence of H. pylori infection is high. Tests for H. pylori infection can be divided into non-invasive and minimally invasive tests. Many different antibiotic combination therapies (eg, triple therapy, quadruple therapy, levofloxacin-based therapy, sequential therapy, concomitant therapy, and probiotics with eradication therapy) are now available for the eradication of H. pylori infection. In patients who are symptomatic without an organic pathology, functional dyspepsia and other causes of abdominal pain need to be considered. Functional dyspepsia is best managed using a multifaceted approach by establishing a good physician-patient relationship, dietary and lifestyle interventions, medical therapy, psychotherapy, and the use of psychotropic medications. This review rationalizes the current-day recommendations for the evaluation and management of patients with dyspepsia in a clinical setting.

Prevalence of gastroesophageal reflux disease symptoms and related factors in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is common in patients with many chronic diseases, but has not been well recognized in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We investigated the prevalence of GERD symptoms in 278 outpatients with RA and their association with such clinical factors as age, sex, height, weight, body mass index, medications drugs, and functional status evaluated by the Modified Health Assessment Questionnaire (MHAQ). GERD symptoms were evaluated by Frequency Scale for the Symptoms of GERD (FSSG). The mean FSSG score for all patients was 5.6, and 82 patients were considered to have GERD symptoms (FSSG score ≥8), thus the overall prevalence of GERD symptoms was 29.5%. MHAQ score and height were significantly higher and lower, respectively, and prednisolone usage was significantly more in the patients with GERD symptoms than those without. These three clinical factors were also significantly associated with GERD symptoms by univariate logistic regression. Multivariate logistic regression analysis demonstrated that MHAQ was the only clinical factor related to GERD symptoms. In conclusion, the prevalence of GERD symptoms in RA patients was high and strongly associated with decreased functional status, suggesting that physicians should pay attention to GERD symptoms in RA management, especially for patients with low functional status.

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.

A fixed-dose combination of naproxen and esomeprazole magnesium has comparable upper gastrointestinal tolerability to celecoxib in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee: results from two randomized, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trials

BACKGROUND. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are associated with poor upper gastrointestinal (UGI) tolerability and increased ulcer risk, but patient adherence to gastroprotective co-therapy is frequently inadequate. A fixed-dose combination of enteric-coated naproxen 500 mg and immediate-release esomeprazole magnesium 20 mg was evaluated: efficacy is reported by Hochberg et al. (Curr Med Res Opin 2011;27:1243-53); tolerability findings are reported here. PATIENTS AND METHODS. In two 12-week double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter, phase III studies (PN400-307 and PN400-309), patients aged ≥ 50 years with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis randomly (2:2:1) received naproxen/esomeprazole magnesium BID, celecoxib 200 mg QD, or placebo. Tolerability end-points included: modified Severity of Dyspepsia Assessment (mSODA); heartburn severity; and UGI adverse events (AEs). RESULTS. Overall, 619 (PN400-307) and 615 (PN400-309) patients were randomized; mSODA scores improved (baseline to week 12) in each group, with no significant treatment differences between naproxen/esomeprazole magnesium and celecoxib (95% CIs: PN400-307: -0.4, 1.9; PN400-309: -1.8, 0.6). Naproxen/esomeprazole magnesium-treated patients reported significantly more heartburn-free days versus celecoxib (95% CIs: PN400-307: 2.1, 12.7; PN400-309: 2.5, 13.4). UGI AE incidence (PN400-307: 17.3%; PN400-309: 20.3%) was similar between treatment groups. UGI AEs resulted in few discontinuations (< 4%, either study). CONCLUSIONS. Naproxen/esomeprazole magnesium has comparable UGI tolerability to celecoxib in patients with osteoarthritis.

Fixed-dose combination of enteric-coated naproxen and immediate-release esomeprazole has comparable efficacy to celecoxib for knee osteoarthritis: two randomized trials

OBJECTIVE

To demonstrate that a fixed-dose combination of enteric-coated naproxen 500 mg and immediate-release esomeprazole magnesium 20 mg has comparable efficacy to celecoxib for knee osteoarthritis.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Two randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, multicenter phase III studies (PN400-307 and PN400-309) enrolled patients aged ≥50 years with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis. Following an osteoarthritis flare, patients received naproxen/esomeprazole magnesium twice daily, celecoxib 200 mg once daily, or placebo for 12 weeks.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT00664560 and NCT00665431.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Three co-primary efficacy endpoints were mean change from baseline to week 12 in Western Ontario and McMaster Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain and function subscales, and Patient Global Assessment of osteoarthritis using a visual analog scale (PGA-VAS).

RESULTS

In Study 307, 619 patients were randomized and 614 treated. In Study 309, 615 patients were randomized and 610 treated. Both naproxen/esomeprazole magnesium and celecoxib were associated with improvements (least squares mean change from baseline to week 12) in WOMAC pain (Study 307: -42.0 and -41.8, respectively; Study 309: -44.2 and -42.9, respectively), WOMAC function (Study 307: -36.4 and -36.3, respectively; Study 309: -38.9 and -36.8, respectively), and PGA-VAS (Study 307: 21.2 and 21.6, respectively; Study 309: 29.0 and 25.6, respectively). A prespecified non-inferiority margin of 10 mm between naproxen/esomeprazole magnesium and celecoxib was satisfied for each co-primary endpoint at week 12 in both studies. Significant improvements were observed with naproxen/esomeprazole magnesium versus placebo in both studies (p < 0.05). Celecoxib was significantly different from placebo in Study 307 (p < 0.05); however, the improvements were not significant in Study 309. Acetaminophen use and patient expectation of receiving active treatment (80% probability) may have contributed to a high placebo response observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Naproxen/esomeprazole magnesium has comparable efficacy to celecoxib for the management of pain associated with osteoarthritis of the knee over 12 weeks.

Long-term safety of naproxen and esomeprazole magnesium fixed-dose combination: phase III study in patients at risk for NSAID-associated gastric ulcers

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate long-term safety of enteric-coated naproxen 500 mg and immediate-release esomeprazole magnesium 20 mg fixed-dose combination (FDC) in patients at risk of NSAID-associated upper gastrointestinal (UGI) ulcers.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

In this open-label, multicenter, phase III study, Helicobacter pylori-negative patients aged ≥50 years or 18-49 years with history of uncomplicated ulcer within the past 5 years, who had osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, or other condition requiring daily NSAIDs for ≥12 months received naproxen/esomeprazole twice daily for 12 months.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT00527904.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Adverse events (AEs), vital signs, physical examination, and laboratory tests. Subgroup analyses included age and low-dose aspirin (LDA) use. Predefined NSAID-associated UGI and cardiovascular AEs were analyzed.

RESULTS

Of 239 patients treated (safety population), 135 completed ≥348 treatment days (12-month completers). AE incidence was approximately 70%; dyspepsia, constipation, upper respiratory tract infection, nausea, back pain, and contusion were most frequent (≥5% patients, either population). Treatment-related AEs occurred in 28.0% and 23.7% of patients in the safety and 12-month completer populations, respectively; 18.8% of patients withdrew due to AEs (safety population). Few serious AEs and no deaths occurred. In the safety population, AE incidence was 71.4% and 76.9% in patients aged <65 years (n = 161) and ≥65 years (n = 78), respectively, and 67.6% and 75.8% in LDA users (n = 74) and non-users (n = 165), respectively. Predefined UGI and cardiovascular AEs were observed in 18.8% and 6.3% of patients, respectively, in the safety population, and 16.3% and 5.2%, respectively, in 12-month completers. Dyspepsia and hypertension were most common. Additional assessments showed no unexpected findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on these outcome measures, long-term treatment with FDC naproxen/esomeprazole is not associated with any new safety issues, including predefined UGI and cardiovascular AEs, in patients requiring NSAID therapy who are at risk of UGI complications.

Topical diclofenac epolamine patch 1.3% for treatment of acute pain caused by soft tissue injury

Acute pain caused by musculoskeletal disorders is very common and has a significant negative impact on quality-of-life and societal costs. Many types of acute pain have been managed with traditional oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors (coxibs). Data from prospective, randomised controlled clinical trials and postmarketing surveillance indicate that use of oral traditional NSAIDs and coxibs is associated with an elevated risk of developing gastrointestinal, renovascular and/or cardiovascular adverse events (AEs). Increasing awareness of the AEs associated with NSAID therapy, including coxibs, has led many physicians and patients to reconsider use of these drugs and look for alternative treatment options. Treatment with NSAIDs via the topical route of administration has been shown to provide clinically effective analgesia at the site of application while minimising systemic absorption. The anti-inflammatory and analgesic potency of the traditional oral NSAID diclofenac, along with its physicochemical properties, makes it well suited for topical delivery. Several topical formulations of diclofenac have been developed. A topical patch containing diclofenac epolamine 1.3% (DETP, FLECTOR(®) Patch), approved for use in Europe in 1993, has recently been approved for use in the United States and is indicated for the treatment of acute pain caused by minor strains, sprains and contusions. In this article, we review the available clinical trial data for this product in the treatment of pain caused by soft tissue injury.

Dyspepsia as an adverse effect of drugs

Drugs are frequently implicated as a possible cause in new onset dyspeptic symptoms and few drugs are free of this suspicion. Nausea, anorexia, abdominal pain and dyspepsia make up between one-tenth and one-third of reported adverse reactions but they are all so common, both in the background population and among patients, that they are frequently attributed to an illness rather than to medications. No symptom or clinical sign is pathognomonic for adverse drug effects, maybe with the exception of vomiting. Dyspepsia is a common reporting in placebo-arms of treatment trials. Owing to the high background incidence of dyspepsia, it is difficult to discern between spontaneous and true drug-related dyspepsia. The mechanisms by which a drug causes dyspepsia are often unknown even though some drugs are known to cause direct mucosal injury. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and antibiotics are common causes of drug-related dyspepsia.

Upper gastrointestinal symptoms in patients treated with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs: prevalence and impact--the COMPLAINS study

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the prevalence and type of upper gastrointestinal symptoms during nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) therapy, the impact of these symptoms on daily life and adherence to treatment and the concordance between physicians' and patients' assessments.

METHODS

A sample of 1000 French rheumatologists was invited to participate in the study, of which 630 accepted. Participating physicians enrolled all patients above 18 years of age seen during a 1-week period who had been receiving daily NSAID treatment for at least 3 days (n = 8269). Data on gastrointestinal symptoms were collected using a standardized questionnaire. In the first two symptomatic patients seen by each physician, patient and physician questionnaires were used to investigate concordance between symptom evaluations.

RESULTS

Two thousand seven hundred and ninety-nine patients (33.8%) reported upper gastrointestinal symptoms; of these, 1056 (12.8% of the total population) had acid reflux symptoms (heartburn and/or acid regurgitation). The most common symptoms were epigastric burning (17.3%) and epigastric discomfort or pain (14.4%). Symptoms were less common with coxibs than with nonselective NSAIDs (26.4 vs. 35.4%, P<10). There was moderate or good agreement between physicians' and patients' symptom assessments. Upper gastrointestinal symptoms resulted in NSAID dose reduction in 5.8% of patients, temporary withdrawal of treatment in 17.2% and permanent withdrawal in 10.8%. Half of the patients reported at least moderate impairment of daily activities because of their symptoms.

CONCLUSION

Approximately, one-third of NSAID-treated patients complained of upper gastrointestinal symptoms, with coxibs being better tolerated than nonselective NSAIDs. These symptoms have a marked impact on the quality of life and adherence to therapy.

Influence of gastric mucosal status on success of stepwise acid suppressive therapy for dyspepsia

BACKGROUND

The most effective initial treatment strategy of dyspepsia is still under debate. Individual biological characteristics, such as condition of gastric mucosa, might contribute to selection of the most appropriate acid suppression treatment strategy.

AIM

To assess whether pre-treatment testing of gastric mucosal status is relevant for treatment success in an RCT comparing step-up and step-down therapies in newly diagnosed dyspepsia patients.

METHODS

Baseline serum samples were collected to assess gastric mucosal status using serum levels of pepsinogens-I&II, gastrin-17, and Helicobacter pylori IgA/IgG-antibodies. The 6-month treatment success was compared between step-up and step-down for patients with serum diagnoses: normal; gastritis; corpus atrophy or antrum atrophy.

RESULTS

In all, 519 patients (M/F: 249/270, age: 47 (18-85) years, 29%H. pylori+) were randomized to step-up (n = 293) or step-down (n = 226). Normal mucosa, gastritis and corpus atrophy were diagnosed serologically in 70%, 28% and 2% of the patients, evenly distributed between the strategies (P = 0.65). Treatment success was achieved in respectively, 69%, 70% and 70% for the serum diagnosis groups, and did not differ between the strategies.

CONCLUSIONS

Dyspepsia treatment success could not be predicted by gastric mucosal status. Therefore, serum diagnosis of gastric mucosal status is no useful tool for patient allocation to acid suppressive treatment strategies.

The prevalence of intolerance for low-dose acetylsalicylacid in the secondary prevention of atherothrombosis

Daily low-dose acetylsalicylacid (ASA) is prescribed to patients with atherothrombosis frequently to prevent vascular complications. In reports on complications and side effects of low-dose ASA use in the literature there is a range of definitions. We explored the incidence, characteristics and consequences of symptoms suggestive of ASA intolerance in patients on low-dose ASA. General practitioners and specialists in 105 centres were asked to review their patient files for the last 10 consecutive patients who were prescribed ASA. Participating patients completed a questionnaire about their current ASA use (doctors completed the questionnaire together with the patients), use of co-medication and symptoms suggestive of ASA intolerance. A total of 947 patients were included in this study. Sixty patients (6.6%) had ceased ASA treatment, predominantly because of the occurrence of side effects suspected to be caused by ASA use. A quarter of the patients concomitantly used an anti-acid agent. Of the 947 patients, 271 (30.6%) indicated symptoms during ASA intake. The most common symptoms were related to the gastrointestinal tract (25.1%). In patients prescribed a low-dose of ASA monotherapy, side effects suggestive of intolerance are common. More awareness should be created to detect and treat these symptoms, because the occurrence of side effects is the most important reason for patients to discontinue ASA treatment.

Effect and cost-effectiveness of step-up versus step-down treatment with antacids, H2-receptor antagonists, and proton pump inhibitors in patients with new onset dyspepsia (DIAMOND study): a primary-care-based randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Substantial physician workload and high costs are associated with the treatment of dyspepsia in primary health care. Despite the availability of consensus statements and guidelines, the most cost-effective empirical strategy for initial management of the condition remains to be determined. We compared step-up and step-down treatment strategies for initial management of patients with new onset dyspepsia in primary care.

METHODS

Patients aged 18 years and older who consulted with their family doctor for new onset dyspepsia in the Netherlands were eligible for enrolment in this double-blind, randomised controlled trial. Between October, 2003, and January, 2006, 664 patients were randomly assigned to receive stepwise treatment with antacid, H(2)-receptor antagonist, and proton pump inhibitor (step-up; n=341), or these drugs in the reverse order (step-down; n=323), by use of a computer-generated sequence with blocks of six. Each step lasted 4 weeks and treatment only continued with the next step if symptoms persisted or relapsed within 4 weeks. Primary outcomes were symptom relief and cost-effectiveness of initial management at 6 months. Analysis was by intention to treat (ITT); the ITT population consisted of all patients with data for the primary outcome at 6 months. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00247715.

FINDINGS

332 patients in the step-up, and 313 in the step-down group reached an endpoint with sufficient data for evaluation; the main reason for dropout was loss to follow-up. Treatment success after 6 months was achieved in 238 (72%) patients in the step-up group and 219 (70%) patients in the step-down group (odds ratio 0.92, 95% CI 0.7-1.3). The average medical costs were lower for patients in the step-up group than for those in the step-down group (euro228 vs euro245; p=0.0008), which was mainly because of costs of medication. One or more adverse drug events were reported by 94 (28%) patients in the step-up and 93 (29%) patients in the step-down group. All were minor events, including (other) dyspeptic symptoms, diarrhoea, constipation, and bad/dry taste.

INTERPRETATION

Although treatment success with either step-up or step-down treatment is similar, the step-up strategy is more cost effective at 6 months for initial treatment of patients with new onset dyspeptic symptoms in primary care.

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug use as a risk factor for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease: an observational study

BACKGROUND

Although the associations between nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and peptic ulcer disease or dyspepsia are well established, fewer data exist concerning the relationship between NSAIDs and gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GERD).

AIM

To examine the relationship between NSAIDs and GERD.

METHODS

A self-administered questionnaire covering NSAID use and GERD symptoms (heartburn and acid regurgitation) was sent to a representative national sample of 10,000 French adults (> or = 18 years) between 14 October and 21 November 2005. Risk factors associated with GERD were identified by logistic regression analysis in respondents who were not taking aspirin or proton pump inhibitors.

FINDINGS

A total of 7259 completed questionnaires were returned of which 6823 were evaluable. Overall, 2262 respondents (33%) reported using NSAIDs during the previous 3 months. The lifetime and 3-month prevalence rates of GERD symptoms were 37% and 21% respectively. GERD symptoms were significantly more common among NSAID users than among non-users (27% vs. 19%, P < or = 0.001) and a similar trend was seen for aspirin use. Proton pump inhibitors were received by 31% of respondents who reported experiencing GERD symptoms within the previous 3 months compared with 6% of those without symptoms (P < 0.01); however, only 20% of NSAID-treated respondents were receiving proton pump inhibitors. NSAID use, age and female gender were independent predictors of GERD symptoms.

CONCLUSION

NSAID or aspirin use is a significant risk factor for GERD symptoms.

Esomeprazole: prevention and treatment of NSAID-induced symptoms and ulcers

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) represent one of the most widely used drug classes. However, many patients complain of dyspeptic symptoms impairing their quality of life: ~ 20% of patients taking NSAIDs show endoscopic ulcers with or without symptoms, and up to 2% of chronic NSAID users will develop serious complications each year, such as bleeding or perforation, which are the cause of death in many patients. Coprescription of a proton pump inhibitor is one established option for the healing and prevention of NSAID-associated lesions of the upper gastrointestinal tract in patients at risk. Recent studies evaluated the clinical efficacy of esomeprazole in the management of gastrointestinal problems associated with the intake of selective and non-selective NSAIDs and aspirin.

Maintenance treatment with esomeprazole following initial relief of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug-associated upper gastrointestinal symptoms: the NASA2 and SPACE2 studies

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), including selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors, cause upper gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms that are relieved by treatment with esomeprazole. We assessed esomeprazole for maintaining long-term relief of such symptoms. Six hundred and ten patients with a chronic condition requiring anti-inflammatory therapy who achieved relief of NSAID-associated symptoms of pain, discomfort, or burning in the upper abdomen during two previous studies were enrolled and randomly assigned into two identical, multicentre, parallel-group, placebo-controlled studies of esomeprazole 20 mg or 40 mg treatment (NASA2 [Nexium Anti-inflammatory Symptom Amelioration] and SPACE2 [Symptom Prevention by Acid Control with Esomeprazole] studies; ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers NCT00241514 and NCT00241553, respectively) performed at various rheumatology, gastroenterology, and primary care clinics. Four hundred and twenty-six patients completed the 6-month treatment period. The primary measure was the proportion of patients with relapse of upper GI symptoms, recorded in daily diary cards, after 6 months. Relapse was defined as moderate-to-severe upper GI symptoms (a score of more than or equal to 3 on a 7-grade scale) for 3 days or more in any 7-day period. Esomeprazole was significantly more effective than placebo in maintaining relief of upper GI symptoms throughout 6 months of treatment. Life-table estimates (95% confidence intervals) of the proportion of patients with relapse at 6 months (pooled population) were placebo, 39.1% (32.2% to 46.0%); esomeprazole 20 mg, 29.3% (22.3% to 36.2%) (p = 0.006 versus placebo); and esomeprazole 40 mg, 26.1% (19.4% to 32.9%) (p = 0.001 versus placebo). Patients on either non-selective NSAIDs or selective COX-2 inhibitors appeared to benefit. The frequency of adverse events was similar in the three groups. Esomeprazole maintains relief of NSAID-associated upper GI symptoms in patients taking continuous NSAIDs, including selective COX-2 inhibitors.

Effects of chronic therapy with non-steroideal antinflammatory drugs on gastric permeability of sucrose: A study on 71 patients with rheumatoid arthritis

AIM: To evaluate the gastric permeability after both acute and chronic use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and to assess the clinical usefulness of sucrose test in detecting and following NSAIDs- induced gastric damage mainly in asymptomatic patients and the efficacy of a single pantoprazole dose in chronic users.

METHODS: Seventy-one consecutive patients on chronic therapy with NSAIDs were enrolled in the study and divided into groups A and B (group A receiving 40 mg pantoprazole daily, group B only receiving NSAIDs). Sucrose test was performed at baseline and after 2, 4 and 12 wk, respectively. The symptoms in the upper gastrointestinal tract were recorded.

RESULTS: The patients treated with pantoprazole had sucrose excretion under the limit during the entire follow-up period. The patients without gastroprotection had sucrose excretion above the limit after 2 wk, with an increasing trend in the following weeks (P = 0.000). A number of patients in this group revealed a significantly altered gastric permeability although they were asymptomatic during the follow-up period.

CONCLUSION: Sucrose test can be proposed as a valid tool for the clinical evaluation of NSAIDs- induced gastric damage in both acute and chronic therapy. This tecnique helps to identify patients with clinically silent gastric damages. Pantoprazole (40 mg daily) is effective and well tolerated in chronic NSAID users.

Oral treatment options for degenerative joint disease--presence and future

Alleviation of pain and inhibition of inflammation are the primary goals of pharmacotherapy of osteoarthritis (OA). These therapeutic goals can almost always be accomplished by the use of analgesics and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID). One of the main problems of NSAIDs is their gastrointestinal toxicity, for which a prophylactic medication should be considered particularly amongst risk groups. Recent studies have shown that COX-2-selective and maybe also non-selective NSAIDs increase the cardiovascular risk so that their application is getting now drastically restricted. Pharmacological results published until now suggest that a clinically relevant minor analgesic and/or anti-inflammatory effect can be attained with the use of some of the SYmptomatic Slow Acting Drugs in OA (SYSADOAs). However, no clinical studies exist, which can positively confirm prevention, slowing down or reversal of any advanced joint cartilage destruction by any individual medication. Disease modifying therapy is still in its infancy; discovery and development of novel therapeutic targets and agents are an extremely difficult task, currently challenging many pharmaceutical companies and academic institutions.

GI Risk and Risk Factors of NSAIDs

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are the most widely used drugs in the United States. Ulcers are found at endoscopy in 15% to 30% of patients using NSAIDs regularly. The annual incidence of upper gastrointestinal (GI) complications such as bleeding with regular NSAID use is approximately 1.0% to 1.5%, whereas the annual rate of upper GI clinical events (complicated plus symptomatic uncomplicated ulcers) is approximately 2.5% to 4.5%. Upper GI symptoms such as dyspepsia also occur in many patients taking NSAIDs--at a relative risk of about 1.5 to 2 compared with that in patients without NSAID use. Important risk factors for upper GI clinical events include older age, prior history of upper GI events, use of corticosteroids or anticoagulants, and high-dose or multiple NSAIDs (including NSAID plus low-dose aspirin). Lower GI clinical events such as bleeding may also occur with NSAIDs, although they are less common and less well studied than upper GI events. The decision to employ a protective strategy to decrease NSAID-associated GI clinical events is based on risk stratification. Strategies employed include the use of non-NSAID analgesics, use of lowest effective dose of NSAID, use of medical cotherapy (eg, proton pump inhibitor, misoprostol), or use of coxibs.

Functional gastroduodenal disorders

A numerically important group of patients with functional gastrointestinal disorders have chronic symptoms that can be attributed to the gastroduodenal region. Based on the consensus opinion of an international panel of clinical investigators who reviewed the available evidence, a classification of the functional gastroduodenal disorders is proposed. Four categories of functional gastroduodenal disorders are distinguished. The first category, functional dyspepsia, groups patients with symptoms thought to originate from the gastroduodenal region, specifically epigastric pain or burning, postprandial fullness, or early satiation. Based on recent evidence and clinical experience, a subgroup classification is proposed for postprandial distress syndrome (early satiation or postprandial fullness) and epigastric pain syndrome (pain or burning in the epigastrium). The second category, belching disorders, comprises aerophagia (troublesome repetitive belching with observed excessive air swallowing) and unspecified belching (no evidence of excessive air swallowing). The third category, nausea and vomiting disorders, comprises chronic idiopathic nausea (frequent bothersome nausea without vomiting), functional vomiting (recurrent vomiting in the absence of self-induced vomiting, or underlying eating disorders, metabolic disorders, drug intake, or psychiatric or central nervous system disorders), and cyclic vomiting syndrome (stereotypical episodes of vomiting with vomiting-free intervals). The rumination syndrome is a fourth category of functional gastroduodenal disorder characterized by effortless regurgitation of recently ingested food into the mouth followed by rechewing and reswallowing or expulsion. The proposed classification requires further research and careful validation but the criteria should be of value for clinical practice; for epidemiological, pathophysiological, and clinical management studies; and for drug development.

Drug injury in the upper gastrointestinal tract: nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs

It is well established that nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and aspirin confer significant morbidity and mortality. The widespread use of these drugs has increased the absolute numbers of cases of NSAID- or aspirin-related upper gastrointestinal complications. Emerging data indicate that antidepressants, such as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and tricyclic antidepressants, may also increase risk for gastrointestinal bleeding. Multiple factors have been identified that increase risk for NSAID- and aspirin-related upper gastrointestinal complications. The highest risks are related to age (>60 years) and prior complicated peptic ulcer; additional risk factors include use of multiple NSAIDs and high doses of NSAIDS. Recent studies have demonstrated enhanced healing and prevention of NSAID- and aspirin-related gastrointestinal lesions with proton pump inhibitors.

NSAID-associated adverse effects and acid control aids to prevent them: a review of current treatment options

NSAIDs are central to the clinical management of a wide range of conditions. However, NSAIDs in combination with gastric acid, which has been shown to play a central role in upper gastrointestinal (GI) events, can damage the gastroduodenal mucosa and result in dyspeptic symptoms and peptic lesions such as ulceration.NSAID-associated GI mucosal injury is an important clinical problem. Gastroduodenal ulcers or ulcer complications occur in up to 25% of patients receiving NSAIDs. However, these toxicities are often not preceded by indicative symptoms. Data obtained from the Arthritis, Rheumatism, and Aging Medical Information System have shown that 50-60% of NSAID-associated peptic ulcer cases can remain clinically silent and do not present until complications occur. Therefore, prophylactic treatment to prevent GI complications may be necessary in a substantial proportion of NSAID users, especially those in groups associated with a high risk of developing these complications. Use of cyclo-oxygenase (COX)-2 selective NSAIDs, also known as 'coxibs', substantially reduces the incidence of upper GI toxicities seen with non-selective NSAIDs. However, there are concerns regarding the cardiovascular safety of coxibs. For this reason, the US FDA recommends minimal use of coxibs and only when strictly necessary. Additionally, rofecoxib has been removed from the US market and sales of valdecoxib have been suspended. Furthermore, upper GI toxicities still occur in patients receiving coxibs. Therefore, cotherapies are required to prevent and/or heal upper GI effects associated with NSAID use. Effective prophylactic and treatment strategies include misoprostol, histamine H(2) receptor antagonists and proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). The key role that gastric acid plays in upper GI adverse events among NSAID users suggests that it is important to choose the most effective agent for acid control to alleviate symptoms, heal mucosal erosions and improve the reduced quality of life in this patient population. PPIs provide effective acid suppression, which is essential to avoid GI mucosal injury, and they are, therefore, capable of dramatically decreasing the morbidity and mortality associated with this disorder. Since many serious GI complications are not heralded by any previous symptoms, physicians need to be aware of risk factor profiles that predispose patients to serious GI problems. Physicians also need to initiate the appropriate preventative acid suppressive therapy to minimise the burden of NSAID-associated GI adverse effects.

[Treatment of NSAIDs related dyspepsia]

NSAIDs-induced dyspepsia occurs in 10 to 30% of patients treated with NSAIDs, leading to discontinuation of treatment in 5 to 15%. Gastrointestinal tolerability of COX-2 selective inhibitors is better than for non-selective NSAIDs. Helicobacter pylori infection does not influence gastrointestinal tolerability of NSAIDs. Therefore, patients should not be tested and treated for H. pylori infection unless they have a history of peptic ulcer. Symptoms of NSAIDs-induced dyspepsia are poorly correlated with gastroduodenal mucosal damage. Therefore, upper gastrointestinal endoscopy should be performed only if symptom relief is not achieved with the first line empirical treatment and/or if symptoms suggestive of complications, such as bleeding, develop. Proton pump inhibitors appear to be the treatment of choice for NSAIDs-induced dyspepsia.

Épidémiologie des complications gastro-duodénales associées aux anti-inflammatoires non stéroïdiens

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents (NSAIDs) are among the most widely prescribed drugs worldwide. In France, about 25% of individuals aged 40 years or older are treated with NSAIDs at least one week in the year. Although the therapeutic benefits of these drugs are substantial, their use is limited by their gastroduodenal toxicity. Dyspepsia occurs in about 30% of patients receiving NSAIDs, an approximately two-fold enhancement of risk compared with control subjects. Asymptomatic endoscopic lesions are observed in 20 to 80% of patients, depending on population characteristics, individual NSAIDs and definitions of endoscopic lesions. The risk of symptomatic ulcer, complicated ulcer (haemorrhage, perforation, stenosis) and death related to ulcer complication is multiplied by 4 in patients treated with NSAIDs. Established risk factors for NSAID-induced gastroduodenal complications are age, ulcer history, heavy alcohol consumption, individual NSAIDs, dose, association with corticoid or aspirin or anticoagulants (ulcer haemorrhage) while the role of treatment duration and Helicobacter pylori infection are controversial.

Incidence of outpatient physician claims for upper gastrointestinal symptoms among new users of celecoxib, ibuprofen, and naproxen in an insured population in the United States

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the risk of outpatient medical claims for UGI symptoms among new users of celecoxib versus ibuprofen, and naproxen.

METHODS

The study was conducted using LifeLink, an insurance claims database of approximately 1.8 million employees, dependents, and retirees in the United States. Patients newly treated with a prescription of celecoxib, ibuprofen, or naproxen between June 1, 1999, and June 30, 2001, were included. A patient with an upper GI (UGI) symptom was any individual with an outpatient physician claim for dyspepsia (ICD-9 = 536.8), abdominal pain (789.0), or nausea/vomiting (787.0). Incidence was determined using person-time analysis. Multivariate analyses were conducted using Poisson and Cox regression models.

RESULTS

The cohort consisted of patients prescribed celecoxib (n = 68,939), ibuprofen (n = 71,456), or naproxen (n = 50,014). At baseline, celecoxib users were older and more likely to have a history of UGI or cardiovascular conditions. The incidence rate of any UGI symptom was 0.46 per 1,000 patient-days for celecoxib, 0.70 for ibuprofen, and 0.62 for naproxen. After adjusting for confounding factors using Poisson regression, the ibuprofen rate was 48% higher than the celecoxib rate (incidence rate ratio (IRR) = 1.48; 95% CI = 1.39-1.58; p < 0.001), whereas the naproxen rate was 40% higher (IRR = 1.40; 95% CI = 1.31-1.49; p < 0.001). The association between drug use and UGI symptoms was confirmed by Cox regression analysis; the hazard ratios were 1.21 (95% CI = 1.13-1.29; p < 0.001) for ibuprofen and 1.15 (95% CI = 1.07-1.23; p < 0.001) for naproxen relative to celecoxib. Younger age, female sex, medical history of UGI, cardiovascular and renal conditions, and higher baseline average healthcare expenditures for the 12-month period preceding the index prescription were also significantly associated with an increased incidence of UGI symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Celecoxib use is associated with a significantly decreased risk of outpatient physician claims for UGI symptoms compared with commonly used prescription nonspecific nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.

Gastroprotection by coxibs: what do the Celecoxib Long-Term Arthritis Safety Study and the Vioxx Gastrointestinal Outcomes Research Trial tell us?

Current evidence suggests that PPIs might be effective in maintaining patients in remission during continued NSAID use and that the combination of omeprazole plus diclofenac is as effective as treatment with celecoxib in preventing recurrent bleeding. Larger outcome studies comparing the combination of a PPI with other nonselective NSAIDs and a selective COX-2 inhibitor (and the combination of a selective COX-2 inhibitor with a PPI or misoprostol) are required to determine whether or not any regimen will further decrease or eliminate the risk of ulcer complications in high-risk individuals.