Meloxicam Does Not Affect the Antiplatelet Effect of Aspirin in Healthy Male and Female Volunteers

Perioperative Considerations for Antithrombotic Therapy in Oculofacial Surgery: A Review of Current Evidence and Practice Guidelines

PURPOSE

Recent survey studies have demonstrated wide variability in practice patterns regarding the management of antithrombotic medications in oculofacial plastic surgery. Current evidence and consensus guidelines are reviewed to guide perioperative management of antithrombotic medications.

METHODS

Comprehensive literature review of PubMed database on perioperative use of antithrombotic medication.

RESULTS/CONCLUSIONS

Perioperative antithrombotic management is largely guided by retrospective studies, consensus recommendations, and trials in other surgical fields due to the limited number of studies in oculoplastic surgery. This review summarizes evidence-based recommendations from related medical specialties and provides context for surgeons to tailor antithrombotic medication management based on patient's individual risk. The decision to continue or cease antithrombotic medications prior to surgery requires a careful understanding of risk: risk of intraoperative or postoperative bleeding versus risk of a perioperative thromboembolic event. Cessation and resumption of antithrombotic medications after surgery should always be individualized based on the patient's thrombotic risk, surgical and postoperative risk of bleeding, and the particular drugs involved, in conjunction with the prescribing doctors. In general, we recommend that high thromboembolic risk patients undergoing high bleeding risk procedures (orbital or lacrimal surgery) may stop antiplatelet agents, direct oral anticoagulants, and warfarin including bridging warfarin with low-molecular weight heparin. Low-risk patients, regardless of type of procedure performed, may stop all agents. Decision on perioperative management of antithrombotic medications should be made in conjunction with patient's internist, cardiologist, hematologist, or other involved physicians which may limit the role of guidelines depending on patient risk and should be used on a case-by-case basis. Further studies are needed to provide oculofacial-specific evidence-based guidelines.

Untargeted Metabolomics to Go beyond the Canonical Effect of Acetylsalicylic Acid

Given to its ability to irreversibly acetylate the platelet cyclooxygenase-1 enzyme, acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) is successfully employed for the prevention of cardiovascular disease. Recently, an antitumoral effect of ASA in colorectal cancer has been increasingly documented. However, the molecular and metabolic mechanisms by which ASA exerts such effect is largely unknown. Using a new, untargeted liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry approach, we have analyzed urine samples from seven healthy participants that each ingested 100 mg of ASA once daily for 1 week. Of the 2007 features detected, 25 metabolites differing after ASA ingestion (nominal p < 0.05 and variable importance in projection (VIP) score > 1) were identified, and pathway analysis revealed low levels of glutamine and of metabolites involved in histidine and purine metabolisms. Likewise, consistent with an altered fatty acid β-oxidation process, a decrease in several short- and medium-chain acyl-carnitines was observed. An abnormal β-oxidation and a lower than normal glutamine availability suggests reduced synthesis of acetyl-Co-A, as they are events linked to one another and experimentally related to ASA antiproliferative effects. While giving an example of how untargeted metabolomics allows us to explore new clinical applications of drugs, the present data provide a direction to be pursued to test the therapeutic effects of ASA—e.g., the antitumoral effect—beyond cardiovascular protection.

Therapy with activated prothrombin complex concentrate is effective in reducing dabigatran-associated blood loss in a porcine polytrauma model

Clinical use of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants is increasingly well established. However, specific agents for reversal of these drugs are not currently available. It was to objective of this study to investigate the impact of activated prothrombin complex concentrate (aPCC) on the anticoagulant effects of dabigatran in a randomised, controlled, porcine trauma model. Twenty-one pigs received oral and intravenous dabigatran, resulting in supratherapeutic plasma concentrations. Twelve minutes after injury (standardised bilateral femur fractures and blunt liver injury), animals (n=7/group) received 25 or 50 U/kg aPCC (aPCC25 and aPCC50) or placebo (control) and were followed for 5 hours. The primary endpoint was total volume of blood loss (BL). Haemodynamic and coagulation variables (prothrombin time [PT], activated partial thromboplastin time, diluted thrombin time, thrombin–antithrombin complexes, thromboelastometry, thrombin generation and D-dimers) were measured. Twelve minutes post-injury, BL was similar between groups. Compared with control (total BL: 3807 ± 570 ml) and aPCC25 (3690 ± 454 ml; p=0.77 vs control), a significant reduction in total BL (1639 ± 276 ml; p< 0.0001) and improved survival (p< 0.05) was observed with aPCC50. Dabigatran’s anticoagulant effects were effectively treated in the aPCC50 group, as measured by several parameters including EXTEM clotting time (CT) and PT. In contrast, with aPCC25, laboratory values were initially corrected but subsequently deteriorated due to ongoing blood loss. Thromboembolic or bleeding effects were not detected. In conclusion, blood loss following trauma in dabigatran-anticoagulated pigs was successfully reduced by 50 U/kg aPCC. Optimal methodology for measuring amelioration of dabigatran anticoagulation by aPCC is yet to be determined.

Meloxicam and risk of myocardial infarction: a population-based nested case-control study

Certain non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) have been associated with an increased risk of myocardial infarction (MI), a risk linked to cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibition. There are limited studies assessing the risk of MI associated with meloxicam, an increasingly popular drug with COX-2 inhibiting properties. A nested matched case-control study using The Health Improvement Network, a UK population-based database was conducted. NSAID users between 35 and 89 years of age with at least 1 year enrollment in the cohort were included. Incident MI cases were matched on age, sex, practice and event date with up to 4 controls. NSAID exposure was categorized as remote (between 60 days and 1 year), recent (between 1 and 60 days) or current relative to the event date. Current users were further classified as naproxen (negative control), diclofenac (positive control), meloxicam or other NSAID users. Multivariable conditional logistic regression was conducted to determine the risk of MI for each NSAID use categories compared with that of remote users. 9291 MI cases were matched with 30,676 controls. The cases had a higher prevalence of traditional cardiac risk factors, chronic kidney disease and inflammatory arthritis and cardioprotective drug utilization. The adjusted odds ratio of MI for current user compared to remote users were: meloxicam 1.38 (1.17-1.63), naproxen 1.12 (0.96-1.30) and diclofenac 1.37 (1.25-1.50). In this large population-based study, meloxicam increased the risk of MI by 38%. This study warrants cautious use of this increasingly popular drug.

[The problem of cardiac safety of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs]

The paper considers an update on the mechanisms for the development of adverse reactions of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs on the cardiovascular system.

The prognostic utility of tests of platelet function for the detection of 'aspirin resistance' in patients with established cardiovascular or cerebrovascular disease: a systematic review and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

The use of aspirin is well established for secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease. However, a proportion of patients suffer repeat cardiovascular events despite being prescribed aspirin treatment. It is uncertain whether or not this is due to an inherent inability of aspirin to sufficiently modify platelet activity. This report aims to investigate whether or not insufficient platelet function inhibition by aspirin ('aspirin resistance'), as defined using platelet function tests (PFTs), is linked to the occurrence of adverse clinical outcomes, and further, whether or not patients at risk of future adverse clinical events can be identified through PFTs.

OBJECTIVES

To review systematically the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness evidence regarding the association between PFT designation of 'aspirin resistance' and the risk of adverse clinical outcome(s) in patients prescribed aspirin therapy. To undertake exploratory model-based cost-effectiveness analysis on the use of PFTs.

DATA SOURCES

Bibliographic databases (e.g. MEDLINE from inception and EMBASE from 1980), conference proceedings and ongoing trial registries up to April 2012.

METHODS

Standard systematic review methods were used for identifying clinical and cost studies. A risk-of-bias assessment tool was adapted from checklists for prognostic and diagnostic studies. (Un)adjusted odds and hazard ratios for the association between 'aspirin resistance', for different PFTs, and clinical outcomes are presented; however, heterogeneity between studies precluded pooling of results. A speculative economic model of a PFT and change of therapy strategy was developed.

RESULTS

One hundred and eight relevant studies using a variety of PFTs, 58 in patients on aspirin monotherapy, were analysed in detail. Results indicated that some PFTs may have some prognostic utility, i.e. a trend for more clinical events to be associated with groups classified as 'aspirin resistant'. Methodological and clinical heterogeneity prevented a quantitative summary of prognostic effect. Study-level effect sizes were generally small and absolute outcome risk was not substantially different between 'aspirin resistant' and 'aspirin sensitive' designations. No studies on the cost-effectiveness of PFTs for 'aspirin resistance' were identified. Based on assumptions of PFTs being able to accurately identify patients at high risk of clinical events and such patients benefiting from treatment modification, the economic model found that a test-treat strategy was likely to be cost-effective. However, neither assumption is currently evidence based.

LIMITATIONS

Poor or incomplete reporting of studies suggests a potentially large volume of inaccessible data. Analyses were confined to studies on patients prescribed aspirin as sole antiplatelet therapy at the time of PFT. Clinical and methodological heterogeneity across studies precluded meta-analysis. Given the lack of robust data the economic modelling was speculative.

CONCLUSIONS

Although evidence indicates that some PFTs may have some prognostic value, methodological and clinical heterogeneity between studies and different approaches to analyses create confusion and inconsistency in prognostic results, and prevented a quantitative summary of their prognostic effect. Protocol-driven and adequately powered primary studies are needed, using standardised methods of measurements to evaluate the prognostic ability of each test in the same population(s), and ideally presenting individual patient data. For any PFT to inform individual risk prediction, it will likely need to be considered in combination with other prognostic factors, within a prognostic model.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO 2012:CRD42012002151.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Origin of the Enigmatic Stepwise Tight-Binding Inhibition of Cyclooxygenase-1

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are widely used for the treatment of pain, fever, inflammation, and some types of cancers. Their mechanism of action is the inhibition of isoforms 1 and 2 of the enzyme cyclooxygenase (COX-1 and COX-2, respectively). However, both nonselective and selective NSAIDs may have side effects that include gastric intestinal bleeding, peptic ulcer formation, kidney problems, and occurrences of myocardial infarction. The search for selective high-affinity COX inhibitors resulted in a number of compounds characterized by a slow, tight-binding inhibition that occurs in a two-step manner. It has been suggested that the final, only very slowly reversible, tight-binding event is the result of conformational changes in the enzyme. However, the nature of these conformational changes has remained elusive. Here we explore the structural determinants of the tight-binding phenomenon in COX-1 with molecular dynamics and free energy simulations. The calculations reveal how different classes of inhibitors affect the equilibrium between two conformational substates of the enzyme in distinctly different ways. The class of tight-binding inhibitors is found to exclusively stabilize an otherwise unfavorable enzyme conformation and bind significantly stronger to this state than to that normally observed in crystal structures. By also computing free energies of binding to the two enzyme conformations for 16 different NSAIDs, we identify an induced-fit mechanism and the key structural features associated with high-affinity tight binding. These results may facilitate the rational development of new COX inhibitors with improved selectivity profiles.

The effect of COX-2-selective meloxicam on the myocardial, vascular and renal risks: a systematic review

PURPOSE

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are known to increase the risk of cardiovascular (CV) and renal incidences, especially at higher doses and upon long term use. However, the available reports are criticized for lack of specificity, grouping of vastly different outcomes together and ignoring the heterogeneity among NSAIDs. In this systematic review, we are reporting CV/renal risks associated with meloxicam, stratified into myocardial, vascular, renal risk categories, to address the differential nature of NSAIDs effects on different body systems. We are also reporting composite CV/renal risk to present overall risk associated with various covariates.

METHODS

We searched the online healthcare databases for observational studies or randomized controlled trials, reporting myocardial or all-cause mortality outcome (>90 days exposure) and/or vascular/renal outcomes (any exposure) after meloxicam use, published until April 2014. The combined odd ratio values (OR'; 95% CI) were calculated using the random effect inverse variance model.

RESULTS

We found 19 eligible studies out of 2,422 reports. Meloxicam demonstrated a low increase in composite risk (OR' 1.14; CI 1.04-1.25) which was mainly vascular in nature (OR' 1.35; CI 1.18-1.55] as it did not elevate myocardial (OR' 1.13; CI 0.98-1.32) or renal (OR', 0.99; CI 0.72-1.35) risks. Relative to meloxicam, other NSAIDs increased the composite risk, in a dose-dependent fashion, in the following order: rofecoxib > indomethacin > diclofenac > celecoxib > naproxen > ibuprofen. OR' was also influenced by type of disease and the comparator used, and acetylsalicylic acid.

CONCLUSION

NSAIDs are heterogeneous in increasing CV/renal risks. The low increased risk associated with meloxicam is mainly vascular in origin.

Drug-drug interaction between NSAIDS and low-dose aspirin: a focus on cardiovascular and GI toxicity

INTRODUCTION

The aging of the population in the US and other countries means that a large number of people will likely take NSAIDs for the relief of pain and low-dose aspirin (LD-ASA) for cardioprotection. However, the cardioprotective value of LD-ASA can be compromised in patients who take NSAIDs concomitantly, because some NSAIDs competitively bind to critical amino-acid residues on cyclooxygenase (COX) enzymes and interfere with the mechanism of antiplatelet activity of LD-ASA.

AREAS COVERED

A review of the literature was conducted to provide an overview of current issues surrounding the concomitant use of NSAIDs and LD-ASA, to explore potential mechanisms for this drug-drug interaction and to consider current and future treatment options that may mitigate the risk associated with their concomitant use.

EXPERT OPINION

NSAIDs offer effective pain relief for the most common forms of pain, such as low back pain, musculoskeletal pain associated with arthritis, postsurgical pain, headache, acute pain syndromes, menstrual pain and dental pain. The development of NSAID formulations that offer effective pain control with fewer or less serious adverse effects due to interference with ASA would be a valuable medical advance. Several promising treatment options and regimens may be available in the future.

Influence of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs on the antiplatelet effects of aspirin in rats

Low-dose aspirin acts by irreversibly acetylating internal cyclooxygenase-1 (COX-1) on platelets, thereby suppressing platelet aggregation. Because nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) also inhibit COX-1, the antiplatelet effects of aspirin may be suppressed when it is co-administered with NSAIDs. In this study, the influences of ibuprofen, loxoprofen sodium and etodolac on the antiplatelet effects of aspirin were investigated in male Sprague-Dawley (SD) rats. Aspirin and/or NSAIDs were administered orally at single or multiple daily doses. Platelet aggregation (ADP and collagen were added as stimuli) and serum thromboxane B(2) (TXB(2)) concentrations were measured. The maximum inhibitions of aggregation in the aspirin before ibuprofen group were 41.0±7.8% for ADP and 38.7±5.4% for collagen at 6 h after administration; similar values were seen in the aspirin group; however, percent inhibitions in the aspirin before ibuprofen multiple administration group were lower than those in the aspirin group. Thus, the inhibitory effects of daily low-dose aspirin on platelets are competitively inhibited by the prolonged use of multiple daily doses of ibuprofen. In contrast, serum TXB(2) concentrations in all groups were lower than those in the control group (drug-free). This suggests that the relationship between the inhibition of platelet COX-1 and the suppression of platelet aggregation is nonlinear. When aspirin was administered with loxoprofen sodium, similar effects were observed; however, with etodolac, the antiplatelet effects in all groups were equal to those in the aspirin group. Accordingly, if co-administration with NSAIDs is necessary with low-dose aspirin, a selective COX-2 inhibitor, such as etodolac, should be used.

Celecoxib does not attenuate the antiplatelet effects of aspirin and clopidogrel in healthy volunteers

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The prevalence of arthritis, which is often treated with celecoxib, is high in patients with coronary artery disease. Furthermore, celecoxib has been reported to reduce restenosis after coronary stenting by inhibiting expression of the proto-oncogene Akt. A concern is that celecoxib increases thrombogenicity by inhibiting the synthesis of prostacyclin in endothelial cells. However, it is not known whether the administration of celecoxib will attenuate the antiplatelet effects of aspirin and clopidogrel, which are used after stenting. We addressed this gap in our knowledge.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

We recruited healthy volunteers (n=40) and randomized them into five subgroups (n=8 for each group: aspirin, celecoxib, aspirin+celecoxib, aspirin+clopidogrel, and aspirin+clopidogrel+celecoxib). Each subject received their medications for 6 days and blood samples were taken on day 0 and day 7. Celecoxib (200 mg twice a day), and/or aspirin (100 mg daily), and/or clopidogrel (75 mg daily) were administered. We compared platelet function among subgroups using light transmittance aggregometry and arachidonic acid metabolite assays.

RESULTS

Celecoxib treatment alone did not significantly affect platelet aggregation. The reduction in adenosine diphosphase (ADP)-induced platelet aggregation by aspirin+clopidogrel was not affected by addition of celecoxib (31.3+/-6.9% vs. 32.4+/-12.2%, p=0.83). Inhibition of collagen-induced platelet aggregation by aspirin+clopidogrel was not affected by addition of celecoxib (47.6+/-13.4% vs. 51.6+/-3.7%, p=0.69). Drug-induced changes in prostacyclin and thromboxane levels did not differ among treatment groups.

CONCLUSION

Celecoxib treatment does not interfere with the antiplatelet effects of aspirin or clopidogrel, suggesting that celecoxib can be safely administered in combination with dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with coronary stenting without increased thrombogenicity.

Prehospital advances in the management of severe penetrating trauma

BACKGROUND

Historic advances in combat prehospital care have been made in the last decade. Unlike other areas of critical care, most of these innovations are not the result of significant improvements in technology, but by conceptual changes in how care is delivered in a tactical setting. The new concept of Tactical Combat Casualty Care has revolutionized the management of combat casualties in the prehospital tactical setting.

DISCUSSION

The Tactical Combat Casualty Care concept recognizes the unique epidemiologic and tactical considerations of combat care and that simply extrapolating civilian care concepts to the battlefield are insufficient.

SUMMARY

This article examines the most recent and salient advances that have occurred in battlefield prehospital care driven by our ongoing combat experience in the Iraq and Afghanistan and the evolution around the Tactical Combat Casualty Care concept.

[Are the NSAIDs able to compromising the cardio-preventive efficacy of aspirin?]

OBJECTIVES

Some studies have recently suggested a potential pharmacodynamic interaction between aspirin and some non-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). We have evaluated the reality of this pharmacodynamic interaction and analyse its clinical pertinence.

METHODS

Literature review (Medline search - December 2005).

RESULTS

Several ex vivo studies show that some non-selective NSAIDs can block the active site of Cox1 thus preventing aspirin from exerting its platelet anti-aggregating cardio-preventive action. Cox2 selective molecules do not act at this site. The few studies, mainly case reports, have analysed the potential loss of the cardiovascular preventive benefit of aspirin in patients receiving concomitantly non-selective anti-inflammatory drugs with controversial results.

IN PRACTICE

It seems necessary to know the existence of this pharmacodynamic interaction between aspirin at a low dose and some non-selective anti-inflammatory drugs notably ibuprofen and naproxen. In the absence of a clear clinical demonstration, it is advisable to avoid the non-selective NSAIDs in patients treated with a low dose of aspirin. It might be advisable to switch to an anti-aggregating treatment other than aspirin (clopidrogel, etc.) in these cases. At the present time, however, there are no data on which to base such a recommendation.

Aspirin resistance: truth or dare

Acetylsalicylic acid, or aspirin (ASA), is widely used in patients with cardiovascular disease to prevent acute ischemic events. However, platelet response to ASA is not equal in all individuals, and a high variability in the prevalence of ASA resistance is reported in the literature (0.4-83%). Actually, ASA resistance is poorly understood; this stems from the fact that its definition is unclear, its presence can be evaluated by a number of assays that are not equivalent, and its prevalence may vary widely based on the population studied. This article (1) exposes the difficulties in defining ASA resistance; (2) discusses the mechanisms by which ASA resistance may occur; (3) presents the characteristics that may put patients at greater risk of exhibiting ASA resistance; and (4) discusses the clinical impact of ASA resistance in patients requiring chronic therapy.

Paradoxical rebound platelet activation after painkillers cessation: missing risk for vascular events?

BACKGROUND

Several reliable reports strongly indicate that the use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events. Considering the key role of platelets in coronary atherosclerosis and the fact that antiplatelet therapy with aspirin (and more recently, clopidogrel) has been associated with reduced vascular mortality, we sought to determine the effect of therapy and withdrawal of NSAIDs and COX-2 inhibitors on platelet activity.

METHODS

Platelet characteristics from 34 aspirin-naive volunteers who were receiving NSAIDs and COX-2 inhibitors were compared with 138 drug-free controls. Platelets were assessed twice at baseline (at least 1 month of NSAIDs and COX-2 inhibitors) and after a 14-day washout. We used adenosine diphosphate-induced conventional aggregometry, the point-of-care Ultegra analyzer (Ultegra Accumetrics, San Diego, Calif), and whole blood flow cytometry.

RESULTS

Platelet activity during therapy with NSAIDs and COX-2 inhibitors was similar and unremarkable between groups. However, there was a highly significant increase of platelet activity as assessed by conventional aggregometry (P=.0003), Ultegra analyzer readings (P=.03), and expression of GPIIb/IIIa (P=.02), P-selectin (P=.03), and platelet endothelial cell adhesion molecule-1 (P=.001) after withdrawal from NSAIDs and COX-2 inhibitors.

CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest that drug cessation, rather than continuous therapy with NSAIDs and COX-2 inhibitors, may be associated with rebound platelet activation, which may predispose one to a higher risk of vascular events. This hypothesis requires intensive testing in crossover randomized studies and may justify more aggressive antiplatelet regimens in patients after discontinuation of therapy with NSAIDs and COX-2 inhibitors.

Current Status of NonsteroidalAnti-Inflammatory Drugsin Physiatry

The gastropathy associated with the administration of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for musculoskeletal pain disorders has contributed to significant morbidity and mortality. The distinction between the cyclooxygenase 1 and 2 enzymatic properties lead to the development of selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitory NSAIDs with the prospect of reducing NSAID-related gastropathy while maintaining anti-inflammatory properties. Initial studies of the efficacy and safety of the selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors seemed promising. Larger clinical trials were carried out to reinforce the efficacy and safety of the cyclooxygenase-2 anti-inflammatory medications (coxibs). Further analysis of these trials raised concern with regard to both the efficacy and safety of this class of drugs. The most recent clinical trials of the coxibs have demonstrated significant cardiovascular thrombogenic potential, particularly at higher doses. Clinical investigators and regulatory agencies have questioned whether these findings mitigate the efficacy of coxibs and NSAIDs in general in the prophylaxis of colonic polyps, Alzheimer's disease, and more saliently, musculoskeletal pain disorders. This article addresses the current controversy of the efficacy and safety of the coxibs and NSAIDs in general based on recent clinical trials and review by healthcare consortiums. This article also provides guidelines regarding the use of NSAIDs, including the diminishing armamentarium of the coxibs, and the alternative therapeutic options available to the physiatrist in managing musculoskeletal pain disorders.

Meloxicam: a reappraisal of pharmacokinetics, efficacy and safety

The discovery of two distinct isoenzymes of COX has led to the development and clinical introduction of COX-2 inhibitors with increased selectivity onto the market. Meloxicam is a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) of the oxicam class, and is a preferential inhibitor of COX-2, demonstrating effectiveness with anti-inflammatory, analgesic and antipyretic activity. Meloxicam is therapeutically utilised in the management of osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis. Trials have examined the risk of gastrointestinal ulceration of meloxicam when compared with traditional non-specific COX-inhibiting NSAIDs with mixed results; meloxicam seems to have a greater gastrointestinal risk than the highly specific COX-2 NSAIDs. Meloxicam has a plasma half-life of approximately 20 h and is convenient for once daily administration. Neither moderate renal nor hepatic insufficiency significantly alters the pharmacokinetics of meloxicam in short-term studies. Furthermore, dose adjustment is not required in the elderly. Recent drug-drug interaction studies have demonstrated that meloxicam interacts with some medications, including cholestyramine, lithium and some inhibitors of cytochrome P450 -2C9 and -3A4. Consequently, increased clinical vigilance should be maintained when coprescribing some medications with meloxicam. Concentration-dependent therapeutic and toxicological effects have yet to be extensively elucidated for meloxicam. Long-term safety in various organ systems, especially in the heart and vascular system and with concomitant drug administration, remains to be proven. The pharmacokinetics of meloxicam enables once daily application, which increases compliance compared with some shorter acting NSAIDs; however, long-term clinical data clearly demonstrating safety and efficacy advantages are lacking.

Disease modification and cardiovascular risk reduction: two sides of the same coin?

Inflammatory rheumatic diseases are associated with a substantial increase in accelerated atherosclerosis, with complex interactions between traditional and disease-related risk factors. Therefore, cardiovascular risk reduction should be considered as integral to the control of disease activity in the care plans of patients with RA, SLE and, arguably any chronic inflammatory disease. Shared care structures, already established for the monitoring of DMARDs, could be adapted to communicate and monitor cardiovascular risk reduction objectives. We review the evidence for the efficacy of a range of therapeutic strategies, the majority of which impact on both disease activity and cardiovascular risk. The algorithm proposed here attempts to distil the latest advice from specialist panels at the National Cholesterol Education Program and the British Hypertension Society, as well as incorporating the existing data on SLE and RA patients. The algorithm is structured to minimize clinic time and resources necessary to stratify patients into groups for ROUTINE, SUBSTANTIAL or INTENSIVE risk management; the associated table summarizes optimal therapeutic objectives in each of these groups. The implication of this algorithm is that management of cardiovascular risk should be much more aggressive than is currently the norm in patients with chronic inflammatory diseases, such as RA and SLE. Long-term studies of such interventions are needed to further clarify the benefits of intensive cardiovascular risk management in these patients.