Tolerability and adverse events in clinical trials of celecoxib in osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis: systematic review and meta-analysis of information from company clinical trial reports

Celecoxib ameliorates diabetic sarcopenia by inhibiting inflammation, stress response, mitochondrial dysfunction, and subsequent activation of the protein degradation systems

Aim: Diabetic sarcopenia leads to disability and seriously affects the quality of life. Currently, there are no effective therapeutic strategies for diabetic sarcopenia. Our previous studies have shown that inflammation plays a critical role in skeletal muscle atrophy. Interestingly, the connection between chronic inflammation and diabetic complications has been revealed. However, the effects of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug celecoxib on diabetic sarcopenia remains unclear. Materials and Methods: The streptozotocin (streptozotocin)-induced diabetic sarcopenia model was established. Rotarod test and grip strength test were used to assess skeletal muscle function. Hematoxylin and eosin and immunofluorescence staining were performed to evaluate inflammatory infiltration and the morphology of motor endplates in skeletal muscles. Succinate dehydrogenase (SDH) staining was used to determine the number of succinate dehydrogenase-positive muscle fibers. Dihydroethidium staining was performed to assess the levels of reactive oxygen species (ROS). Western blot was used to measure the levels of proteins involved in inflammation, oxidative stress, endoplasmic reticulum stress, ubiquitination, and autophagic-lysosomal pathway. Transmission electron microscopy was used to evaluate mitophagy. Results: Celecoxib significantly ameliorated skeletal muscle atrophy, improving skeletal muscle function and preserving motor endplates in diabetic mice. Celecoxib also decreased infiltration of inflammatory cell, reduced the levels of IL-6 and TNF-α, and suppressed the activation of NF-κB, Stat3, and NLRP3 inflammasome pathways in diabetic skeletal muscles. Celecoxib decreased reactive oxygen species levels, downregulated the levels of Nox2 and Nox4, upregulated the levels of GPX1 and Nrf2, and further suppressed endoplasmic reticulum stress by inhibiting the activation of the Perk-EIF-2α-ATF4-Chop in diabetic skeletal muscles. Celecoxib also inhibited the levels of Foxo3a, Fbx32 and MuRF1 in the ubiquitin-proteasome system, as well as the levels of BNIP3, Beclin1, ATG7, and LC3Ⅱ in the autophagic-lysosomal system, and celecoxib protected mitochondria and promoted mitochondrial biogenesis by elevating the levels of SIRT1 and PGC1-α, increased the number of SDH-positive fibers in diabetic skeletal muscles. Conclusion: Celecoxib improved diabetic sarcopenia by inhibiting inflammation, oxidative stress, endoplasmic reticulum stress, and protecting mitochondria, and subsequently suppressing proteolytic systems. Our study provides evidences for the molecular mechanism and treatment of diabetic sarcopenia, and broaden the way for the new use of celecoxib in diabetic sarcopenia.

Biomimetic Fibers Based on Equidistant Micropillar Arrays Determines Chondrocyte Fate via Mechanoadaptability

It is recognized that the changes in the physical properties of extracellular matrix (ECM) result in fine-tuned cell responses including cell morphology, proliferation and differentiation. In this study, a novel patterned equidistant micropillar substrate based on polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) is designed to mimic the collagen fiber-like network of the cartilage matrix. By changing the component of the curing agent to an oligomeric base, micropillar substrates with the same topology but different stiffnesses are obtained and it is found that chondrocytes seeded onto the soft micropillar substrate maintain their phenotype by gathering type II collagen and aggrecan more effectively than those seeded onto the stiff micropillar substrate. Moreover, chondrocytes sense and respond to micropillar substrates with different stiffnesses by altering the ECM-cytoskeleton-focal adhesion axis. Further, it is found that the soft substrate-preserved chondrocyte phenotype is dependent on the activation of Wnt/β-catenin signaling. Finally, it is indicated that the changes in osteoid-like region formation and cartilage phenotype loss in the stiffened sclerotic area of osteoarthritis cartilage to validate the changes triggered by micropillar substrates with different stiffnesses. This study provides the cell behavior changes that are more similar to those of real chondrocytes at tissue level during the transition from a normal state to a state of osteoarthritis.

Discontinuation and nonpublication analysis of chronic pain randomized controlled trials

Introduction

The primary objective of this cross-sectional analysis is to evaluate rates of discontinuation and nonpublication of Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of therapeutic interventions to treat chronic pain.

Methods

Using ClinicalTrials.gov, a sample was obtained which included clinical trials pertaining to chronic pain. Trials were analyzed for publication status and completion status of each trial. If information was unavailable on the trial registry database, or could not be allocated through a systematic search, the corresponding trialist was contacted and data points were gathered.

Results

In our final analysis of the 408 RCTs, we found that 281 (68.9%) were published in a peer-reviewed journal and 127 (31.1%) were unpublished trials. Of 112 discontinued trials, 59 (52.7%) reached publication. In addition, 221 of 296 completed trials (74.7%) were published, and 75 (25.3%) remained unpublished after trial completion. The most common listed reason for trial discontinuation was administrative recommendations (41 of 71 trials [57.7%]), while not receiving an email reply to our standardized email from the corresponding trialist was the most common result for trial nonpublication (49 of 88 trials [55.7%]). Clinical trials funded by nonindustry sponsors were more likely to reach publication than industry-funded clinical trials (unadjusted odds ratio 1.86 [95% CI, 1.18-2.95]; adjusted odds ratio 3.01 [95% CI, 1.76-5.14]).

Conclusion

The rate of discontinuation of RCTs involving patients with chronic pain is concerning. Chronic pain affects many patients; thus, the importance of having quality data from clinical trials cannot be overstated. Our study indicates that chronic pain RCTs are frequently discontinued and their findings often go unpublished - all of which could provide crucial information to providers and patients regarding the treatment of chronic pain. We offer suggestions to enhance chronic pain RCT completion, thereby reducing the waste of resources in chronic pain research.

Effects of individual shock wave therapy vs celecoxib on hip pain caused by femoral head necrosis

BACKGROUND

Celecoxib has been used to treat hip discomfort and functional difficulties associated with osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH), although significant adverse reactions often follow long-term use. Extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) can delay the progression of ONFH, alleviate the pain and functional limitations it causes, and avoid the adverse effects of celecoxib.

AIM

To investigate the effects of individual ESWT, a treatment alternative to the use of celecoxib, in alleviating pain and dysfunction caused by ONFH.

METHODS

This was a randomized, controlled, double-blinded, non-inferiority trial. We examined 80 patients for eligibility in this study; 8 patients were excluded based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. A total of 72 subjects with ONFH were randomly assigned to group A (n = 36; celecoxib + alendronate + sham-placebo shock wave) or group B (n = 36; individual focused shock wave [ESWT based on magnetic resonance imaging three-dimensional (MRI-3D) reconstruction] + alendronate). The outcomes were assessed at baseline, at the end of treatment, and at an 8-wk follow-up. The primary outcome measure was treatment efficiency after 2 wk of intervention using the Harris hip score (HHS) (improvement of 10 points or more from the baseline was deemed sufficient). Secondary outcome measures were post-treatment HHS, visual analog scale (VAS), and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scores.

RESULTS

After treatment, the pain treatment efficiency of group B was greater than that of group A (69% vs 51%; 95%CI: 4.56% to 40.56%), with non-inferiority thresholds of -4.56% and -10%, respectively. Furthermore, the HHS, WOMAC, and VAS scores in group B dramatically improved during the follow-up period as compared to those in group A (P < 0.001). After therapy, the VAS and WOMAC in group A were significantly improved from the 2^nd to 8^th wk (P < 0.001), although HHS was only significantly altered at the 2 wk point (P < 0.001). On the 1^st d and 2^nd wk after treatment, HHS and VAS scores were different between groups, with the difference in HHS lasting until week 4. Neither group had severe complications such as skin ulcer infection or lower limb motor-sensory disturbance.

CONCLUSION

Individual shock wave therapy (ESWT) based on MRI-3D reconstruction was not inferior to celecoxib in managing hip pain and restrictions associated with ONFH.

Comparison of cardiorenal safety of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the treatment of arthritis: a network meta-analysis

Background

Arthritis includes osteoarthritis (OA), rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and other arthritis-related disorders. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are one of the most widely used drugs for the treatment of arthritis. However, there remains a concern that some currently used NSAIDs may increase the risk of cardiorenal adverse events in patients with arthritis. Although it has been established that some NSAIDs are associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular and renal events, their safety varies widely. To provide insight into drug use, this study systematically assessed and compared the incidence of cardiovascular and renal events in different NSAIDs by using Bayesian meta-analysis.

Methods

The PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on NSAIDs. Databases were searched from the inception to April 25, 2022. Two investigators independently screened articles according to the Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcomes, Study design (PICOS) principle, extracted data, and assessed the quality of articles using Cochrane Risk of Bias assessing tools. R software (version 4.1.3) was used for network meta-analysis (NMA).

Results

The analysis ultimately included 20 articles with a total of 144,957 patients and 13 interventions. The risk of bias in the included articles was generally moderate. Ibuprofen was associated with the highest incidence of hypertension outcomes [comparing with placebo OR (95% CI): 3.24 (1.71, 5.82)], rofecoxib with the highest incidence of renal events [comparing with placebo OR (95% CI): 4.46 (1.49, 14.73)], ibuprofen with the highest incidence of cardiovascular events [comparing with placebo OR (95% CI): 2.39 (0.82, 8.06), and naproxen with the highest incidence of edema [comparing with placebo OR (95% CI): 2.31 (1.16, 4.47)].

Conclusions

The NMA results showed that amtolmetin guacil was relatively safer, but it needs further investigation. Rofecoxib was associated with a higher incidence of cardiorenal adverse events, ibuprofen with a higher incidence of cardiovascular events and hypertension, and naproxen with a higher incidence of renal events and edema. Clinicians should weigh the efficacy of NSAIDs against renal and cardiovascular toxicity when prescribing NSAIDs for the treatment of arthritis.

Behcet's Disease Mimicking Crohn's Disease: A Diagnostic Pitfall in GI Tract Biopsies

Behcet's disease is a rare entity. It's a multi-systemic inflammatory disease of unknown etiology characterized by recurrent ulcers and vasculitis, mainly including the oral cavity, eyes, gastrointestinal tract and joints. Crohn's disease is a chronic inflammatory disorder that may affect the same organs as Behcet's disease, however more frequently the gastrointestinal tract. Distinguishing Behcet's disease from Crohn's disease can be challenging due to the overlapping clinical presentation and similar morphology features on pathology biopsy specimens. This is a case report of a 32-year-old female who first presented at the emergency department with fatigue, weight loss, arthralgia, and erythema nodosum. The patient was admitted for oral ulcers, skin rash, genital ulcers, and melena one month later. Treatment with prednisone was started at the time and further workup for Behcet's disease versus inflammatory bowel disease was started. Her esophagus biopsy shows granulomatous-like vasculitis, and her colon biopsies show overlapping features with Crohn's disease. Herein, we present a rare and interesting case in which Behcet's disease mimics inflammatory bowel disease on the gastrointestinal tract biopsies but with some unique findings and diagnostic pitfalls for gastrointestinal tract vasculitis and ulceration.

Gastrointestinal Complications Associated With Non-steroidal Anti-inflammatory Drug Use Among Adults: A Retrospective, Single-Center Study

Background

Traditional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are recognized to injure the upper gastrointestinal tract (GIT) mucosa. For example, gastric mucosal hemorrhages can be caused by a single dose of 650 mg of aspirin. Nearly 30% to 50% of NSAID users showed endoscopic lesions including subepithelial hemorrhages, erosions, and ulcerations. These lesions are often asymptomatic and are mostly found in the gastric antrum. With the chronic exposure, the mucosa adapts to the aggression of the NSAIDs, whereby these lesions slowly lessen or fade.

Aim

The aim of this study is to detect the association between NSAIDs and gastrointestinal complications among the general population in the Aseer region, Saudi Arabia.

Methodology

A record-based retrospective study was conducted targeting people with GIT complications who were 20 years old and above. We reviewed patients' records from the GIT clinic in the Aseer region of Saudi Arabia. We reviewed specifically patients who had GIT complications like gastritis, abdominal pain, GIT bleeding, heartburn, nausea, vomiting, peptic ulcer, and diarrhea. Then we contacted those patients individually to fill out a questionnaire. Participants less than 18 years, those who refused to complete the questionnaire, or any patients with no history of GIT complications were excluded. An online questionnaire was sent to the patients with GIT complications. The questionnaire included participant's personal data, NSAID use, and associated GIT complications. The questionnaire was uploaded online using social media platforms by the researchers and their relatives and friends during the period from March 2012 to May 2022.

Results

A total of 211 participants with GIT complications completed the study questionnaire. Participant ages ranged from 20-59 years with a mean age of 31.2 ± 12.9 years old. A total of 140 (66.4%) were males and 175 (82.9%) were from urban areas. A total of 156 (73.9%) were non-smokers. A total of 103 (48.8%) participants used NSAIDs. As for complications, the most reported were peptic ulcer (37.9%), GIT bleeding (5.8%), GIT erosions (4.9%), and intestinal obstruction (3.9%) while 59.2% had no complications.

Conclusions

The current study revealed that nearly one out of every two participants in the Aseer region mainly used NSAIDs as tablets for pain. Regarding high utilization rates, less than half of them developed GIT complications, mainly peptic ulcers.

Symptoms Compatible with Rome IV Functional Bowel Disorder in Patients with Ankylosing Spondylitis

OBJECTIVES

To determine the frequency of symptoms meeting Rome IV functional bowel disorder (FBD) in patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS), investigate factors associated with FBD symptoms, and assess whether having FBD symptoms might influence AS disease activity.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, we enrolled 153 AS patients without known colonic ulcer and 56 sex- and age-matched controls to evaluate FBD (or its subtypes) symptoms. Disease characteristics were also evaluated in AS group.

RESULTS

Sixty (39.2%) of 153 AS patients had FBD symptoms, which was more prevalent than controls (23.2%). Besides, symptoms compatible with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and chronic diarrhea were detected in 18 and 43 AS patients respectively. For AS group, multivariable logistic regression analyses showed that symptoms of FBD, IBS, and chronic diarrhea were negatively associated with using non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID), and positively associated with comorbid fibromyalgia, respectively. In exploration about effects of FBD (or its subtypes) symptoms on AS disease activity by multivariable linear regression analyses, FBD symptoms and chronic diarrhea had universal positive associations with assessments of AS disease characteristics respectively.

CONCLUSION

Patients with AS had frequent symptoms compatible with FBD, IBS, and chronic diarrhea, proportions of which were lower in those with NSAID-use. The improvement of FBD symptoms and chronic diarrhea might be conducive to disease status of AS patients.

Efficacy and safety of single-dose DFN-15 for treatment of acute postsurgical dental pain: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

ABSTRACT

The analgesic efficacy and safety of DFN-15, a new oral liquid formulation of celecoxib with more rapid absorption than the capsule, were evaluated in the treatment of acute pain in adult patients after dental surgery. In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging study, 120 otherwise healthy adults who underwent the extraction of bilateral impacted mandibular third molar teeth and experienced moderate to severe pain postsurgery were randomly assigned, in a 1:1:1:1 ratio, to receive one dose of either placebo or DFN-15 at 3 doses: 62.5, 125, and 250 mg. Participants were evaluated at prespecified time points over 8 hours after study drug administration, using several instruments, including the 11-point Numerical Pain Rating Scale, 5-point Pain Relief Scale, and 5-point Treatment Satisfaction Scale. Rescue analgesic (oxycodone / acetaminophen) was permitted. The primary endpoint was the summed pain intensity difference (SPID) over the 6-hour postdose period (SPID6), which was compared between each DFN-15 dose and placebo using analysis of covariance. Other assessments of pain relief, use of rescue medication, and safety were also analyzed. All 3 doses of DFN-15 were significantly superior to placebo in SPID6 (least square mean difference over placebo: -756.6, -1120.7, and -1355.1, P < 0.0001 for all comparisons). In addition, DFN-15 was generally superior to placebo in other endpoints, including reduction of pain intensity, speed and magnitude of pain relief, treatment satisfaction, and rescue medication use. DFN-15 was similar to placebo in the incidence of adverse events with no apparent dose-related effects.

A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study of the Efficacy, Tolerability, and Safety of Celecoxib Oral Solution (ELYXYB) in Acute Treatment of Episodic Migraine with or without Aura

Background

Safe, effective, oral therapies are needed for acute treatment of migraine. This clinical trial assessed the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of celecoxib oral solution (ELYXYB) in a single migraine attack associated with moderate-to-severe pain.

Methods

This was a phase III, randomized (1:1), double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, conducted at 41 US centers from December 2016 to October 2017. Adults with episodic migraine (with or without aura) for ≥1 year were treated with a single 4.8 mL dose of 120-mg celecoxib oral solution or placebo. Co-primary endpoints were the proportion of patients who were pain-free and free from the most bothersome migraine symptom (MBS) at 2 hours post-dose. The MBS was identified at screening from among nausea, photophobia, or phonophobia.

Results

Six hundred thirty-one patients were randomized (celecoxib oral solution, n=316; placebo, n=315; mean age 41 years, range 18-75; 84.3% female). One study site met prespecified outlier criteria (defined as a treatment effect estimate that was at least twice as large as all other sites) and was excluded from efficacy analyses. This site had a mean 2-hour pain freedom placebo response rate of 75% vs a combined mean of 23.5% for all other sites. In subsequent analysis, 2-hour post-dose pain freedom response rates were significantly higher in the celecoxib oral solution group vs placebo (32.8%, [27.2%, 38.8%]) vs 23.5%, [18.5%, 29.2%]; P=0.020). For 2-hour post-dose MBS freedom, response rates were significantly higher in the celecoxib oral solution group vs placebo (58.1% [51.4%, 64.5%] vs 43.9% [37.2%, 50.7%]; P=0.003). A total of 10.7% (31/289) of patients treated with celecoxib oral solution and 9.9% (28/283) of placebo-treated patients reported a treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE). Study drug-related TEAEs were reported by 7.3% (21/289) and 7.4% (21/283) of celecoxib oral solution and placebo patients, respectively; the most common were nausea (celecoxib oral solution: 1.4% [4/289] vs placebo: 1.8% [5/283]) and dysgeusia (celecoxib oral solution: 1.7% [5/289] vs placebo: 1.1% [3/283]). No serious TEAEs, deaths, or drug-related TEAEs leading to withdrawal were reported.

Conclusion

Celecoxib oral solution is a safe, effective COX-2-selective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug for the treatment of acute migraine. In this analysis, celecoxib oral solution was significantly more effective than placebo and was also associated with a low rate of gastric TEAEs. Celecoxib oral solution may provide a convenient, alternate option to currently available treatments.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03009019; registered January 4, 2017; retrospectively registered, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03009019.

Physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling for prediction of celecoxib pharmacokinetics according to CYP2C9 genetic polymorphism

Celecoxib is a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) and a representative selective cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 inhibitor, which is commonly prescribed for osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, acute pain, and primary dysmenorrhea. It is mainly metabolized by CYP2C9 and partly by CYP3A4 after oral administration. Many studies reported that CYP2C9 genetic polymorphism has significant effects on the pharmacokinetics of celecoxib and the occurrence of adverse drug reactions. The aim of this study was to develop a physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) model of celecoxib according to CYP2C9 genetic polymorphism for personalized pharmacotherapy. Initially, a clinical pharmacokinetic study was conducted where a single dose (200 mg) of celecoxib was administered to 39 healthy Korean subjects with CYP2C9*1/*1 or CYP2C9*1/*3 genotypes to obtain data for PBPK development. Based on the conducted pharmacokinetic study and a previous pharmacokinetic study involving subjects with CYP2C9*1/*13 and CYP2C9*3/*3 genotype, PBPK model for celecoxib was developed. A PBPK model for CYP2C9*1/*1 genotype group was developed and then scaled to other genotype groups (CYP2C9*1/*3, CYP2C9*1/*13 and CYP2C9*3/*3). After model development, model validation was performed with comparison of five pharmacokinetic studies. As a result, the developed PBPK model of celecoxib successfully described the pharmacokinetics of each CYP2C9 genotype group and its predicted values were within the acceptance criterion. Additionally, all the predicted values were within two-fold error range in comparison to the previous pharmacokinetic studies. This study demonstrates the possibility of determining the appropriate dosage of celecoxib for each individual through the PBPK modeling with CYP2C9 genomic information. This approach could contribute to the reduction of adverse drug reactions of celecoxib and enable precision medicine.

Acute Treatment of Migraine with Celecoxib Oral Solution: Results of a Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial

Background

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are widely used for migraine, but gastrointestinal tolerability limits use. We previously reported results from the first treatment period of this 2-period, randomized, controlled study comparing DFN-15—an oral, ready-made liquid solution of a selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitor celecoxib—with placebo for the acute treatment of a moderate-severe migraine attack. Herein, we report the effects of treatment for the second treatment period.

Methods

In the first treatment period of this trial, adults with migraine were randomized to double-blind trial treatment of attacks of moderate or severe pain with DFN-15,120 mg or placebo. For the second treatment period, reported herein, participants were re-randomized to treat an attack of any baseline pain intensity (mild, moderate, or severe). Co-primary efficacy endpoints specified for the first attack were not specified for the second attack.

Results

Of the 531 patients who completed the first treatment period, 491 (n = 243 DFN-15; n = 248 placebo; 87% female, mean age 41 years) were re-randomized into the second double-blind treatment period. Baseline pain intensity was mild in 17.2% (85/493) of patients, moderate in 58.4% (288/493) of patients, and severe in 22.9% (113/493) of patients. At 2 hours post-dose, DFN-15 was superior to placebo for freedom from pain (46.2% [110/238] vs 31.1% [76/244], p ≤ 0.001) and the most bothersome symptom (63.4% [121/191] vs 50.0% [98/196], p = 0.010). Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in 7.1% (35/493) of patients (DFN-15: 6.1% [15/244]; placebo 8.0% [20/249]). Study drug-related TEAEs occurred in 5.1% (25/493) of patients (DFN-15: 4.5% [11/244]; placebo 5.6% [14/249]); nausea (1% [5/493]) and dysgeusia (0.8% [4/493]) were most common. No serious TEAEs, severe TEAEs, or TEAEs leading to study drug termination were reported.

Conclusions

DFN-15 was superior to placebo for pain freedom and freedom from the most bothersome symptom when patients treat a migraine attack of any baseline pain intensity. Rates of TEAEs did not differ between treatment groups.

The Efficacy and Safety of DFN-15 for the Treatment of Migraine: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Studies

OBJECTIVES

The efficacy of DFN-15 for pain control of migraine remains controversial. We conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the influence of DFN-15 versus placebo on pain control in migraine patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We search PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, EBSCO, and Cochrane Library databases through November 2019 for randomized controlled trials assessing the effect of DFN-15 versus placebo on pain control in migraine patients. This meta-analysis is performed using the random-effects model.

RESULTS

Three randomized controlled trials are included in the meta-analysis. Overall, compared with the control group in migraine patients, lasmiditan treatment shows a positive impact on pain freedom at 2 hours (risk ratio [RR], 1.96; 95% confidence interval, 1.61-2.40; P < 0.00001), headache response at 2 hours (RR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.25-1.57; P < 0.00001), and pain freedom at 24 hours (RR, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.33-2.62; P = 0.0003), but has no obvious influence or no substantial impact on no or mild disability level (RR, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.97-1.52; P = 0.09) or nausea (RR, 2.42; 95% CI, 0.53-11.01; P = 0.25). In addition, lasmiditan seems to result in the increase in dizziness (RR, 7.33; 95% CI, 1.83-29.30; P = 0.005) and paresthesia (RR, 5.17; 95% CI, 2.08-12.86; P = 0.0004).

CONCLUSIONS

DFN-15 treatment may be effective and safe for pain control in migraine patients.

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) therapy in patients with hypertension, cardiovascular, renal or gastrointestinal comorbidities: joint APAGE/APLAR/APSDE/APSH/APSN/PoA recommendations

BACKGROUND

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are one of the most commonly prescribed medications, but they are associated with a number of serious adverse effects, including hypertension, cardiovascular disease, kidney injury and GI complications.

OBJECTIVE

To develop a set of multidisciplinary recommendations for the safe prescription of NSAIDs.

METHODS

Randomised control trials and observational studies published before January 2018 were reviewed, with 329 papers included for the synthesis of evidence-based recommendations.

RESULTS

Whenever possible, a NSAID should be avoided in patients with treatment-resistant hypertension, high risk of cardiovascular disease and severe chronic kidney disease (CKD). Before treatment with a NSAID is started, blood pressure should be measured, unrecognised CKD should be screened in high risk cases, and unexplained iron-deficiency anaemia should be investigated. For patients with high cardiovascular risk, and if NSAID treatment cannot be avoided, naproxen or celecoxib are preferred. For patients with a moderate risk of peptic ulcer disease, monotherapy with a non-selective NSAID plus a proton pump inhibitor (PPI), or a selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitor should be used; for those with a high risk of peptic ulcer disease, a selective COX-2 inhibitor plus PPI are needed. For patients with pre-existing hypertension receiving renin-angiotensin system blockers, empirical addition (or increase in the dose) of an antihypertensive agent of a different class should be considered. Blood pressure and renal function should be monitored in most cases.

CONCLUSION

NSAIDs are a valuable armamentarium in clinical medicine, but appropriate recognition of high-risk cases, selection of a specific agent, choice of ulcer prophylaxis and monitoring after therapy are necessary to minimise the risk of adverse events.

A comparative study of the efficacy of NAXOZOL compared to celecoxib in patients with osteoarthritis

Objective

Selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors (celecoxib) can minimize the gastrointestinal complications related to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) use. NAXOZOL is a new combination formulation designed to provide sequential delivery of a non-enteric-coated, immediate-release esomeprazole strontium tetrahydrate 20 mg mantle followed by an enteric-coated naproxen 500 mg core. However, there have been no studies comparing NAXOZOL to celecoxib with respect to gastrointestinal tract protection and pain relief in patients with osteoarthritis. This study was undertaken to compare the effects of NAXOZOL and celecoxib with respect to gastrointestinal tract protection and pain relief in patients with osteoarthritis.

Methods

The randomized enrolled patients were divided into two treatment groups: a NAXOZOL group and a celecoxib group. All participants received treatments (NAXOZOL, 500/20 mg (naproxen 500 mg, esomeprazole strontium tetrahydrate 20 mg) twice per day versus celecoxib, 200 mg daily) on a 1:1 allocation basis for 12 weeks. The primary outcome was the Leeds Dyspepsia Questionnaire (LDQ) score used for non-inferiority testing. Secondary outcome measures included the Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale (GSRS) score, Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score, European Quality of Life-5 dimensions (EQ-5D) scale and the EQ-5D Visual Analogue Scale (EQ VAS). Other outcome measures included the use of supplementary or rescue drugs, and the incidence of adverse events.

Results

The baseline-adjusted LDQ scores immediately after 12 weeks of treatment in NAXOZOL group were not inferior to those in celecoxib group. The overall change in the baseline-adjusted GSRS score, VAS score, EQ-5D, and EQ VAS was not different between the two groups. The usage of supplementary drugs and the drug-related incidence of adverse events were not different. However, the days to use rescue drug were longer in celecoxib group than in NAXOZOL group.

Conclusion

NAXOZOL was not inferior to celecoxib in protecting the gastrointestinal tract and providing pain relief in patients with osteoarthritis.

Efficacy, Tolerability, and Safety of DFN-15 (Celecoxib Oral Solution, 25 mg/mL) in the Acute Treatment of Episodic Migraine: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study

Objective

The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of 120 mg DFN‐15 vs placebo for the acute treatment of migraine.

Background

Certain nonsteroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are guideline‐recommended therapies for the acute treatment of migraine, but patients who use them may have issues with gastrointestinal tolerability. Celecoxib, a selective inhibitor of cyclooxygenase‐2, produces analgesia similar to nonselective NSAIDs. DFN‐15 is an oral, ready‐made liquid solution of celecoxib being investigated for the acute treatment of migraine.

Methods

A randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, efficacy, tolerability, and safety study in adults with migraine was conducted. Subjects treated a single migraine attack with 120 mg DFN‐15 or placebo as soon as possible after the onset of pain of moderate to severe intensity. The 2 independent coprimary efficacy endpoints were the proportion of subjects with freedom from pain and the absence of the most bothersome symptom (MBS) at 2 hours postdose. A second double‐blind treatment period followed the first, but did not contribute to the primary outcomes and will be reported elsewhere.

Results

There were 622 subjects randomized (1:1) to double‐blind treatment with either 120 mg DFN‐15 or placebo, and 567 (91.2%) treated a migraine with study drug (n = 285 DFN‐15; n = 282 placebo). Groups were balanced in demographic characteristics; the mean age was 40, and most subjects were female (87% [494/567]). At 2 hours postdose, DFN‐15 was significantly superior to placebo for pain freedom (35.6% [98/275] vs 21.7% [57/263], P < .001), with an odds ratio (95% CI) of 2.00 (1.36, 2.94) and for freedom from the MBS (57.8% [134/232] vs 44.8% [104/232], P = .007), with an odds ratio (95% CI) of 1.68 (1.17, 2.43). A total of 13.3% (38/285) of DFN‐15‐treated subjects and 8.9% (25/282) of placebo‐treated subjects reported a treatment‐emergent adverse event (TEAE). Study drug‐related TEAEs were reported by 9.1% (26/285) of DFN‐15 subjects and 6.0% (17/282) of placebo subjects, the most common of which were dysgeusia (4.2% [12/285] vs 1.4% [4/282]) and nausea (3.2% [9/285] vs 1.8% [5/282]). No subjects treated with DFN‐15 reported TEAEs that were severe or led to withdrawal, and no serious TEAEs or deaths were reported in the study.

Conclusions

DFN‐15 was significantly more effective than placebo for the acute treatment of migraine, with a generally favorable tolerability and safety profile.

Potentially inappropriate concomitant medicine use with the selective COX-2 inhibitor celecoxib: Analysis and comparison of spontaneous adverse event reports from Australia, Canada and the USA

BACKGROUND

To perform an international comparison and analysis of celecoxib spontaneous adverse event reports (AERs) from Canada, Australia and the United States, focusing on gastrointestinal, renal and cardiovascular events. This study also examined concomitant medicines use which may have potentiated the risk of the reported adverse events. Research, design and methods: Three databases were searched for spontaneous AERs associated with celecoxib, submitted within the past 10 years: Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration Database of Adverse Event Notifications; Canada Vigilance Adverse Reaction Online Database; and the United States Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System Database. Analysis of the AERs focussed on the identification of gastrointestinal, cardiovascular and renal adverse events and concomitant medications suspected of potentiating adverse event risks.

RESULTS

A total of 24,232 celecoxib AERs were identified. Gastrointestinal disorders were the most frequently reported adverse events at the system organ class (SOC) level in the AERs. A large number of AERs documented the use of potentially inappropriate concomitant medicines which may have increased the risk of the reported adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

The large number of reports that involved a concomitant medicine that was in contravention with prescribing guidelines indicates an increased need for efforts to support the safe prescribing of celecoxib.

Penetration and efficacy of transdermal NSAIDs in a model of acute joint inflammation

Purpose

Prescription and OTC non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are ubiquitous treatments for pain and inflammation; however, oral administration of these drugs may produce gastrointestinal (GI) side effects. Transdermal (TD) administration of NSAIDs circumvents these adverse events by avoiding the GI tract and, presumably, achieves regional drug levels of therapeutic effect and thereby, fewer off-target complications.

Methods

A drug quantification method was developed for ibuprofen and celecoxib in canine plasma and synovial fluid using liquid chromatography and mass spectrometry. This method was employed to evaluate the penetrance of ibuprofen and celecoxib topical formulations in dogs. Effectiveness of these topical NSAID formulations was compared to the equivalent oral drug concentration in a canine sodium-urate model of acute joint inflammation. In this model, pain was quantified using a modified Canine Brief Pain Inventory questionnaire and regional inflammation using joint caliper measurements; the significance of intervention was evaluated using linear mixed models for repeated measures along with Bonferroni corrections.

Results

After seven days of chronic topical administration, Delivra™ (DEL) formulations of ibuprofen and celecoxib generated serum levels of 2.9µg/mL and 220ng/mL and synovial fluid levels of 1.8 µg/mL and 203 ng/mL (respectively). In the canine model of acute inflammation, the overall treatment effects as well as the treatment by time interactions were strongly significant (P<0.001) for both drugs. Oral ibuprofen proved uniquely effective at the earliest time point, while all ibuprofen formulations were effective at treating pain at 8.5 and 24.5 hours post-induction. Similarly, all celecoxib formulations (oral and topical) were equally effective at 8.5 and 24.5 hours post-induction.

Conclusion

DEL formulations of ibuprofen and celecoxib successfully introduced these NSAIDs into synovial fluid at concentrations similar to those observed in circulation. Furthermore, these formulations reduced symptoms of pain associated with acute inflammation. Oral and transdermally delivered NSAIDs have similar pain relief effects; therefore, a replacement or combinatorial treatment may provide a more stable pain relief profile. In conclusion, this work supports further investigation of TD products in the treatment of regional inflammatory events.

Celecoxib Treatment Improves Neurologic Deficit and Reduces Selective Neuronal Loss and Glial Response in Rats after Transient Middle Cerebral Artery Occlusion

Areas of selective neuronal loss (SNL) represent the first morphologic signs of damage in the penumbra region and are considered putative targets for ischemic stroke therapy. We performed a novel assessment of measuring the effects of the anti-inflammatory agent celecoxib by analyzing simultaneously the different neural populations (neurons, astrocytes, and microglia cells) in SNL and non-SNL areas. Rats were subjected to 1 hour of middle cerebral artery occlusion (MCAO) and treated with celecoxib 1 and 24 hours after ischemia. Infarct volume measurements and triple immunostaining of neurons (neuronal nuclear antigen), microglia (ionized calcium-binding adaptor molecule 1), and astroglia were performed after 12 and 48 hours of reperfusion. Motor response was tested by standard behavioral assays at 3, 12, 24, and 48 hours. Confocal analysis revealed that the percentage of SNL areas, microglia densities, and glial activation increased at 48 hours of reperfusion. Celecoxib treatment improved the neurologic deficit, reduced the infarct volume by 50% after 48 hours of reperfusion, and resulted in a reduced percentage of SNL areas and microglia and astroglia reactivity after 48 hours of reperfusion. This study proves, for the first time, that celecoxib presents postischemic neuroprotective effects in a transient MCAO model, prevents or delays the presence of SNL areas, and reduces glial activation.

Diclofenac Potassium in Acute Postoperative Pain and Dysmenorrhoea: Results from Comprehensive Clinical Trial Reports

We compared the efficacy of diclofenac potassium in unpublished clinical study reports (CSRs) and published reports to examine publication bias, industry bias, and comprehensiveness. Novartis provided CSRs of randomised double-blind trials of diclofenac potassium involving postoperative patients following third molar extraction (3 trials, n=519), gynaecological surgery (3 trials, n=679), and dysmenorrhoea (2 trials, n=711) conducted in 1988–1990. Searches identified published reports of 6 trials. Information from 599/1909 patients was not published; trials with 846/1909 patients were published in a defunct journal. Greater methodological information in CSRs contributed to lesser risk of bias than published trials. Numbers needed to treat (NNT) from CSRs for all six postoperative trials for at least 50% of maximum pain relief over 6 h were 2.2 (95% confidence interval, 1.9–2.6) and 2.1 (1.8–2.4) for 50 and 100 mg diclofenac potassium, respectively. A Cochrane review of published trial data reported NNTs of 2.1 and 1.9, and one comprehensive analysis reported NNTs of 2.2 and 2.1, respectively. All analyses had similar results for patients remedicating within 8 h. No data from dysmenorrhoea CSRs appeared in a Cochrane review. CSRs provide useful information and increase confidence. Stable efficacy estimates with standard study designs reduce the need for updating reviews.

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug related upper gastrointestinal bleeding: types of drug use and patient profiles in real clinical practice

BACKGROUND

The best available evidence regarding non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-related gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding comes from randomized controlled trials including patients who use NSAIDs to manage chronic rheumatic diseases; however, patients with varying background profiles commonly take NSAIDs for many other reasons, often without prescription, and such usage has not been well studied.

OBJECTIVES AND METHODS

To define the characteristics of patients hospitalized for upper GI bleeding in clinical practice, we conducted a case-control study among patients with endoscopy-proven major upper GI bleeding due to gastroduodenal peptic lesions and control subjects. We used adjusted logistic regression models to estimate bleeding risks. Data analysis was performed using SPSS 22.0.

RESULTS

Our analysis included 3785 cases and 6540 controls, including 1270 cases (33.55%) and 834 controls (12.75%) reporting recent use (<30 days) of NSAIDs including high-dose acetylsalicylic acid (ASA). NSAID use was associated with increased risk of upper GI bleeding, with an adjusted relative risk of 4.86 (95% CI, 4.32-5.46). Acute musculoskeletal pain (36.1%), chronic osteoarthritis (13.5%), and headache (13.6%) were the most common reasons for NSAID use. Among cases, only 17.31% took NSAIDs and 6.38% took high dose ASA due to chronic osteoarthritis. Demographic characteristics significantly differed between subjects with chronic vs. acute musculoskeletal pain. Proton pump inhibitor use was significantly higher in patients who used NSAIDs due to chronic osteoarthritis compared to patients with acute musculoskeletal pain. NSAID (65.15%) or high-dose ASA use (65.83%) preceding upper GI bleeding was most often short-term. In over half of cases (63.62%), the upper GI bleeding event was not preceded by dyspeptic warning symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of patients hospitalized due to NSAID-related upper GI bleeding reported short-term NSAID use for reasons other than chronic rheumatic disease. These findings suggest that current prevention strategies may not reach a wide population of short-term NSAID users.

Randomized trial of switching from prescribed non-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs to prescribed celecoxib: the Standard care vs. Celecoxib Outcome Trial (SCOT)

BACKGROUND

Selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors and conventional non-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (nsNSAIDs) have been associated with adverse cardiovascular (CV) effects. We compared the CV safety of switching to celecoxib vs. continuing nsNSAID therapy in a European setting.

METHOD

Patients aged 60 years and over with osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis, free from established CV disease and taking chronic prescribed nsNSAIDs, were randomized to switch to celecoxib or to continue their previous nsNSAID. The primary endpoint was hospitalization for non-fatal myocardial infarction or other biomarker positive acute coronary syndrome, non-fatal stroke or CV death analysed using a Cox model with a pre-specified non-inferiority limit of 1.4 for the hazard ratio (HR).

RESULTS

In total, 7297 participants were randomized. During a median 3-year follow-up, fewer subjects than expected developed an on-treatment (OT) primary CV event and the rate was similar for celecoxib, 0.95 per 100 patient-years, and nsNSAIDs, 0.86 per 100 patient-years (HR = 1.12, 95% confidence interval, 0.81-1.55; P = 0.50). Comparable intention-to-treat (ITT) rates were 1.14 per 100 patient-years with celecoxib and 1.10 per 100 patient-years with nsNSAIDs (HR = 1.04; 95% confidence interval, 0.81-1.33; P = 0.75). Pre-specified non-inferiority was achieved in the ITT analysis. The upper bound of the 95% confidence limit for the absolute increase in OT risk associated with celecoxib treatment was two primary events per 1000 patient-years exposure. There were only 15 adjudicated secondary upper gastrointestinal complication endpoints (0.078/100 patient-years on celecoxib vs. 0.053 on nsNSAIDs OT, 0.078 vs. 0.053 ITT). More gastrointestinal serious adverse reactions and haematological adverse reactions were reported on nsNSAIDs than celecoxib, but more patients withdrew from celecoxib than nsNSAIDs (50.9% patients vs. 30.2%; P < 0.0001).

INTERPRETATION

In subjects 60 years and over, free from CV disease and taking prescribed chronic nsNSAIDs, CV events were infrequent and similar on celecoxib and nsNSAIDs. There was no advantage of a strategy of switching prescribed nsNSAIDs to prescribed celecoxib. This study excluded an increased risk of the primary endpoint of more than two events per 1000 patient-years associated with switching to prescribed celecoxib.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

https://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT00447759; Unique identifier: NCT00447759.

Celecoxib for osteoarthritis

BACKGROUND

Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common form of arthritis and is caused by degeneration of the joint cartilage and growth of new bone, cartilage and connective tissue. It is often associated with major disability and impaired quality of life. There is currently no consensus on the best treatment to improve OA symptoms. Celecoxib is a selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the clinical benefits (pain, function, quality of life) and safety (withdrawals due to adverse effects, serious adverse effects, overall discontinuation rates) of celecoxib in osteoarthritis (OA).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase and clinical trials registers up to April 11, 2017, as well as reference and citation lists of included studies. Pharmaceutical companies and authors of published articles were contacted.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included published studies (full reports in a peer reviewed journal) of prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared oral celecoxib versus no intervention, placebo or another traditional NSAID (tNSAID) in participants with clinically- or radiologically-confirmed primary OA of the knee or hip, or both knee and hip.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently performed data extraction, quality assessment, and compared results. Main analyses for patient-reported outcomes of pain and physical function were conducted on studies with low risk of bias for sequence generation, allocation concealment and blinding of participants and personnel.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 36 trials that provided data for 17,206 adults: 9402 participants received celecoxib 200 mg/day, and 7804 were assigned to receive either tNSAIDs (N = 1869) or placebo (N = 5935). Celecoxib was compared with placebo (32 trials), naproxen (6 trials) and diclofenac (3 trials). Studies were published between 1999 and 2014. Studies included participants with knee, hip or both knee and hip OA; mean OA duration was 7.9 years. Most studies included predominantly white participants whose mean age was 62 (± 10) years; most participants were women. There were no concerns about risk of bias for performance and detection bias, but selection bias was poorly reported in most trials. Most trials had high attrition bias, and there was evidence of selective reporting in a third of the studies. Celecoxib versus placeboCompared with placebo celecoxib slightly reduced pain on a 500-point Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) pain scale, accounting for 3% absolute improvement (95% CI 2% to 5% improvement) or 12% relative improvement (95% CI 7% to 18% improvement) (4 studies, 1622 participants). This improvement may not be clinically significant (high quality evidence).Compared with placebo celecoxib slightly improved physical function on a 1700-point WOMAC scale, accounting for 4% absolute improvement (95% CI 2% to 6% improvement), 12% relative improvement (95% CI 5% to 19% improvement) (4 studies, 1622 participants). This improvement may not be clinically significant (high quality evidence).There was no evidence of an important difference for withdrawals due to adverse events (Peto OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.15) (moderate quality evidence due to study limitations).Results were inconclusive for numbers of participants experiencing any serious AEs (SAEs) (Peto OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.36), gastro-intestinal events (Peto OR 1.91, 95% CI 0.24 to 14.90) and cardiovascular events (Peto OR 3.40, 95% CI 0.73 to 15.88) (very low quality evidence due to serious imprecision and study limitations). However, regulatory agencies have warned of increased cardiovascular events for celecoxib. Celecoxib versus tNSAIDsThere were inconclusive results regarding the effect on pain between celecoxib and tNSAIDs on a 100-point visual analogue scale (VAS), showing 5% absolute improvement (95% CI 11% improvement to 2% worse), 11% relative improvement (95% CI 26% improvement to 4% worse) (2 studies, 1180 participants, moderate quality evidence due to publication bias).Compared to a tNSAID celecoxib slightly improved physical function on a 100-point WOMAC scale, showing 6% absolute improvement (95% CI 6% to 11% improvement) and 16% relative improvement (95% CI 2% to 30% improvement). This improvement may not be clinically significant (low quality evidence due to missing data and few participants) (1 study, 264 participants).Based on low or very low quality evidence (downgraded due to missing data, high risk of bias, few events and wide confidence intervals) results were inconclusive for withdrawals due to AEs (Peto OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.27), number of participants experiencing SAEs (Peto OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.28), gastro-intestinal events (Peto OR 0.61, 0.15 to 2.43) and cardiovascular events (Peto OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.17 to 1.25).In comparisons of celecoxib and placebo there were no differences in pooled analyses between our main analysis with low risk of bias and all eligible studies. In comparisons of celecoxib and tNSAIDs, only one outcome showed a difference between studies at low risk of bias and all eligible studies: physical function (6% absolute improvement in low risk of bias, no difference in all eligible studies).No studies included in the main comparisons measured quality of life. Of 36 studies, 34 reported funding by drug manufacturers and in 34 studies one or more study authors were employees of the sponsor.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We are highly reserved about results due to pharmaceutical industry involvement and limited data. We were unable to obtain data from three studies, which included 15,539 participants, and classified as awaiting assessment. Current evidence indicates that celecoxib is slightly better than placebo and some tNSAIDs in reducing pain and improving physical function. We are uncertain if harms differ among celecoxib and placebo or tNSAIDs due to risk of bias, low quality evidence for many outcomes, and that some study authors and Pfizer declined to provide data from completed studies with large numbers of participants. To fill the evidence gap, we need to access existing data and new, independent clinical trials to investigate benefits and harms of celecoxib versus tNSAIDs for people with osteoarthritis, with longer follow-up and more direct head-to-head comparisons with other tNSAIDs.

Centipede venom peptide SsmTX-I with two intramolecular disulfide bonds shows analgesic activities in animal models

Pain is a major symptom of many diseases and results in enormous pressures on human body or society. Currently, clinically used analgesic drugs, including opioids and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, have adverse reactions, and thus, the development of new types of analgesic drug candidates is urgently needed. Animal venom peptides have proven to have potential as new types of analgesic medicine. In this research, we describe the isolation and characterization of an analgesic peptide from the crude venom of centipede, Scolopendra subspinipes mutilans. The amino acid sequence of this peptide was identical with SsmTX-I that was previously reported as a specific Kv2.1 ion channel blocker. Our results revealed that SsmTX-I was produced by posttranslational processing of a 73-residue prepropeptide. The intramolecular disulfide bridge motifs of SsmTX-I was Cys1-Cys3 and Cys2-Cys4. Functional assay revealed that SsmTX-I showed potential analgesic activities in formalin-induced paw licking, thermal pain, and acetic acid-induced abdominal writhing mice models. Our research provides the first report of cDNA sequences, disulfide motif, successful synthesis, and analgesic potential of SsmTX-I for the development of pain-killing drugs. It indicates that centipede peptide toxins could be a treasure trove for the search of novel analgesic drug candidates. Copyright © 2017 European Peptide Society and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Topical capsaicin (high concentration) for chronic neuropathic pain in adults

BACKGROUND

This review is an update of 'Topical capsaicin (high concentration) for chronic neuropathic pain in adults' last updated in Issue 2, 2013. Topical creams with capsaicin are used to treat peripheral neuropathic pain. Following application to the skin, capsaicin causes enhanced sensitivity, followed by a period with reduced sensitivity and, after repeated applications, persistent desensitisation. High-concentration (8%) capsaicin patches were developed to increase the amount of capsaicin delivered; rapid delivery was thought to improve tolerability because cutaneous nociceptors are 'defunctionalised' quickly. The single application avoids noncompliance. Only the 8% patch formulation of capsaicin is available, with a capsaicin concentration about 100 times greater than conventional creams. High-concentration topical capsaicin is given as a single patch application to the affected part. It must be applied under highly controlled conditions, often following local anaesthetic, due to the initial intense burning sensation it causes. The benefits are expected to last for about 12 weeks, when another application might be made.

OBJECTIVES

To review the evidence from controlled trials on the efficacy and tolerability of topically applied, high-concentration (8%) capsaicin in chronic neuropathic pain in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, two clinical trials registries, and a pharmaceutical company's website to 10 June 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of at least 6 weeks' duration, using high-concentration (5% or more) topical capsaicin to treat neuropathic pain.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently searched for studies, extracted efficacy and adverse event data, and examined issues of study quality and potential bias. Where pooled analysis was possible, we used dichotomous data to calculate risk ratio and numbers needed to treat for one additional event, using standard methods.Efficacy outcomes reflecting long-duration pain relief after a single drug application were from the Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) at specific points, usually 8 and 12 weeks. We also assessed average pain scores over weeks 2 to 8 and 2 to 12 and the number of participants with pain intensity reduction of at least 30% or at least 50% over baseline, and information on adverse events and withdrawals.We assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE and created a 'Summary of findings' table.

MAIN RESULTS

We included eight studies, involving 2488 participants, two more studies and 415 more participants than the previous version of this review. Studies were of generally good methodological quality; we judged only one study at high risk of bias, due to small size. Two studies used a placebo control and six used 0.04% topical capsaicin as an 'active' placebo to help maintain blinding. Efficacy outcomes were inconsistently reported, resulting in analyses for most outcomes being based on less than complete data.For postherpetic neuralgia, we found four studies (1272 participants). At both 8 and 12 weeks about 10% more participants reported themselves much or very much improved with high-concentration capsaicin than with 'active' placebo, with point estimates of numbers needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTs) of 8.8 (95% confidence interval (CI) 5.3 to 26) with high-concentration capsaicin and 7.0 (95% CI 4.6 to 15) with 'active' placebo (2 studies, 571 participants; moderate quality evidence). More participants (about 10%) had average 2 to 8-week and 2 to 12-week pain intensity reductions over baseline of at least 30% and at least 50% with capsaicin than control, with NNT values between 10 and 12 (2 to 4 studies, 571 to 1272 participants; very low quality evidence).For painful HIV-neuropathy, we found two studies (801 participants). One study reported the proportion of participants who were much or very much improved at 12 weeks (27% with high-concentration capsaicin and 10% with 'active' placebo). For both studies, more participants (about 10%) had average 2 to 12-week pain intensity reductions over baseline of at least 30% with capsaicin than control, with an NNT of 11 (very low quality evidence).For peripheral diabetic neuropathy, we found one study (369 participants). It reported about 10% more participants who were much or very much improved at 8 and 12 weeks. One small study of 46 participants with persistent pain following inguinal herniorrhaphy did not show a difference between capsaicin and placebo for pain reduction (very low quality evidence).We downgraded the quality of the evidence for efficacy outcomes by one to three levels due to sparse data, imprecision, possible effects of imputation methods, and susceptibility to publication bias.Local adverse events were common, but not consistently reported. Serious adverse events were no more common with active treatment (3.5%) than control (3.2%). Adverse event withdrawals did not differ between groups, but lack of efficacy withdrawals were somewhat more common with control than active treatment, based on small numbers of events (six to eight studies, 21 to 67 events; moderate quality evidence, downgraded due to few events). No deaths were judged to be related to study medication.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

High-concentration topical capsaicin used to treat postherpetic neuralgia, HIV-neuropathy, and painful diabetic neuropathy generated more participants with moderate or substantial levels of pain relief than control treatment using a much lower concentration of capsaicin. These results should be interpreted with caution as the quality of the evidence was moderate or very low. The additional proportion who benefited over control was not large, but for those who did obtain high levels of pain relief, there were usually additional improvements in sleep, fatigue, depression, and quality of life. High-concentration topical capsaicin is similar in its effects to other therapies for chronic pain.

Efficacy and safety of DFN-15, an oral liquid formulation of celecoxib, in adults with migraine: a multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, crossover study

BACKGROUND

The objective of this proof-of-concept study was to assess the safety, efficacy, and potential for dose response of a new oral liquid formulation of celecoxib, DFN-15, in adults with migraine. Variability in patient-identified most bothersome symptom (MBS) across 3 migraine attacks was also evaluated.

METHODS

This was a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, 3-treatment, 6-sequence, 3-period, crossover study of 3 treatments (DFN-15 120 mg, DFN-15 240 mg, and placebo) administered at the onset of moderate to severe headache.

RESULTS

Of 63 randomized subjects, 56 (89%) took single doses of DFN-15 120 mg and 240 mg and completed all 3 treatment periods. Most subjects were female (75.0%) and white (86.7%), with a mean age of 43.6 years. Both doses of DFN-15 achieved a higher 2-hour pain-free response than placebo (29.1% for 120 mg, 26.1% for 240 mg, and 17.6% for placebo), but the differences were not statistically significant. Photophobia was most commonly reported as the MBS, but for 53% of subjects (27/51), their identified MBS varied across the 3 studied attacks. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events with DFN-15 were dysgeusia (≤11.8%) and nausea (≤5.9%).

CONCLUSION

Both doses of DFN-15 outperformed placebo for the 2-hour pain-free end point, but due to a carryover effect with placebo, the differences were not statistically significant. Since response to both doses was similar, DFN-15 120 mg is being further developed for the management of acute migraine. Further study is needed to determine whether the current findings are altered by larger or different trial designs (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02472418).

[DGRh recommendations for the implementation of current security aspects in the NSAID treatment of musculoskeletal pain]

NSAIDs exert their anti-inflammatory and analgesic effects by inhibition of COX‑2, a key enzyme for proinflammatory prostanoid synthesis. Therapy with NSAIDs is limited by their typical gastrointestinal, cardiovascular and renal side effects, which are caused by inhibition of COX‑1 (gastrointestinal toxicity), COX‑2 (cardiovascular side effects) or both COX-isoenzymes (renal side effects). Appropriate prevention strategies should be employed in patients at risk. If gastrointestinal risk factors are present, co-administration of a proton pump inhibitor or misoprostol is recommended; in patients with cardiovascular risk, coxibs, diclofenac and high-dose ibuprofen should be avoided. Furthermore, drug interactions and contraindications should be considered. In patients with renal impairment (GFR < 30 ml/min) all NSAIDs must be avoided. Ulcer anamnesis is a contraindication for traditional NSAIDs. Preexisting cardio- or cerebrovascular diseases are contraindications for coxibs. Treatment decisions should be individually based with a continuous monitoring of the risk - benefit ratio and exploitation of non-pharmacological treatment options.

Effects of CYP2C9 genetic polymorphisms on the pharmacokinetics of celecoxib and its carboxylic acid metabolite

Celecoxib, a selective cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 inhibitor, is used for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis. The predominant hepatic metabolism of celecoxib to celecoxib carboxylic acid (CCA) is mediated mainly by CYP2C9. We investigated the effects of the major CYP2C9 genetic variants in Asian populations, CYP2C9*3 and CYP2C9*13, on the pharmacokinetics of celecoxib and its carboxylic acid metabolite in healthy Korean subjects. A single 200-mg oral dose of celecoxib was given to 52 Korean subjects with different CYP2C9 genotypes: CYP2C9EM (n = 26; CYP2C9*1/*1), CYP2C9IM (n = 24; CYP2C9*1/*3 and *1/*13), and CYP2C9PM (n = 2; CYP2C9*3/*3). Celecoxib and CCA concentrations in plasma samples collected up to 48 or 96 h after drug intake were determined by HPLC-MS/MS. The mean area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC_0-∞) of celecoxib was increased 1.63-fold (P < 0.001), and the apparent oral clearance (CL/F) of celecoxib was decreased by 39.6% in the CYP2C9IM genotype group compared with that of CYP2C9EM (P < 0.001). The overall pharmacokinetic parameters for celecoxib in CYP2C9*1/*13 subjects were similar to those in CYP2C9*1/*3 subjects. Two subjects with CYP2C9PM genotype both showed markedly higher AUC_0-∞, prolonged half-life, and lower CL/F for celecoxib than did subjects with CYP2C9EM and IM genotypes. CYP2C9*3 and CYP2C9*13 variant alleles significantly affected the plasma concentration of celecoxib.

Systematic review with meta-analysis: the gastrointestinal benefits of COX-2 selective inhibitors with concomitant use of low-dose aspirin

BACKGROUND

It is uncertain whether concurrent use of low-dose aspirin removes the gastrointestinal benefit displayed by COX-2 selective inhibitors (coxibs) when compared to traditional nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs).

AIM

To evaluate the gastrointestinal risks associated with coxibs and traditional NSAIDs and the interaction with concurrent use of low-dose aspirin.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library through April 2016 to identify randomised trials comparing the gastrointestinal risk between coxibs and traditional NSAIDs in patients taking or not taking low-dose aspirin. Results were combined using random effects meta-analysis. Subgroup analyses by concurrent use of aspirin were undertaken.

RESULTS

Eleven trials (84 150 participants) were included. The overall relative risk (RR) of coxibs vs. traditional NSAIDs for complicated gastrointestinal events was 0.54 (95% CI, confidence interval 0.32-0.92), with a significant subgroup difference (P = 0.04) according to concurrent use of aspirin (used: RR = 0.96, 95% CI 0.66-1.24; not used: RR = 0.33, 95% CI 0.14-0.83). The overall RR for clinical gastrointestinal events was 0.59 (95% CI 0.47-0.75), with a significant subgroup difference according to aspirin usage (P = 0.008; used: RR = 0.77, 95% CI 0.62-0.95; not used: RR = 0.50, 95% CI 0.39-0.64). Overall coxibs were associated with significantly lower risk of symptomatic ulcers (RR = 0.60, 95% CI 0.50-0.72) and endoscopic ulcers (RR = 0.29, 95% CI 0.16-0.53) than traditional NSAIDs; a significant subgroup difference was shown for endoscopic ulcers (P = 0.05) but not for symptomatic ulcers (P = 0.27).

CONCLUSION

Concomitant use of low-dose aspirin reduces but does not completely eliminate the gastrointestinal benefit of coxibs over traditional NSAIDs.

Natural remedies for non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug-induced toxicity

The liver is an important organ of the body, which has a vital role in metabolic functions. The non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID), diclofenac causes hepato-renal toxicity and gastric ulcers. NSAIDs are noted to be an agent for the toxicity of body organs. This review has elaborated various scientific perspectives of the toxicity caused by diclofenac and its mechanistic action in affecting the vital organ. This review suggests natural products are better remedies than current clinical drugs against the toxicity caused by NSAIDs. Natural products are known for their minimal side effects, low cost and availability. On the other hand, synthetic drugs pose the danger of adverse effects if used frequently or over a long period. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Comparison of Calipers for Matching on the Disease Risk Score

Previous studies have compared calipers for propensity score (PS) matching, but none have considered calipers for matching on the disease risk score (DRS). We used Medicare claims data to perform 3 cohort studies of medication initiators: a study of raloxifene versus alendronate in 1-year nonvertebral fracture risk, a study of cyclooxygenase 2 inhibitors versus nonselective nonsteroidal antiinflammatory medications in 6-month gastrointestinal bleeding, and a study of simvastatin + ezetimibe versus simvastatin alone in 6-month cardiovascular outcomes. The study periods for each cohort were 1998 through 2005, 1999 through 2002, and 2004 through 2005, respectively. In each cohort, we calculated 1) a DRS, 2) a prognostic PS which included the DRS as the independent variable in a PS model, and 3) the PS for each patient. We then nearest-neighbor matched on each score in a variable ratio and a fixed ratio within 8 calipers based on the standard deviation of the logit and the natural score scale. When variable ratio matching on the DRS, a caliper of 0.05 on the natural scale performed poorly when the outcome was rare. The prognostic PS did not appear to offer any consistent practical benefits over matching on the DRS directly. In general, logit-based calipers or calipers smaller than 0.05 on the natural scale performed well when DRS matching in all examples.

Dimension reduction and shrinkage methods for high dimensional disease risk scores in historical data

Background

Multivariable confounder adjustment in comparative studies of newly marketed drugs can be limited by small numbers of exposed patients and even fewer outcomes. Disease risk scores (DRSs) developed in historical comparator drug users before the new drug entered the market may improve adjustment. However, in a high dimensional data setting, empirical selection of hundreds of potential confounders and modeling of DRS even in the historical cohort can lead to over-fitting and reduced predictive performance in the study cohort. We propose the use of combinations of dimension reduction and shrinkage methods to overcome this problem, and compared the performances of these modeling strategies for implementing high dimensional (hd) DRSs from historical data in two empirical study examples of newly marketed drugs versus comparator drugs after the new drugs’ market entry—dabigatran versus warfarin for the outcome of major hemorrhagic events and cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor (coxibs) versus nonselective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (nsNSAIDs) for gastrointestinal bleeds.

Results

Historical hdDRSs that included predefined and empirical outcome predictors with dimension reduction (principal component analysis; PCA) and shrinkage (lasso and ridge regression) approaches had higher c-statistics (0.66 for the PCA model, 0.64 for the PCA + ridge and 0.65 for the PCA + lasso models in the warfarin users) than an unreduced model (c-statistic, 0.54) in the dabigatran example. The odds ratio (OR) from PCA + lasso hdDRS-stratification [OR, 0.64; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.46–0.90] was closer to the benchmark estimate (0.93) from a randomized trial than the model without empirical predictors (OR, 0.58; 95 % CI 0.41–0.81). In the coxibs example, c-statistics of the hdDRSs in the nsNSAID initiators were 0.66 for the PCA model, 0.67 for the PCA + ridge model, and 0.67 for the PCA + lasso model; these were higher than for the unreduced model (c-statistic, 0.45), and comparable to the demographics + risk score model (c-statistic, 0.67).

Conclusions

hdDRSs using historical data with dimension reduction and shrinkage was feasible, and improved confounding adjustment in two studies of newly marketed medications.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12982-016-0047-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Amtolmetin: A Reappraisal of NSAID with Gastroprotection

Aim. To assess the gastrosparing effect of amtolmetin guacyl (AMG) against other nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in patients with osteo-/rheumatoid arthritis. Methods. A literature search was done in the electronic databases (PubMed, Google Scholar, Embase, and Scopus) with key words “amtolmetin guacyl”, “amtolmetin”, and “arthritis”; filters were applied to obtain publications between 01-Jan-1985 and 01-Oct-2015, which were “clinical trials” in osteo-/rheumatoid arthritis patients and in “English language.” Studies were assessed using the Jadad criteria and trials with score ≥ 3 were included in the analysis to compare the safety and efficacy of AMG against other NSAIDs. Results. Search yielded 19 publications of which 3 were included for analysis. Baseline characteristics of patients were comparable between the AMG group and other NSAIDs (diclofenac, celecoxib, and piroxicam) groups in all trials. Efficacy of AMG was similar to the other NSAIDs compared in the trials. The number of adverse events (AEs) reported was similar between both the groups; however, severe AEs reported were significantly lower in the AMG group. Of note was the significant lower number of duodenal ulcers after treatment in the AMG group. Conclusions. AMG has efficacy similar to other NSAIDs and a safer gastrointestinal AE profile when compared to the other NSAIDs.

Comparison of high-dimensional confounder summary scores in comparative studies of newly marketed medications

OBJECTIVE

To compare confounding adjustment by high-dimensional propensity scores (hdPSs) and historically developed high-dimensional disease risk scores (hdDRSs) in three comparative study examples of newly marketed medications: (1) dabigatran vs. warfarin on major hemorrhage; (2) on death; and (3) cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors vs. nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs on gastrointestinal bleeds.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

In each example, we constructed a concurrent cohort of new and old drug initiators using US claims databases. In historical cohorts of old drug initiators, we developed hdDRS models including investigator-specified plus empirically identified variables and using principal component analysis and lasso regression for dimension reduction. We applied the models to the concurrent cohorts to obtain predicted outcome probabilities, which we used for confounding adjustment. We compared the resulting estimates to those from hdPS.

RESULTS

The crude odds ratio (OR) comparing dabigatran to warfarin was 0.52 (95% confidence interval: 0.37-0.72) for hemorrhage and 0.38 (0.26-0.55) for death. Decile stratification yielded an OR of 0.64 (0.46-0.90) for hemorrhage using hdDRS vs. 0.70 (0.49-1.02) for hdPS. ORs for death were 0.69 (0.45-1.06) and 0.73 (0.48-1.10), respectively. The relative performance of hdDRS in the cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors example was similar.

CONCLUSION

hdDRS achieved similar or better confounding adjustment compared to conventional regression approach but worked slightly less well than hdPS.

Analysis of patents on anti-rheumatoid arthritis therapies issued in China

INTRODUCTION

The etiology of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is complex and diverse. Chronic inflammatory processes with joint dysfunction can cause permanent disability. Therefore, the development of new drugs and therapies for RA is very important.

AREAS COVERED

This review analyzes the existing patents on anti-RA products in China to help pharmaceutical companies and individuals patent potential candidate drugs for RA treatment.

EXPERT OPINION

Three hundred and seventeen patents were analyzed, including 172 patents for Traditional Chinese Medicines (TCMs, 54.2%), 65 for synthetic compounds (20.5%), 55 for biological products (17.4%) and 25 patents for the drug preparation process (7.9%). Among the TCM patents, 73.8% were of various preparations for different Chinese medicines, 23.8% were of herbal extracts and 2.3% were of herbal extract derivatives. Synthetic compounds were involved in more than 30 targets, some small-molecule drugs that target signaling kinases such as p38 MAPK, Janus kinase may become important directions in the management of RA. Biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) are the most efficacious drugs for RA treatment. As the classic therapeutic target in RA, TNF-α has the largest number of bDMARD patents. In addition, it is expected that new targets such as high-mobility group protein B1, thioredoxin domain-containing protein 5 (TXNDC5) and B lymphocyte stimulator (BlyS) will play a significant role in RA as potential targets for new treatments. The largest number of all the published patent applications are claiming TCMs, which may provide substantial new information for anti-RA drug development. The largest number of all the published patent applications are claiming TCMs, which may provide huge information for anti-RA drug development.

Comparison between 200 mg QD and 100 mg BID oral celecoxib in the treatment of knee or hip osteoarthritis

This network meta-analysis aimed to investigate the effectiveness and safety of 100 mg BID and 200 mg QD oral celecoxib in the treatment of OA of the knee or hip. PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library were searched through from inception to August 2014. Bayesian network meta-analysis was used to combine direct and indirect evidences on treatment effectiveness and safety. A total of 24 RCTs covering 11696 patients were included. For the comparison in between the two dosage regimens, 100 mg BID oral celecoxib exhibited a greater probability to be the preferred one either in terms of pain intensity or function at the last follow-up time point. For total gastrointestinal (GI) adverse effects (AEs), both of the two dosage regimens demonstrated a higher incidence compared to the placebo group. Further analyses of GI AEs revealed that only 200 mg QD was associated with a significantly higher risk of abdominal pain when compared with placebo. Furthermore, 100 mg BID showed a significantly lower incidence of skin AEs when compared with 200 mg QD and placebo. Maybe 100 mg BID should be considered as the preferred dosage regimen in the treatment of knee or hip OA.

The effects of celecoxib or naproxen on blood pressure in pediatric patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis

BACKGROUND

Selective and nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are indicated for the treatment of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA). However, the effect of NSAIDs on blood pressure (BP) in children has not been rigorously examined.

METHODS

In this randomized, double-blind, multicenter, active-controlled, 6-week trial, the safety and efficacy of celecoxib (50 mg twice daily [bid] or 100 mg bid) or naproxen (7.5 mg/kg bid) was evaluated in patients aged 2–17 years with JIA.

RESULTS

The least squares (LS) mean difference (celecoxib – naproxen) in change from baseline to week 6/final visit in systolic BP was 1.10 (90% confidence interval, −0.56, 2.76). No significant LS mean differences in diastolic BP relative to baseline were reported. Treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 48% of patients in each treatment group.

CONCLUSION

Both celecoxib and naproxen had no impact on BP, and both treatments had comparable safety profiles. Celecoxib, or naproxen, could be seen as suitable treatment options for pediatric patients with JIA.

Safe prescribing of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in patients with osteoarthritis--an expert consensus addressing benefits as well as gastrointestinal and cardiovascular risks

BACKGROUND

There are several guidelines addressing the issues around the use of NSAIDs. However, none has specifically addressed the upper versus lower gastrointestinal (GI) risk of COX-2 selective and non-selective compounds nor the interaction at both the GI and cardiovascular (CV) level of either class of drugs with low-dose aspirin. This Consensus paper aims to develop statements and guidance devoted to these specific issues through a review of current evidence by a multidisciplinary group of experts.

METHODS

A modified Delphi consensus process was adopted to determine the level of agreement with each statement and to determine the level of agreement with the strength of evidence to be assigned to the statement.

RESULTS

For patients with both low GI and CV risks, any non-selective NSAID (ns-NSAID) alone may be acceptable. For those with low GI and high CV risk, naproxen may be preferred because of its potential lower CV risk compared with other ns-NSAIDs or COX-2 selective inhibitors, but celecoxib at the lowest approved dose (200 mg once daily) may be acceptable. In patients with high GI risk, if CV risk is low, a COX-2 selective inhibitor alone or ns-NSAID with a proton pump inhibitor appears to offer similar protection from upper GI events. However, only celecoxib will reduce mucosal harm throughout the entire GI tract. When both GI and CV risks are high, the optimal strategy is to avoid NSAID therapy, if at all possible.

CONCLUSIONS

Time is now ripe for offering patients with osteoarthritis the safest and most cost-effective therapeutic option, thus preventing serious adverse events which could have important quality of life and resource use implications. Please see related article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12916-015-0291-x.

An algorithm recommendation for the management of knee osteoarthritis in Europe and internationally: a report from a task force of the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis and Osteoarthritis (ESCEO)

OBJECTIVES

Existing practice guidelines for osteoarthritis (OA) analyze the evidence behind each proposed treatment but do not prioritize the interventions in a given sequence. The objective was to develop a treatment algorithm recommendation that is easier to interpret for the prescribing physician based on the available evidence and that is applicable in Europe and internationally. The knee was used as the model OA joint.

METHODS

ESCEO assembled a task force of 13 international experts (rheumatologists, clinical epidemiologists, and clinical scientists). Existing guidelines were reviewed; all interventions listed and recent evidence were retrieved using established databases. A first schematic flow chart with treatment prioritization was discussed in a 1-day meeting and shaped to the treatment algorithm. Fine-tuning occurred by electronic communication and three consultation rounds until consensus.

RESULTS

Basic principles consist of the need for a combined pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment with a core set of initial measures, including information access/education, weight loss if overweight, and an appropriate exercise program. Four multimodal steps are then established. Step 1 consists of background therapy, either non-pharmacological (referral to a physical therapist for re-alignment treatment if needed and sequential introduction of further physical interventions initially and at any time thereafter) or pharmacological. The latter consists of chronic Symptomatic Slow-Acting Drugs for OA (e.g., prescription glucosamine sulfate and/or chondroitin sulfate) with paracetamol at-need; topical NSAIDs are added in the still symptomatic patient. Step 2 consists of the advanced pharmacological management in the persistent symptomatic patient and is centered on the use of oral COX-2 selective or non-selective NSAIDs, chosen based on concomitant risk factors, with intra-articular corticosteroids or hyaluronate for further symptom relief if insufficient. In Step 3, the last pharmacological attempts before surgery are represented by weak opioids and other central analgesics. Finally, Step 4 consists of end-stage disease management and surgery, with classical opioids as a difficult-to-manage alternative when surgery is contraindicated.

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed treatment algorithm may represent a new framework for the development of future guidelines for the management of OA, more easily accessible to physicians.

Single dose oral etoricoxib for acute postoperative pain in adults

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review first published in Issue 2, 2009, and updated in Issue 4, 2012.Etoricoxib is a selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitor licensed for the relief of chronic pain in osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis, and acute pain in some jurisdictions. This class of drugs is believed to be associated with fewer upper gastrointestinal adverse effects than conventional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and adverse effects of single dose etoricoxib for acute postoperative pain using methods that permit accurate comparison with other analgesics evaluated in the same way, using criteria of efficacy recommended by in-depth studies at the individual patient level.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Oxford Pain Database, www.clinicaltrials.gov, and reference lists of articles. The date of the most recent search was 31 January 2014.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials of single dose, oral etoricoxib for acute postoperative pain in adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently considered studies for inclusion in the review, assessed quality, and extracted data. We used the area under the pain relief versus time curve to derive the proportion of participants prescribed etoricoxib or placebo with at least 50% pain relief over six hours, using validated equations. We calculated relative risk (RR) and number needed to treat to benefit (NNT). We used information on use of rescue medication to calculate the proportion of participants requiring rescue medication and the weighted mean of the median time to use. We also collected information on adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified no new studies for this updated review, which includes six studies with 1214 participants in comparisons of etoricoxib with placebo. All six studies reported on the 120 mg dose (798 participants in a comparison with placebo). Sixty-six per cent of participants with etoricoxib 120 mg and 12% with placebo reported at least 50% pain relief (NNT 1.8 (1.7 to 2.0); high-quality evidence). For dental studies only, the NNT was 1.6 (1.5 to 1.8). A single dose of 90 mg produced similar results in one large trial. Other doses (60, 180, and 240 mg) were each studied in only one treatment arm.Significantly fewer participants used rescue medication over 24 hours when taking etoricoxib 120 mg than placebo (NNT to prevent remedication 2.2 (1.9 to 2.8)), and the median time to use of rescue medication was 20 hours for etoricoxib and two hours for placebo. Adverse events were reported at a similar rate to placebo (moderate-quality evidence), with no serious events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Single-dose oral etoricoxib produces high levels of good quality pain relief after surgery, and adverse events did not differ from placebo in these studies. The 120 mg dose is as effective as, or better than, other commonly used analgesics.