Efficacy and tolerability of naproxen/esomeprazole magnesium tablets compared with non-specific NSAIDs and COX-2 inhibitors: a systematic review and network analyses

Management of Osteoarthritis: Expert Opinion on NSAIDs

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a leading cause of disability among older adults worldwide. Treatment aims are to alleviate inflammatory pain and improve physical function through non-pharmacological and pharmacological interventions. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are recommended as first-line therapy. However, selection is challenged by patient age, comorbidities and polypharmacy, and by the drug's benefit/risk balance, all of which together influence the risk of cardiovascular (CV), gastrointestinal (GI) and renal adverse events (AEs). While the efficacy profile of the various NSAIDs is delineated, the differences in their safety profile are not straightforward. This narrative review provides practical indications by a multidisciplinary Italian expert panel for general practitioners and specialists managing OA patients with chronic inflammatory pain; the goal is to maximize therapy efficacy while reducing untoward effects caused by inappropriate NSAID use. The discussion on the best approach to NSAIDs spanned the following topics: (1) patient evaluation: investigate pain origin, duration and components together with possible risk factors for CV, GI and renal AEs; (2) non-pharmacological interventions: the physiatrist provides a person-centered, holistic approach accounting for all patient aspects; (3) pharmacological interventions: patient profile and drugs' pharmacological properties affect NSAID selection, which drugs to be used in combination or to be avoided, formulation and therapy duration; (4) the pharmacologist's, general practitioner's and pain therapist's points of view; (5) NSAID safety: the individual baseline risk and the drug's safety profile are major determinants of CV, GI and renal risk; consider possible drug-drug interactions; (6) periodical re-evaluation of treatment response and adherence, using scales to assess pain and function.

Anticancer Effects of Helminthostachys zeylanica Ethyl acetate Extracts on Human Gastric Cancer Cells through Downregulation of the TNF-α-activated COX-2-cPLA2-PGE2 Pathway

Background: Gastric cancer (GC) is the second most prevalent cancer worldwide and the eighth most common cause of tumor-related death in Taiwan. Helminthostachys zeylanica, a flavonoid compound, has anti-inflammatory, immunomodulatory, and anticancer effects. We examined whether an extract of H. zeylanica (E1 and E2) has potential as a treatment for GC. Methods: We investigated the effects (pro-apoptosis, pro-autophagy, and antiproliferation ability) of H. zeylanica-E2 on cell viability in healthy gastric epithelial (GES-1) and GC cells (AGS and BGC823). H. zeylanica-E2 was toxic to GC cells but had little or no toxicity to normal cells. Results: In this study, H. zeylanica-E2 induced apoptosis through caspase 3/7, Bcl-2, Bax, cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2), and cleaved poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase pathways in GC cells. In addition, it increased autophagy by stimulating autophagy-related protein (ATG)5, ATG7, LC3-I/LC3-II, and inhibiting COX-2 activity in GC cells. We also found that H. zeylanica-E2 exhibited antiproliferation ability through cell cycle arrest in G0/G1 and G2/M and suppressed the migration of GC cells. The anticancer effects of H. zeylanica-E2 in GC cells might be mediated partly through inhibition of tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α)-activated proinflammatory cytosolic phospholipase A2 (cPLA2)-COX-2-prostaglandin E₂ (PGE₂) pathway. Conclusions: Our results suggest that H. zeylanica-E2 has potential as a novel adjunctive agent for the treatment of GC.

Factors Affecting Quality of Life and Satisfaction in Patients with Arthritis after Change to a Fixed-Dose Naproxen/Esomeprazole Combination Drug

Background

In drug therapy for patients with arthritis, a naproxen/esomeprazole combination drug may be a tolerable choice because it can minimize gastrointestinal and cardiovascular adverse effects. The aim of this study was to investigate the changes in quality of life (QOL), medication adherence, and satisfaction after switch from the existing drug to the combination drug. In addition, we analyzed the correlation between the above-mentioned variables and the stratified demographic and medical data of the patients.

Methods

A prospective, noninterventional, observational study was conducted in 30 hospitals between May 2014 and July 2016. In total, 2,308 patients with osteoarthritis, 99 patients with rheumatoid arthritis, and 76 patients with ankylosing spondylitis were enrolled. Demographic information (age, sex, body mass index [BMI], alcohol consumption, and smoking) and medical information (type of arthritis, duration of disease, and comorbidities) were collected via a self-administered questionnaire. Patients were observed for more than three months after switching to the combination drug. Data on the QOL (EuroQoL 5-Dimension questionnaire [EQ-5D questionnaire]), medication adherence (Morisky Medication Adherence Scale [MMAS]), and satisfaction were collected at the first and last visits.

Results

A total of 2,483 patients enrolled at 30 hospitals completed the questionnaire. After the switch to the combination drug, the mean EQ-5D score improved from 0.72 ± 0.17 to 0.79 ± 0.14 (p < 0.001), and significant improvement was associated with female sex (p = 0.016), shorter disease duration (p < 0.001), and absence of comorbidities (p < 0.001). The mean MMAS score was 6.38 ± 1.77, indicating medium adherence. Satisfaction was significantly higher in female patients (p < 0.001), in patients with a shorter disease duration (p < 0.001), osteoarthritis (p = 0.003), and no comorbidities (p < 0.001). Serious drug-related adverse effects did not occur.

Conclusions

The overall QOL was improved with medium adherence after the switch to the combination drug. On the basis of the analysis of stratified data, sex, age, drinking, smoking, disease duration, comorbidities, and BMI might be associated with QOL, satisfaction, and adherence.

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.

Relative benefit-risk comparing diclofenac to other traditional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors in patients with osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis: a network meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

There is argument over the benefits and risks of drugs for treating chronic musculoskeletal pain. This study compared the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of diclofenac, ibuprofen, naproxen, celecoxib, and etoricoxib for patients with pain caused by osteoarthritis (OA) or rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

A systematic literature review used Medline and EMBASE to identify randomised controlled trials. Efficacy outcomes assessed included: pain relief measured by visual analogue scale (VAS); Western Ontario McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) VAS or WOMAC Likert scale; physical functioning measured by WOMAC VAS or Likert scale; and patient global assessment (PGA) of disease severity measured on VAS or 5-point Likert scale. Safety outcomes included: Antiplatelet Trialists' Collaboration (APTC), major cardiovascular (CV) and major upper gastrointestinal (GI) events, and withdrawals. Data for each outcome were synthesized by a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA). For efficacy assessments, labelled doses for OA treatment were used for the base case while labelled doses for RA treatment were also included in the sensitivity analysis. Pooled data across dose ranges were used for safety.

RESULTS

Efficacy, safety, and tolerability data were found for 146,524 patients in 176 studies included in the NMA. Diclofenac (150 mg/day) was likely to be more effective in alleviating pain than celecoxib (200 mg/day), naproxen (1000 mg/day), and ibuprofen (2400 mg/day), and similar to etoricoxib (60 mg/day); a lower dose of diclofenac (100 mg/day) was comparable to all other treatments in alleviating pain. Improved physical function with diclofenac (100 and 150 mg/day) was mostly comparable to all other treatments. PGA with diclofenac (100 and 150 mg/day) was likely to be more effective or comparable to all other treatments. All active treatments were similar for APTC and major CV events. Major upper GI events with diclofenac were lower compared to naproxen and ibuprofen, comparable to celecoxib, and higher than etoricoxib. Risk of withdrawal with diclofenac was lower compared to ibuprofen, similar to celecoxib and naproxen, and higher than etoricoxib.

CONCLUSIONS

The benefit-risk profile of diclofenac was comparable to other treatments used for pain relief in OA and RA; benefits and risks vary in individuals and need consideration when making treatment decisions.