Safety of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs and/or paracetamol in people receiving methotrexate for inflammatory arthritis: a Cochrane systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the literature on the safety of using nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAID) and/or paracetamol in people receiving methotrexate (MTX) for inflammatory arthritis (IA), as an evidence base for generating clinical practice recommendations.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was performed using the Cochrane Library, Medline, Embase, and conference proceedings for the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) for 2008-2009. The search aimed to identify studies describing adverse events (AE) with the concurrent use of paracetamol and/or NSAID in people taking MTX for IA. Articles fulfilling our predefined inclusion criteria were systematically reviewed and quality appraised.

RESULTS

Seventeen publications out of 8681 identified studies were included in the review, all of which included people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) using various NSAID; there were no identified studies for other forms of IA or with paracetamol. Of the studies examining concurrent use of MTX and NSAID, there were no reported adverse effects on lung, liver, or renal function, and no increase in MTX withdrawal or in major toxic reactions. However, transient thrombocytopenia was demonstrated in 1 study. Looking at specific NSAID, there were no clinically significant AE with concomitant piroxicam or etodolac, and only mild AE with celecoxib or etoricoxib. Antiinflammatory dose aspirin was demonstrated to have an adverse effect on liver and renal function.

CONCLUSION

In the management of RA, concurrent use of NSAID with MTX appears to be safe, provided appropriate monitoring is performed. The use of antiinflammatory doses of aspirin should be avoided.

Pain pharmacotherapy in patients with inflammatory arthritis and concurrent cardiovascular or renal disease: a Cochrane systematic review

BACKGROUND

Pain in inflammatory arthritis (IA) is common and often multifactorial, and many different pharmacotherapeutic agents are routinely used for pain management. There are concerns that some current pain pharmacotherapies may increase the risk of adverse events in patients with concurrent cardiovascular (CV) or renal disease.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was performed searching Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, DARE, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. We also hand-searched conference proceedings for the American College of Rheumatology and the European League Against Rheumatism for 2008-2009.

RESULTS

Our search identified 4782 studies, of which 190 were included for detailed review, but none met the inclusion criteria for our review. We identified 1 study of etoricoxib and diclofenac in non-IA populations [osteoarthritis (OA) or mixed OA and rheumatoid arthritis]. In that study, the presence of CV disease increased the likelihood of a further CV event 3-fold. Patients with 2 or more CV risk factors showed a 2-fold increased likelihood of adverse CV events.

CONCLUSION

Our review has highlighted a lack of specific evidence to guide clinicians in the management of pain in patients with IA and coexistent CV or renal disease. In the absence of this evidence, we suggest clinicians use nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAID) with caution in patients with preexisting CV disease or ≥ 2 CV risk factors. There is currently no evidence to advise clinicians considering other pain pharmacotherapies in the context of CV comorbidities. Current guidelines regarding the use of NSAID and opioids in moderate to severe renal impairment should also be applied to the IA population.

Multinational evidence-based recommendations for pain management by pharmacotherapy in inflammatory arthritis: integrating systematic literature research and expert opinion of a broad panel of rheumatologists in the 3e Initiative

OBJECTIVE

To develop evidence-based recommendations for pain management by pharmacotherapy in patients with inflammatory arthritis (IA).

METHODS

A total of 453 rheumatologists from 17 countries participated in the 2010 3e (Evidence, Expertise, Exchange) Initiative. Using a formal voting process, 89 rheumatologists representing all 17 countries selected 10 clinical questions regarding the use of pain medications in IA. Bibliographic fellows undertook a systematic literature review for each question, using MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL and 2008-09 European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR)/ACR abstracts. Relevant studies were retrieved for data extraction and quality assessment. Rheumatologists from each country used this evidence to develop a set of national recommendations. Multinational recommendations were then formulated and assessed for agreement and the potential impact on clinical practice.

RESULTS

A total of 49,242 references were identified, from which 167 studies were included in the systematic reviews. One clinical question regarding different comorbidities was divided into two separate reviews, resulting in 11 recommendations in total. Oxford levels of evidence were applied to each recommendation. The recommendations related to the efficacy and safety of various analgesic medications, pain measurement scales and pain management in the pre-conception period, pregnancy and lactation. Finally, an algorithm for the pharmacological management of pain in IA was developed. Twenty per cent of rheumatologists reported that the algorithm would change their practice, and 75% felt the algorithm was in accordance with their current practice.

CONCLUSIONS

Eleven evidence-based recommendations on the management of pain by pharmacotherapy in IA were developed. They are supported by a large panel of rheumatologists from 17 countries, thus enhancing their utility in clinical practice.

Safety of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, including aspirin and paracetamol (acetaminophen) in people receiving methotrexate for inflammatory arthritis (rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, psoriatic arthritis, other spondyloarthritis)

BACKGROUND

Methotrexate is routinely used in the treatment of inflammatory arthritis. There have been concerns regarding the safety of using concurrent non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), including aspirin, or paracetamol (acetaminophen), or both, in these people.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically appraise and summarise the scientific evidence on the safety of using NSAIDs, including aspirin, or paracetamol, or both, with methotrexate in inflammatory arthritis; and to identify gaps in the current evidence, assess the implications of those gaps and to make recommendations for future research to address these deficiencies.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, second quarter 2010); MEDLINE (from 1950); EMBASE (from 1980); the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE). We also handsearched the conference proceedings for the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and European League against Rheumatism (EULAR) (2008 to 2009) and checked the websites of regulatory agencies for reported adverse events, labels and warnings.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials and non-randomised studies comparing the safety of methotrexate alone to methotrexate with concurrent NSAIDs, including aspirin, or paracetamol, or both, in people with inflammatory arthritis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed the search results, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies.

MAIN RESULTS

Seventeen publications out of 8681 identified studies were included in the review, all of which included people with rheumatoid arthritis using various NSAIDs, including aspirin. There were no identified studies for other forms of inflammatory arthritis.For NSAIDs, 13 studies were included that used concurrent NSAIDs, of which nine studies examined unspecified NSAIDs. The mean number of participants was 150.4 (range 19 to 315), mean duration 2182.9 (range 183 to 5490) days, although the study duration was not always clearly defined, and the studies were mainly of low to moderate quality. Two of these studies reported no evidence for increased risk of methotrexate-induced pulmonary disease; one study assessed the effect of concurrent NSAIDs on renal function and found no adverse effect; one study identified no adverse effect on liver function; three studies demonstrated no increase in methotrexate withdrawal; and one study showed no increase in all adverse events, including major toxic reactions. However, transient thrombocytopenia was demonstrated in one study, specifically when NSAIDs were taken on the same week day as methotrexate. This study was a retrospective review that involved small numbers only and was of moderate quality; these finding have not been replicated since.Four studies looked at specific NSAIDs (etodolac, piroxicam, celecoxib and etoricoxib), with a mean number of participants of 25.8 (range 14 to 50) and mean study duration of 16.8 (range 14 to 23) days. These studies were mainly of moderate quality. The studies were primarily pharmacokinetic studies but also reported adverse events as secondary outcomes. There were no clinically significant adverse effects with concomitant piroxicam or etodolac; and only mild adverse events with celecoxib or etoricoxib, such as nausea and vomiting, and headaches.For aspirin, seven studies provided data on adverse events with the use of aspirin and methotrexate. These studies included a mean number of participants of 100 (range 11 to 232), had a mean duration of 1325 (range 8 to 2928) days and were mainly of low to moderate quality. Two of the studies reported no evidence for increased risk of methotrexate-induced pulmonary disease and two studies showed no increase in all adverse events including major toxic reactions; however, none of these studies specified the dose of aspirin that was used. One study demonstrated that concurrent aspirin adversely affected liver function at a mean dose of 6.84 tablets of aspirin per day, which is a possible daily dose of 2.1 g presuming that 300 mg aspirin tablets were given. A further study described a partially reversible decline in renal function with 2 g daily of aspirin. One study reported no increase in adverse events with 975 g aspirin daily, however the study duration was only one week.For paracetamol, no studies were identified for inclusion.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In the management of rheumatoid arthritis, the concurrent use of NSAIDs with methotrexate appears to be safe provided appropriate monitoring is performed. The use of anti-inflammatory doses of aspirin should be avoided.

Pain management for rheumatoid arthritis and cardiovascular or renal comorbidity

BACKGROUND

Pain in rheumatoid arthritis is common, is often multi-factorial and many different pharmacotherapeutic agents are routinely used for pain management. There are concerns that some of the pain pharmacotherapies currently used may increase the risk of adverse events in people with rheumatoid arthritis and concurrent cardiovascular or renal disease.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically assess and collate the scientific evidence on the efficacy and safety of using pain pharmacotherapy in people with rheumatoid arthritis and cardiovascular or renal comorbidities.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library 2010, Issue 4); MEDLINE, from 1950; EMBASE, from 1980; the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE). We also handsearched the conference proceedings for American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and European League against Rheumatism (EULAR) for 2008-09, and checked the websites of regulatory agencies for reported adverse events, labels and warnings.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered randomised controlled trials and non-randomised studies comparing the efficacy and safety of pain pharmacotherapies in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, with and without comorbid cardiovascular or renal conditions.In addition, we also considered controlled before-after studies, interrupted time series, cohort and case control studies and case series (N ≥ 20) to assess safety.For the purpose of our review, pain pharmacotherapy was defined as including simple analgesics (such as paracetamol), non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), opioids or opioid-like drugs (such as tramadol), and neuromodulators (including anti-depressants, anti-convulsants, and muscle relaxants).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the search results and planned to extract data and appraise the risk of bias of included studies.

MAIN RESULTS

We did not identify any studies meeting our inclusion criteria. Many of the trials of NSAIDs explicitly excluded patients with cardiovascular or renal comorbidities.We did identify one trial that reported evidence in mixed populations (including both rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis) taking either diclofenac or etoricoxib. In this study, the presence of cardiovascular disease increased the likelihood of a further cardiovascular event three-fold. Patients with two or more cardiovascular comorbidities showed a two-fold increased likelihood of adverse cardiovascular events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There were no trials that specifically compared the efficacy and safety of pain pharmacotherapies for patients with rheumatoid arthritis, with and without comorbid cardiovascular or renal conditions.In the absence of specific evidence in rheumatoid arthritis, current guidelines recommend that NSAIDs be used with caution in the general rheumatoid arthritis population while highlighting the added need for extra vigilance in patients with established cardiovascular disease or risk factors for its development. Current guidelines regarding the use of NSAIDs and opioids in moderate to severe renal impairment should also be applied to the rheumatoid arthritis population.Further research is required to guide clinicians when treating pain in rheumatoid arthritis.

Tumour necrosis factor antagonists and the risk of cardiovascular disease in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic literature review

OBJECTIVES

RA is associated with early ischaemic heart disease. This appears to be driven largely by the presence of chronic inflammation. Studies suggest that treatment with disease-modifying drugs such as MTX may reduce the incidence of cardiovascular events in RA. Anti-TNF therapies significantly reduce inflammation in RA. However, the extent to which these agents also reduce cardiovascular disease (CVD) is uncertain. The purpose of this study was to explore the effect of anti-TNF agents on CVD in RA using a systematic literature review.

METHODS

We searched for studies of adults with RA treated with TNF antagonists where cardiovascular outcomes were recorded using MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Database, Database of Abstracts and Reviews of Effects, Health Technology Appraisal, Science Citation Index and Clinical Evidence from 1989 to 2010. Conference proceedings for the British Society of Rheumatology, ACR and EULAR between 2005 and 2009 were hand searched. Two reviewers assessed abstracts for inclusion and then quality of selected papers was assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 1840 abstracts were identified and 20 articles were suitable for inclusion. Information was obtained on the effect of TNF antagonists on overall CVD events, myocardial infarction, strokes and heart failure.

CONCLUSION

In many studies, TNF antagonists appear to reduce the likelihood of CVD in individuals with RA. Reassuringly, there does not appear to be an increased risk of cardiac failure. However, the reduction in CVD is not as consistently seen as with studies of MTX.

The influence of early life factors on the risk of developing rheumatoid arthritis

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic inflammatory disease that develops as a result of the interaction between genetic and environmental risk factors. Although increasing evidence shows the importance of genes in determining the risk of RA, it is clear that environmental factors also have a vital role. Studies to date have tended to concentrate on environmental influences around the time of disease onset. However, a number of pieces of evidence, including the fact that autoantibodies, such as rheumatoid factor (RF), can develop several years before the onset of clinical disease, suggest that environmental factors may influence disease susceptibility during early life. Several recent studies lend weight to this possibility, with an increased risk of RA in the offspring of mothers who smoked during pregnancy and in those with higher birth weight. There has also been a suggestion that the risk of RA is reduced in breast-fed infants. We describe the evidence surrounding the effect of early life factors on the risk of developing RA and possible mechanisms by which they may act.

The effect of methotrexate on cardiovascular disease in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic literature review

OBJECTIVES

Patients with RA have an increased prevalence of cardiovascular disease (CVD). This is due to traditional risk factors and the effects of chronic inflammation. MTX is the first-choice DMARD in RA. We performed a systematic literature review to determine whether MTX affects the risk of CVD in patients with RA.

METHODS

We searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane database, database of abstracts of reviews of effects, health technology assessment and Science Citation Index from 1980 to 2008. Conference proceedings (British Society of Rheumatology, ACR and EULAR) were searched from 2005 to 2008. Papers were included if they assessed the relationship between MTX use and CVD in patients with RA. Two reviewers independently assessed each title and abstract for relevance and quality.

RESULTS

A total of 2420 abstracts were identified, of which 18 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Two studies assessed the relationship between MTX use and CVD mortality, one demonstrated a significant reduction in CVD mortality and the second a trend towards reduction. Five studies considered all-cause CVD morbidity. Four demonstrated a significant reduction in CVD morbidity and the fifth a trend towards reduction. MTX use in the year prior to the development of RA decreased the risk of CVD for 3-4 years. Four studies considered myocardial infarction, one demonstrated a decreased risk and three a trend towards decreased risk with MTX use.

CONCLUSION

The current evidence suggests that MTX use is associated with a reduced risk of CVD events in patients with RA. This suggests that reducing the inflammation in RA using MTX not only improves disease-specific outcomes but may also reduce collateral damage such as atherosclerosis.

Effective measurement of knee alignment using AP knee radiographs

The gold standard for measuring knee alignment is mechanical axis determined using full-limb radiographs (FLR). Measurement of joint alignment using antero-posterior (AP) knee radiographs is more accessible, economical and involves less radiation exposure to the patient compared with using full-limb radiographs. The aim of this study was to compare and assess the reproducibility of knee joint axial alignment on full-limb radiographs and conventional AP knee radiographs. Knee alignment was measured in 40 subjects (80 knees) from the TwinsUK registry. Measurement of mechanical knee alignment was from FLR, and anatomic knee alignment from weight-bearing AP knee radiographs. Reproducibility was assessed by intra-class correlation coefficients and kappa statistics. Reproducibility of knee alignment for both methods was good, with intra-observer ICC's of 0.99 for both FLR and AP radiographs. The mean alignment angle on FLR was 178.9 degrees (SD 2.1, range 173-183 degrees ), and 179.0 degrees (SD 2.1, range 173-185 degrees ) on AP films. 58.8% of knees on FLR and 66.3% on AP films were of varus alignment. Good correlations were seen between results for FLR and AP radiographs, with ICC ranging from 0.87-0.92 for left and right knees, and kappa statistics of 0.65-0.74. Standard AP knee radiographs can be used to measure knee alignment with good reproducibility, and provide comparable results to those obtained from FLR. This will facilitate measurement of knee alignment in existing cohort studies to assess malalignment as a risk factor of incident OA, and in clinical practice.