Use of Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs That Elevate Cardiovascular Risk: An Examination of Sales and Essential Medicines Lists in Low-, Middle-, and High-Income Countries

PMCID: PMC3570554This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited

Clinical decision support tools: analysis of online drug information databases

BACKGROUND: Online drug information databases are used to assist in enhancing clinical decision support. However, the choice of which online database to consult, purchase or subscribe to is likely made based on subjective elements such as history of use, familiarity, or availability during professional training. The purpose of this study was to evaluate clinical decision support tools for drug information by systematically comparing the most commonly used online drug information databases. METHODS: Five commercially available and two freely available online drug information databases were evaluated according to scope (presence or absence of answer), completeness (the comprehensiveness of the answers), and ease of use. Additionally, a composite score integrating all three criteria was utilized. Fifteen weighted categories comprised of 158 questions were used to conduct the analysis. Descriptive statistics and Chi-square were used to summarize the evaluation components and make comparisons between databases. Scheffe's multiple comparison procedure was used to determine statistically different scope and completeness scores. The composite score was subjected to sensitivity analysis to investigate the effect of the choice of percentages for scope and completeness. RESULTS: The rankings for the databases from highest to lowest, based on composite scores were Clinical Pharmacology, Micromedex, Lexi-Comp Online, Facts & Comparisons 4.0, Epocrates Online Premium, RxList.com, and Epocrates Online Free. Differences in scope produced three statistical groupings with Group 1 (best) performers being: Clinical Pharmacology, Micromedex, Facts & Comparisons 4.0, Lexi-Comp Online, Group 2: Epocrates Premium and RxList.com and Group 3: Epocrates Free (p < 0.05). Completeness scores were similarly stratified. Collapsing the databases into two groups by access (subscription or free), showed the subscription databases performed better than the free databases in the measured criteria (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Online drug information databases, which belong to clinical decision support, vary in their ability to answer questions across a range of categories

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 patientyears, and nsNSAIDs, 0.86 per 100 patient-years (HR ¼1.12, 95% confidence interval, 0.81–1.55; P ¼0.50). Comparable intention-to-treat (ITT) rates were 1.14 per 100 patient-years with celecoxib and 1.10 per 100 patient-years with nsNSAIDs (HR¼1.04; 95% confidence interval, 0.81–1.33; P¼0.75). 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

A turbulent decade for NSAIDs: update on current concepts of classification, epidemiology, comparative efficacy, and toxicity

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) represent a diverse class of drugs and are among the most commonly used analgesics for arthritic pain worldwide, though long-term use is associated with a spectrum of adverse effects. The introduction of cyclooxygenase-2-selective NSAIDs early in the last decade offered an alternative to traditional NSAIDs with similar efficacy and improved gastrointestinal tolerability; however, emerging concerns about cardiovascular safety resulted in the withdrawal of two agents (rofecoxib and valdecoxib) in the mid-2000s and, subsequently, in an overall reduction in NSAID use. It is now understood that all NSAIDs are associated with some varying degree of gastrointestinal and cardiovascular risk. Guidelines still recommend their use, but little is known of how patients use these agents. While strategies and guidelines aimed at reducing NSAID-associated complications exist, there is a need for evidence-based algorithms combining cardiovascular and gastrointestinal factors that can be used to aid treatment decisions at an individual patient level

Effect of sucralfate on components of mucosal barrier produced by cultured canine epithelial cells in vitro

The mucous gel maintains a neutral microclimate at the epithelial cell surface, which may play a role in both the prevention of gastroduodenal injury and the provision of an environment essential for epithelial restitution and regeneration after injury. Enhancement of the components of the mucous barrier by sucralfate may explain its therapeutic efficacy for upper gastrointestinal tract protection, repai, and healing. We studied the effect of sucralfate and its major soluble component, sucrose octasulfate (SOS), on the synthesis and release of gastric mucin and surface active phospholipid, utilizing an isolated canine gastric mucous cells in culture. We correlated these results with the effect of the agents on mucin synthesis and secretion utilizing explants of canine fundus in vitro . Sucralfate and SOS significantly stimulated phospholipid secretion by isolated canine mucous cells in culture (123% and 112% of control, respectively.) Indomethacin pretreatment siginificantly inhibited the effect of sucralfate, but not SOS, on the stimulation of phospholipid release. Administration of either sucralfate or SOS to the isolated canine mucous cells had no effect upon mucin synthesis or secretion using a sensitive immunoassay. Sucralfate and SOS did not stimulate mucin release in the canine explants; sucralfate significantly stimulated the synthesis of mucin, but only to 108% of that observed in untreated explants. No increase in PGE 2 release was observed after sucralfate or SOS exposure to the isolated canine mucous cells. Our results suggest sucralfate affects the mucus barrier largely in a qualitative manner. No increase in mucin secretion or major effect on synthesis was notd, although a significant increase in surface active phospholipid release was observed. The lack of dose dependency of this effect, along with the results of the PGE 2 assay, suggests the drug may act through a non-receptor-mediated mechanism to perturb the cell membrane and release surface active phospholipid. The enhancement of phospholipid release by sucralfate to augment the barrier function of gastric mucus may, in concert with other effects of the drug, strrengthen mucosal barrier function.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/44415/1/10620_2005_Article_BF01308079.pd

Antimetastatic activity of a cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor

Cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) expression is increased in breast cancer and surgery has been shown to increase the growth of metastatic tumours. We investigated the effect of selective COX-2 inhibition on the growth of metastases in either an experimental metastasis model or following excision of a murine primary breast tumour. 50,000 4T1 mammary carcinoma cells were injected into the mammary fat pad of female BALB/c mice. When the mean TD reached 8+/-0.4 mm, tumours were excised and the mice were randomised into two groups (n=12 per group) to receive daily intraperitoneal injections of the selective COX-2 inhibitor, SC-236 or drug vehicle for 14 days. Alternatively, experimental metastases were established by tail-vein injection of 50,000 4T1 cells. Mice received either the selective COX-2 inhibitor, SC-236 or drug vehicle for 14 days (n=12 per group). SC-236 treatment significantly reduced tumour burden, the number and size of spontaneous metastases following primary tumour excision. SC-236 treatment also reduced tumour burden, the number and size of experimental metastases. Immunohistochemical staining demonstrated that COX-2 inhibition reduced microvessel density and increased apoptosis within both spontaneous and experimental metastases. These data clearly demonstrate that the selective COX-2 inhibitor, SC-236, has potent antimetastatic activity against both spontaneous metastases arising following primary tumour excision and experimental metastases.</p

Gastrointestinal-Sparing Effects of Novel NSAIDs in Rats with Compromised Mucosal Defence

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are among the most commonly used prescription and over-the-counter medications, but they often produce significant gastrointestinal ulceration and bleeding, particularly in elderly patients and patients with certain co-morbidities. Novel anti-inflammatory drugs are seldom tested in animal models that mimic the high risk human users, leading to an underestimate of the true toxicity of the drugs. In the present study we examined the effects of two novel NSAIDs and two commonly used NSAIDs in models in which mucosal defence was expected to be impaired. Naproxen, celecoxib, ATB-346 (a hydrogen sulfide- and naproxen-releasing compound) and NCX 429 (a nitric oxide- and naproxen-releasing compound) were evaluated in healthy, arthritic, obese, and hypertensive rats and in rats of advanced age (19 months) and rats co-administered low-dose aspirin and/or omeprazole. In all models except hypertension, greater gastric and/or intestinal damage was observed when naproxen was administered in these models than in healthy rats. Celecoxib-induced damage was significantly increased when co-administered with low-dose aspirin and/or omeprazole. In contrast, ATB-346 and NCX 429, when tested at doses that were as effective as naproxen and celecoxib in reducing inflammation and inhibiting cyclooxygenase activity, did not produce significant gastric or intestinal damage in any of the models. These results demonstrate that animal models of human co-morbidities display the same increased susceptibility to NSAID-induced gastrointestinal damage as observed in humans. Moreover, two novel NSAIDs that release mediators of mucosal defence (hydrogen sulfide and nitric oxide) do not induce significant gastrointestinal damage in these models of impaired mucosal defence

A Prospective Study of Aspirin Use and the Risk of Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Men

Data regarding the influence of dose and duration of aspirin use on risk of gastrointestinal bleeding are conflicting.We conducted a prospective cohort study of 32,989 men enrolled in the Health Professionals Follow-up Study (HPFS) in 1994 who provided biennial aspirin data. We estimated relative risk of major gastrointestinal bleeding requiring hospitalization or a blood transfusion.During 14 years of follow-up, 707 men reported an episode of major gastrointestinal bleeding over 377,231 person-years. After adjusting for risk factors, regular aspirin use (≥2 times/week) had a multivariate relative risk (RR) of gastrointestinal bleeding of 1.32 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.12-1.55) compared to non-regular use. The association was particularly evident for upper gastrointestinal bleeding (multivariate RR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.16-1.92). Compared to men who denied any aspirin use, multivariate RRs of upper gastrointestinal bleeding were 1.05 (95% CI 0.71-1.52) for men who used 0.5-1.5 standard tablets/week, 1.31 (95% CI 0.88-1.95) for 2-5 aspirin/week, 1.63 (95% CI, 1.15-2.32) for 6-14 aspirin/week and 2.40 (95% CI, 1.10-5.22) for >14 aspirin/week (P(trend)<0.001). The relative risk also appeared to be dose-dependent among short-term users <5 years; P(trend)<.001) and long-term users (≥5 years; P(trend) = 0.015). In contrast, after controlling for dose, increasing duration of use did not appear to be associated with risk (P(trend) = 0.749).Regular aspirin use increases the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding, especially from the upper tract. However, risk of bleeding appears to be more strongly related to dose than to duration of use. Risk of bleeding should be minimized by using the lowest effective dose among short-term and long-term aspirin users