599 research outputs found

    Impact of inhaled corticosteroids on growth in children with asthma: systematic review and meta-analysis

    Get PDF
    Background: Long-term inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) may reduce growth velocity and final height of children with asthma. We aimed to evaluate the association between ICS use of >12 months and growth. Methods: We initially searched MEDLINE and EMBASE in July 2013, followed by a PubMed search updated to December 2014. We selected RCTs and controlled observational studies of ICS use in patients with asthma. We conducted random effects meta-analysis of mean differences in growth velocity (cm/year) or final height (cm) between groups. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic. Results: We found 23 relevant studies (twenty RCTs and three observational studies) after screening 1882 hits. Meta-analysis of 16 RCTs showed that ICS use significantly reduced growth velocity at one year follow-up (mean difference -0.48 cm/year (95% CI -0.66 to -0.29)). There was evidence of a dose-response effect in three RCTs. Final adult height showed a mean reduction of -1.20 cm (95% CI -1.90 cm to -0.50 cm) with budesonide versus placebo in a high quality RCT. Meta-analysis of two lower quality observational studies revealed uncertainty in the association between ICS use and final adult height, pooled mean difference -0.85 cm (95% CI -3.35 to 1.65). Conclusion: Use of ICS for >12 months in children with asthma has a limited impact on annual growth velocity. In ICS users, there is a slight reduction of about a centimeter in final adult height, which when interpreted in the context of average adult height in England (175 cm for men and 161 cm for women), represents a 0.7% reduction compared to non-ICS users

    Over and Under-utilization of Cyclooxygenase-2 Selective Inhibitors by Primary Care Physicians and Specialists: The Tortoise and the Hare Revisited

    Full text link
    To compare prescribing trends and appropriateness of use of traditional and cyclooxygenase-2 selective (COX-2) nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) by primary care physicians (PCPs) and specialists. DESIGN : Retrospective cohort study. PATIENTS : One thousand five hundred and seventy-six adult patients continuously enrolled for at least 1 year with an independent practice association of a University-associated managed care plan who were started on a traditional NSAID or a COX-2 inhibitor from 1999 to 2002 and received at least 3 separate medication fills. MEASUREMENTS : Physician specialty was identified from office visits. Appropriateness of utilization was based on gastrointestinal risk characteristics. RESULTS : Primary care patients were younger and less likely to have comorbid conditions. Despite similar GI risk, COX-2 use among patients seen by PCPs was half that of patients seen by specialists (21% vs 44%, P <.001). While PCPs overused cyclooxygenase-2-specific inhibitors (COX-2s) less often than specialists (19% vs 41%, P <.001), they also tended to underuse COX-2s in patients who were at increased GI risk (46% vs 32%, P =.063). This represents a 3-fold and 8-fold difference in overuse versus underuse for PCPs and specialists, respectively. CONCLUSIONS : Using COX-2s as a model for physician adoption of new therapeutic agents, specialists were more likely to use these new medications for patients likely to benefit but were also significantly more likely to use them for patients without a clear indication. This study demonstrates the tension between appropriate adoption of innovative therapies for those individuals who would benefit from their use and those individuals who would receive no added clinical benefit but would incur added cost and be placed at increased risk.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/75173/1/j.1525-1497.2006.00463.x.pd

    TOIB Study. Are topical or oral ibuprofen equally effective for the treatment of chronic knee pain presenting in primary care: a randomised controlled trial with patient preference study. [ISRCTN79353052]

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Many older people have chronic knee pain. Both topical and oral non- steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are commonly used to treat this. Oral NSAIDS are effective, at least in the short term, but can have severe adverse effects. Topical NSAIDs also appear to be effective, at least in the short term. One might expect topical NSAIDs both to be less effective and to have fewer adverse effects than oral NSAIDs. If topical NSAIDs have fewer adverse effects this may outweigh both the reduction in effectiveness and the higher cost of topical compared to oral treatment. Patient preferences may influence the comparative effectiveness of drugs delivered via different routes. METHODS: TOIB is a randomised trial comparing topical and oral ibuprofen, with a parallel patient preference study. We are recruiting people aged 50 or over with chronic knee pain, from 27 MRC General Practice Research Framework practices across the UK. We are seeking to recruit 283 participants to the RCT and 379 to the PPS. Participants will be followed up for up to two years (with the majority reaching one year). Outcomes will be assessed by postal questionnaire, nurse examination, laboratory tests and medical record searches at one and two years or the end of the study. DISCUSSION: This study will provide new evidence on the overall costs and benefits of treating chronic knee pain with either oral or topical ibuprofen. The use of a patient preference design is unusual, but will allow us to explore how preference influences response to a medication. In addition, it will provide more information on adverse events. This study will provide evidence to inform primary care practitioners, and possibly influence practice

    Etoricoxib in the treatment of osteoarthritis over 52-weeks: a double-blind, active-comparator controlled trial [NCT00242489]

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term efficacy and tolerability of etoricoxib, a COX-2 selective inhibitor, in osteoarthritis (OA) patients. METHODS: A double-blind, randomized, multicenter study was conducted in 617 patients with OA of the knee. The base study was 14 weeks in duration and consisted of 2 parts; in Part I (6 weeks), patients were allocated to once daily oral etoricoxib 5, 10, 30, 60, 90 mg or placebo. In Part II (8 weeks); the placebo, etoricoxib 5 and 10 mg groups were reallocated to etoricoxib 30, 60, or 90 mg qd or diclofenac 50 mg t.i.d. Treatment was continued for consecutive 12 and 26 week extensions. Primary efficacy endpoints were the WOMAC VA 3.0 pain subscale and investigator global assessment of disease status. Safety and tolerability were assessed by collecting adverse events throughout the study. RESULTS: Compared with placebo, the etoricoxib groups displayed significant (p < 0.05), dose-dependent efficacy for all primary endpoints in Part I; efficacy was maintained throughout the 52 weeks of the study. During the 46-week active-comparator controlled period, the etoricoxib groups demonstrated clinical efficacy that was similar to that of diclofenac 150 mg and was generally well tolerated, with a lower incidence of gastrointestinal (GI) nuisance symptoms compared with diclofenac (13.1, 14.7, and 13.5% for etoricoxib 30, 60, and 90 mg, respectively compared with 22.5% for diclofenac). CONCLUSION: In this extension study, etoricoxib, at doses ranging from 30 to 90 mg, demonstrated a maintenance of significant clinical efficacy in patients with OA through 52 weeks of treatment. Etoricoxib displayed clinical efficacy similar to diclofenac 150 mg and was generally well tolerated

    Dental management considerations for the patient with an acquired coagulopathy. Part 1: Coagulopathies from systemic disease

    Get PDF
    Current teaching suggests that many patients are at risk for prolonged bleeding during and following invasive dental procedures, due to an acquired coagulopathy from systemic disease and/or from medications. However, treatment standards for these patients often are the result of long-standing dogma with little or no scientific basis. The medical history is critical for the identification of patients potentially at risk for prolonged bleeding from dental treatment. Some time-honoured laboratory tests have little or no use in community dental practice. Loss of functioning hepatic, renal, or bone marrow tissue predisposes to acquired coagulopathies through different mechanisms, but the relationship to oral haemostasis is poorly understood. Given the lack of established, science-based standards, proper dental management requires an understanding of certain principles of pathophysiology for these medical conditions and a few standard laboratory tests. Making changes in anticoagulant drug regimens are often unwarranted and/or expensive, and can put patients at far greater risk for morbidity and mortality than the unlikely outcome of postoperative bleeding. It should be recognised that prolonged bleeding is a rare event following invasive dental procedures, and therefore the vast majority of patients with suspected acquired coagulopathies are best managed in the community practice setting

    COX inhibitors and breast cancer

    Get PDF
    There is considerable evidence to suggest that prostaglandins play an important role in the development and growth of cancer. The enzyme cyclo-oxygenase (COX) catalyses the conversion of arachidonic acid to prostaglandins. In recent years, there has been interest in a possible role for COX inhibitors in the prevention and treatment of malignancy. Cyclo-oxygenase-2 (COX-2) is overexpressed in several epithelial tumours, including breast cancer. Preclinical evidence favours an antitumour role for COX inhibitors in breast cancer. However, the epidemiological evidence for an association is conflicting. Trials are being conducted to study the use of COX inhibitors alone and in combination with other agents in the chemoprevention of breast cancer, and in the neo-adjuvant, adjuvant, and metastatic treatment settings. In evaluating the potential use of these agents particularly in cancer chemoprophylaxis, the safety profile is as important as their efficacy. Concern over the cardiovascular safety of both selective and nonselective COX-inhibitors has recently been highlighted

    Long-term retention on treatment with lumiracoxib 100 mg once or twice daily compared with celecoxib 200 mg once daily: A randomised controlled trial in patients with osteoarthritis

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: The efficacy, safety and tolerability of lumiracoxib, a novel selective cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitor, has been demonstrated in previous studies of patients with osteoarthritis (OA). As it is important to establish the long-term safety and efficacy of treatments for a chronic disease such as OA, the present study compared the effects of lumiracoxib at doses of 100 mg once daily (o.d.) and 100 mg twice daily (b.i.d.) with those of celecoxib 200 mg o.d. on retention on treatment over 1 year. METHODS: In this 52-week, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group study, male and female patients (aged at least 40 years) with symptomatic primary OA of the hip, knee, hand or spine were randomised (1:2:1) to lumiracoxib 100 mg o.d. (n = 755), lumiracoxib 100 mg b.i.d. (n = 1,519) or celecoxib 200 mg o.d. (n = 758). The primary objective of the study was to demonstrate non-inferiority of lumiracoxib at either dose compared with celecoxib 200 mg o.d. with respect to the 1-year retention on treatment rate. Secondary outcome variables included OA pain in the target joint, patient's and physician's global assessments of disease activity, Short Arthritis assessment Scale (SAS) total score, rescue medication use, and safety and tolerability. RESULTS: Retention rates at 1 year were similar for the lumiracoxib 100 mg o.d., lumiracoxib 100 mg b.i.d. and celecoxib 200 mg o.d. groups (46.9% vs 47.5% vs 45.3%, respectively). It was demonstrated that retention on treatment with lumiracoxib at either dose was non-inferior to celecoxib 200 mg o.d. Similarly, Kaplan-Meier curves for the probability of premature discontinuation from the study for any reason were similar across the treatment groups. All three treatments generally yielded comparable results for the secondary efficacy variables and all treatments were well tolerated. CONCLUSION: Long-term treatment with lumiracoxib 100 mg o.d., the recommended dose for OA, was as effective and well tolerated as celecoxib 200 mg o.d. in patients with OA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov NCT00145301
    corecore