Literature DB >> 12462285

A comparison of rofecoxib versus celecoxib in treating pain after dental surgery: a single-center, randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active-comparator-controlled, parallel-group, single-dose study using the dental impaction pain model.

Kerstin Malmstrom1, James R Fricke, Paul Kotey, Barbara Kress, Briggs Morrison.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Rofecoxib and celecoxib, selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors, have analgesic efficacy similar to that of nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.
OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to confirm earlier findings that the overall analgesic efficacy of rofecoxib 50 mg was superior to that of celecoxib 200 mg and to extend the comparison to include celecoxib 400 mg.
METHODS: In this single-center, randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active-comparator-controlled, parallel-group, single-dose study, patients who experienced moderate or severe pain after surgical extraction of at least 2 third molars received a single oral dose of either rofecoxib 50 mg, celecoxib 400 mg, celecoxib 200 mg, ibuprofen 400 mg, or placebo. Patients recorded scores of pain intensity, pain relief, and global assessment at prespecified time intervals throughout the 24-hour period after dosing. The end points were total pain relief (TOPAR) score over 8 hours (TOPAR8; primary end point), TOPAR score over 12 hours (TOPAR12), sum of pain intensity difference (SPID) over 8 and 12 hours (SPID8 and SPID12), patient's global assessment of study drug at 8 hours, time to confirmed perceptible pain relief (ie, time to onset of analgesic effect), peak pain intensity difference (PID), peak pain relief, time to first dose of rescue medication (ie, duration of analgesic effect), and percentage of patients using rescue medication.
RESULTS: A total of 482 patients (358 females, 124 males; mean age, 22.1 years) were enrolled. Rofecoxib 50 mg (n = 151 patients) demonstrated significantly greater overall analgesic efficacy compared with celecoxib 400 mg (n = 151), as measured by TOPAR8 (least squares mean [SE] 17.2 [0.8] vs 15.0 [0.8]; P < 0.05) and TOPAR12 (25.3 [1.2] vs 21.0 [1.2]; P < 0.05), as well as a significantly longer duration of analgesic effect (P < 0.05). Time to onset of analgesic effect and peak analgesic effect were similar for rofecoxib 50 mg and celecoxib 400 mg. Rofecoxib also showed significantly greater overall analgesic efficacy than did celecoxib 200 mg (n = 90), including greater TOPAR8 scores (17.2 [0.8] vs 11.5 [1.1]; P < 0.001), faster onset of analgesic effect (P < 0.001), greater peak analgesic effect (P < 0.001 for peak pain relief and peak PID), and longer duration of analgesic effect (P < 0.001). The overall analgesic efficacy of rofecoxib 50 mg was similar to that of ibuprofen 400 mg (n = 45), except that the duration of analgesic effect of rofecoxib 50 mg was significantly longer (P < 0.001). All active treatments produced significantly greater overall analgesic efficacy compared with that of placebo (P < 0.001 for all scores [TOPAR8, TOPAR12, SPID8, SPID12, and patient's global assessment] for all study drugs). The adverse-events (AE) profile was generally similar in all treatment groups. The 3 most common AEs were nausea, postextraction alveolitis, and vomiting.
CONCLUSIONS: In this study, rofecoxib 50 mg provided generally superior overall analgesic efficacy compared with that of celecoxib 400 and 200 mg, including a significantly longer duration of analgesic effect. The overall analgesic efficacy of rofecoxib 50 mg was generally similar to that of ibuprofen 400 mg, except for a significantly longer duration of analgesic effect.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12462285     DOI: 10.1016/s0149-2918(02)80059-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Ther        ISSN: 0149-2918            Impact factor:   3.393


  12 in total

Review 1.  Single dose oral ibuprofen for acute postoperative pain in adults.

Authors:  Christopher Derry; Sheena Derry; R Andrew Moore; Henry J McQuay
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2009-07-08

2.  Efficacy and safety of selective COX-2 inhibitors for pain management after third molar removal: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

Authors:  Albert González-Barnadas; Octavi Camps-Font; Pablo Martín-Fatás; Rui Figueiredo; Cosme Gay-Escoda; Eduard Valmaseda-Castellón
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2019-04-23       Impact factor: 3.573

Review 3.  Single dose oral celecoxib for acute postoperative pain in adults.

Authors:  Sheena Derry; R Andrew Moore
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2013-10-22

Review 4.  Single dose oral celecoxib for acute postoperative pain in adults.

Authors:  Sheena Derry; R Andrew Moore
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2012-03-14

Review 5.  Celecoxib: a review of its use in the management of arthritis and acute pain.

Authors:  James E Frampton; Gillian M Keating
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 9.546

Review 6.  Single dose oral rofecoxib for acute postoperative pain in adults.

Authors:  Simon Bulley; Sheena Derry; R Andrew Moore; Henry J McQuay
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2009-10-07

7.  Sildenafil citrate in the treatment of pain in primary dysmenorrhea: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  R Dmitrovic; A R Kunselman; R S Legro
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2013-08-06       Impact factor: 6.918

8.  Efficacy of celecoxib for pain management after arthroscopic surgery of hip: a prospective randomized placebo-controlled study.

Authors:  Zhenxiang Zhang; Wei Zhu; Lixian Zhu; Yaqing Du
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2013-11-13

9.  Analgesic efficacy of celecoxib in patients after oral surgery: special reference to time to onset of analgesia and duration of analgesic effect.

Authors:  Takayuki Aoki; Yoshihide Ota; Yusuke Mori; Mitsunobu Otsuru; Mikio Ota; Akihiro Kaneko
Journal:  Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2016-06-18

10.  A Randomized Double-Blind Controlled Trial of Intravenous Meloxicam in the Treatment of Pain Following Dental Impaction Surgery.

Authors:  Steven E Christensen; Stephen A Cooper; Randall J Mack; Stewart W McCallum; Wei Du; Alex Freyer
Journal:  J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2018-01-12       Impact factor: 3.126

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.