Literature DB >> 15325832

Comparison of lumiracoxib with naproxen and ibuprofen in the Therapeutic Arthritis Research and Gastrointestinal Event Trial (TARGET), cardiovascular outcomes: randomised controlled trial.

Michael E Farkouh1, Howard Kirshner, Robert A Harrington, Sean Ruland, Freek W A Verheugt, Thomas J Schnitzer, Gerd R Burmester, Eduardo Mysler, Marc C Hochberg, Michael Doherty, Elena Ehrsam, Xavier Gitton, Gerhard Krammer, Bernhard Mellein, Alberto Gimona, Patrice Matchaba, Christopher J Hawkey, James H Chesebro.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The potential for cyclo-oxygenase 2 (COX2)-selective inhibitors to increase the risk for myocardial infarction is controversial. The Therapeutic Arthritis Research and Gastrointestinal Event Trial (TARGET) aimed to assess gastrointestinal and cardiovascular safety of the COX2 inhibitor lumiracoxib compared with two non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, naproxen and ibuprofen.
METHODS: 18325 patients age 50 years or older with osteoarthritis were randomised to lumiracoxib 400 mg once daily (n=9156), naproxen 500 mg twice daily (4754), or ibuprofen 800 mg three times daily (4415) in two substudies of identical design. Randomisation was stratified for low-dose aspirin use and age. The primary cardiovascular endpoint was the Antiplatelet Trialists' Collaboration endpoint of non-fatal and silent myocardial infarction, stroke, or cardiovascular death. Analysis was by intention to treat.
FINDINGS: 81 (0.44%) patients did not start treatment and 7120 (39%) did not complete the study. At 1-year follow-up, incidence of the primary endpoint was low, both with lumiracoxib (59 events [0.65%]) and the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (50 events [0.55%]; hazard ratio 1.14 [95% CI 0.78-1.66], p=0.5074). Incidence of myocardial infarction (clinical and silent) in the overall population in the individual substudies was 0.38% with lumiracoxib (18 events) versus 0.21% with naproxen (ten) and 0.11% with lumiracoxib (five) versus 0.16% with ibuprofen (seven). In the naproxen substudy, rates of myocardial infarction (clinical and silent) did not differ significantly compared with lumiracoxib in the population not taking low-dose aspirin (hazard ratio 2.37 [95% CI 0.74-7.55], p=0.1454), overall (1.77 [0.82-3.84], p=0.1471), and in patients taking aspirin (1.36 [0.47-3.93], p=0.5658). In the ibuprofen substudy, these rates did not differ between lumiracoxib and ibuprofen in the population not taking low-dose aspirin (0.75 [0.20-2.79], p=0.6669), overall (0.66 [0.21-2.09], p=0.4833), and in patients taking aspirin (0.47 [0.04-5.14], p=0.5328).
INTERPRETATION: The primary endpoint, including incidence of myocardial infarction, did not differ between lumiracoxib and either ibuprofen or naproxen, irrespective of aspirin use. This finding suggests that lumiracoxib is an appropriate treatment for patients with osteoarthritis, who are often at high cardiovascular risk and taking low-dose aspirin.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15325832     DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(04)16894-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lancet        ISSN: 0140-6736            Impact factor:   79.321


  107 in total

1.  Preempting and preventing drug-induced liver injury.

Authors:  Guruprasad P Aithal; Ann K Daly
Journal:  Nat Genet       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 38.330

2.  Fragility Fractures Are Associated with an Increased Risk for Cardiovascular Events in Women and Men with Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Population-based Study.

Authors:  Orla Ni Mhuircheartaigh; Cynthia S Crowson; Sherine E Gabriel; Veronique L Roger; L Joseph Melton; Shreyasee Amin
Journal:  J Rheumatol       Date:  2017-01-15       Impact factor: 4.666

3.  COX-2 inhibition and inhibition of cytosolic phospholipase A2 increase CD36 expression and foam cell formation in THP-1 cells.

Authors:  Kamran Anwar; Iryna Voloshyna; Michael J Littlefield; Steven E Carsons; Peter A Wirkowski; Nadia L Jaber; Andrew Sohn; Sajan Eapen; Allison B Reiss
Journal:  Lipids       Date:  2010-12-22       Impact factor: 1.880

4.  Evidence in practice--number 3: Cox 2 inhibitors.

Authors:  Nick Summerton
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 5.386

5.  Clinical trials report. The APPROVe study: what we should learn from the VIOXX withdrawal.

Authors:  Frank T Ruschitzka
Journal:  Curr Hypertens Rep       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 5.369

6.  Truth and evidence based medicine: spin is everything.

Authors:  Lokesh Tiwari; Jacob M Puliyel; Prerna Upadhyay
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2004-10-30

Review 7.  Perception of risk: the state of COX-2 selective inhibitors.

Authors:  Lee S Simon; Vibeke Strand
Journal:  Curr Rheumatol Rep       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 4.592

Review 8.  Problem of the atherothrombotic potential of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.

Authors:  W W Bolten
Journal:  Ann Rheum Dis       Date:  2005-06-07       Impact factor: 19.103

9.  COX 2 inhibitors, traditional NSAIDs, and the heart.

Authors:  Peter Jüni; Stephan Reichenbach; Matthias Egger
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2005-06-11

Review 10.  Clinical use and pharmacological properties of selective COX-2 inhibitors.

Authors:  Shaojun Shi; Ulrich Klotz
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2007-11-13       Impact factor: 2.953

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.