John Fabule1, Ade Adebajo2. 1. Astrazeneca - Global Medical Affairs, 2 Kingdom Street, London W2 6BD, UK. 2. Academic Rheumatology Group, Faculty of Medicine, University of Sheffield and Barnsley Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Barnsley, UK.
Abstract
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: We conducted an analysis to explore whether the cardiovascular outcomes associated with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), when used in licensed doses by patients with osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis, was class or compound dependent. METHODS: Using the Ovid technology search engine, we conducted a search of the literature for relevant studies published between 1995 and 2011. We also retrieved further studies following manual searches. The primary endpoint was major vascular events and the secondary endpoints were stroke, hypertension and congestive heart failure. A total of 19 studies were analysed. Studies conducted in the osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis patients' population that reported on cardiovascular events were included in the analysis. The analysis was conducted using the software Review Manager 5.1 and Cochrane methodology. RESULTS: Using the primary endpoint of major vascular events (MVE) and a prespecified cutoff point of 1.30, diclofenac (versus 1 comparator) and rofecoxib (versus 2 comparators) had increased risk for MVE [odds ratio (OR) >1.30]. Using the same criteria, diclofenac (versus 1 comparator) had an increased risk of myocardial infarction (MI). Although celecoxib had a slightly increased risk for MI (OR 1.33, versus 1 comparator), the confidence interval included 1 and was not significant. For the secondary endpoints, etoricoxib and rofecoxib were significantly worse off for HT (versus 1 comparator each) and naproxen was significantly worse off for stroke (versus 1 comparator). Although ibuprofen was worse off for HT (versus 1 comparator) the increased risk was not significant. CONCLUSION: From the analysis conducted, it appears that the risk for cardiovascular events in arthritis patients on licensed doses of NSAIDs varies considerably and is likely to depend on the individual compound.
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: We conducted an analysis to explore whether the cardiovascular outcomes associated with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), when used in licensed doses by patients with osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis, was class or compound dependent. METHODS: Using the Ovid technology search engine, we conducted a search of the literature for relevant studies published between 1995 and 2011. We also retrieved further studies following manual searches. The primary endpoint was major vascular events and the secondary endpoints were stroke, hypertension and congestive heart failure. A total of 19 studies were analysed. Studies conducted in the osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritispatients' population that reported on cardiovascular events were included in the analysis. The analysis was conducted using the software Review Manager 5.1 and Cochrane methodology. RESULTS: Using the primary endpoint of major vascular events (MVE) and a prespecified cutoff point of 1.30, diclofenac (versus 1 comparator) and rofecoxib (versus 2 comparators) had increased risk for MVE [odds ratio (OR) >1.30]. Using the same criteria, diclofenac (versus 1 comparator) had an increased risk of myocardial infarction (MI). Although celecoxib had a slightly increased risk for MI (OR 1.33, versus 1 comparator), the confidence interval included 1 and was not significant. For the secondary endpoints, etoricoxib and rofecoxib were significantly worse off for HT (versus 1 comparator each) and naproxen was significantly worse off for stroke (versus 1 comparator). Although ibuprofen was worse off for HT (versus 1 comparator) the increased risk was not significant. CONCLUSION: From the analysis conducted, it appears that the risk for cardiovascular events in arthritispatients on licensed doses of NSAIDs varies considerably and is likely to depend on the individual compound.
Authors: Michael E Farkouh; 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 Journal: Lancet Date: 2004 Aug 21-27 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Nancy A Nussmeier; Andrew A Whelton; Mark T Brown; Richard M Langford; Andreas Hoeft; Joel L Parlow; Steven W Boyce; Kenneth M Verburg Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2005-02-15 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: C O Bingham; A I Sebba; B R Rubin; G E Ruoff; J Kremer; S Bird; S S Smugar; B J Fitzgerald; K O'Brien; A M Tershakovec Journal: Rheumatology (Oxford) Date: 2006-08-27 Impact factor: 7.580
Authors: William B White; Christine R West; Jeffrey S Borer; Philip B Gorelick; Lisa Lavange; Sharon X Pan; Ethan Weiner; Kenneth M Verburg Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2006-11-10 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Mary F Walter; Robert F Jacob; Charles A Day; Rachel Dahlborg; Yujia Weng; R Preston Mason Journal: Atherosclerosis Date: 2004-12 Impact factor: 5.162
Authors: James B Mangold; Helen Gu; Lolita C Rodriguez; Johanne Bonner; Janet Dickson; Christiane Rordorf Journal: Drug Metab Dispos Date: 2004-05 Impact factor: 3.922
Authors: Jody K Takemoto; Jonathan K Reynolds; Connie M Remsberg; Karina R Vega-Villa; Neal M Davies Journal: Clin Pharmacokinet Date: 2008 Impact factor: 6.447