DOCSLIB.ORG

RESEARCH BMJ: First Published As 10.1136/Bmj.B2538 on 14 July 2009

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
RESEARCH BMJ: First Published As 10.1136/Bmj.B2538 on 14 July 2009 RESEARCH BMJ: first published as 10.1136/bmj.b2538 on 14 July 2009. Downloaded from Cost effectiveness of COX 2 selective inhibitors and traditional NSAIDs alone or in combination with a proton pump inhibitor for people with osteoarthritis Nicholas Latimer, research fellow in health economics,1 Joanne Lord, reader in health economics,2 Robert L Grant, senior technical adviser,3 medical statistician,4 Rachel O’Mahony, research fellow,3 John Dickson, community physician in rheumatology,5 Philip G Conaghan, professor of musculoskeletal medicine6 on behalf of the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence Osteoarthritis Guideline Development Group 1Health Economics and Decision ABSTRACT adding a proton pump inhibitor to a COX 2 selective Science, School of Health and Objectives To investigate the cost effectiveness of cyclo- inhibitor (used at the lowest licensed dose) was a cost Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield S1 4DA oxygenase-2 (COX 2) selective inhibitors and traditional effective option, even for patients at low risk of 2Health Economics Research non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and the gastrointestinal adverse events (incremental cost Group, Brunel University, addition of proton pump inhibitors to these treatments, effectiveness ratio approximately £10 000). Uncertainties Middlesex UB8 3PH for people with osteoarthritis. around relative adverse event rates meant relative cost 3 National Collaborating Centre for Design An economic evaluation using a Markov model effectiveness for individual COX 2 selective inhibitors and Chronic Conditions, Royal College of Physicians of London, London and data from a systematic review was conducted. traditional NSAIDs was difficult to determine. NW1 4LE Estimates of cardiovascular and gastrointestinal adverse Conclusions Prescribing a proton pump inhibitor for http://www.bmj.com/ 4Royal College of Physicians of events were based on data from three large randomised people with osteoarthritis who are taking a traditional London, London NW1 4LE controlled trials, and observational data were used for NSAID or COX 2 selective inhibitor is cost effective. The 5Redcar and Cleveland Primary Care Trust, Guisborough Primary sensitivity analyses. Efficacy benefits from treatment were cost effectiveness analysis was sensitive to adverse event Care Hospital, North Yorkshire estimated from a meta-analysis of trials reporting total data and the specific choice of COX 2 selective inhibitor or TS14 6HZ Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) NSAID agent should, therefore, take into account 6 Section of Musculoskeletal osteoarthritis index score. Other model inputs were individual cardiovascular and gastrointestinal risks. Disease, University of Leeds, Leeds LS7 4SA obtained from the relevant literature. The model was run on 28 September 2021 by guest. Protected copyright. Correspondence to: P G Conaghan for a hypothetical population of people with INTRODUCTION [email protected] osteoarthritis. Subgroup analyses were conducted for Traditional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs people at high risk of gastrointestinal or cardiovascular Cite this as: BMJ 2009;339:b2538 (NSAIDs) and the newer cyclo-oxygenase-2 (COX 2) doi:10.1136/bmj.b2538 adverse events. selective inhibitors are commonly prescribed for peo- Comparators Licensed COX 2 selective inhibitors ple with osteoarthritis. Approximately half of the peo- (celecoxib and etoricoxib) and traditional NSAIDs ple with osteoarthritis in the United Kingdom who (diclofenac, ibuprofen, and naproxen) for which suitable require medication are treated with an NSAID or a data were available were compared. Paracetamol was COX 2 selective inhibitor.1 COX 2 selective agents also included, as was the possibility of adding a proton are currently prescribed much less often than tradi- pump inhibitor (omeprazole) to each treatment. tional NSAIDs; in 2007, for example, the COX 2 selec- Main outcome measures The main outcome measure was tive inhibitors celecoxib and etoricoxib accounted for cost effectiveness, which was based on quality adjusted approximately 5.8% of total NSAID prescriptions in life years gained. Quality adjusted life year scores were England and approximately 20% of the total spend.2 calculated from pooled estimates of efficacy and major Although traditional NSAIDs and COX 2 selective adverse events (that is, dyspepsia; symptomatic ulcer; inhibitors seem similar in terms of symptom relief in complicated gastrointestinal perforation, ulcer, or bleed; such patients, traditional NSAIDs are associated with myocardial infarction; stroke; and heart failure). gastrointestinal side effects. COX 2 selective agents Results Addition of a proton pump inhibitor to both COX 2 were developed to reduce the gastrointestinal side selective inhibitors and traditional NSAIDs was highly effects of this drug class. In addition, concerns have cost effective for all patient groups considered been raised over the cardiovascular safety of both (incremental cost effectiveness ratio less than £1000 COX 2 selective inhibitors and traditional NSAIDs.34 (€1175, $1650)). This finding was robust across a wide New data indicate that co-prescribing gastroprotective range of effectiveness estimates if the cheapest proton agents with both traditional NSAIDs and COX 2 selec- pump inhibitor was used. In our base case analysis, tive agents is beneficial.5-7 BMJ | ONLINE FIRST | bmj.com page 1 of 9 RESEARCH The latest National Institute for Health and Clinical multinational etoricoxib and diclofenac arthritis long- Excellence clinical guidance for the management of term (MEDAL) study.20-22 Two of these trials (CLASS BMJ: first published as 10.1136/bmj.b2538 on 14 July 2009. Downloaded from osteoarthritis provides an update to previous recom- and the MEDAL study) included a minority of people mendations on the use of COX 2 selective with rheumatoid arthritis; however, the National Insti- inhibitors.8-11 The previous guidance recommended tute for Health and Clinical Excellence Osteoarthritis that these agents should not be used routinely for Guideline Development Group considered that the patients with osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis relative risks of adverse events would be similar in peo- and should only be used in patients at high risk of ple with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis developing serious gastrointestinal adverse events on because there is no clear evidence of a relationship traditional NSAIDs. In addition, the guidance stated between drug induced adverse event rates and arthritis that there was no evidence to justify the simultaneous type. Table 1 gives an overview of the characteristics of prescription of gastroprotective agents with COX 2 the CLASS, TARGET, and the MEDAL study. These selective inhibitors. This National Institute for Health studies allow comparisons between the currently avail- and Clinical Excellence guidance and other published able COX 2 selective inhibitors (celecoxib and etori- economic analyses in this area preceded the latest evi- coxib) and three traditional NSAIDs (diclofenac, dence on adverse events and gastroprotection, ibuprofen, and naproxen), which together account for however.5912 In addition, drug prices have recently over 80% of NSAID prescriptions in England. 2 “No changed—particularly for proton pump inhibitors— treatment,” paracetamol, and the addition of a proton and the cost effectiveness of gastroprotective agents pump inhibitor (omeprazole) to each NSAID were also could, therefore, also change.13 considered. Topical NSAIDs were not included owing As part of the development of the latest National to data limitations. Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence guideline, we performed an economic evaluation of COX 2 selec- Model design tive inhibitors and traditional NSAIDs, and of the addi- The economic model is described in detail elsewhere.23 tion of gastroprotective agents to these treatments. Here, we give an overview of the model design and parameters. The principal inputs to the model are METHODS shown in tables 2, 3, and 4. We conducted a cost utility analysis according to the The model estimates the net impact of the treatment methods recommended by the National Institute for options on patient outcomes and expenditure, taking http://www.bmj.com/ Health and Clinical Excellence.14 The primary out- account of effects on the incidence of gastrointestinal come measure for the economic analysis was quality and cardiovascular adverse events as well as improve- adjusted life years. A healthcare payer perspective ments in the control of osteoarthritis symptoms. It is was taken—that of the NHS in England and Wales. made up of a series of health states between which a theoreticalcohortofpatientscanmove.Theratesoftran- Comparators sition between these states are estimated using clinical Despite the growth in the evidence base, data are still evidence. The health states represent the most frequent on 28 September 2021 by guest. Protected copyright. sparse regarding the adverse events associated with and severe adverse events: dyspepsia; symptomatic some NSAIDs. Amalgamating data from observa- ulcer; complicated gastrointestinal perforation, ulcer, tional trials with data from randomised controlled or bleed; myocardial infarction; stroke; and heart failure. trials was not feasible because of the differences in In addition, a patient can experience no adverse event, patient groups, drug doses, and adverse event or death. Death rates are based on age specific mortality
Load more

Recommended publications
  • SBARD – Lithium Nsaids
    SBARD in Relation to Potentially Dangerous Interaction Between Lithium and Anti- Inflammatory Drugs A number of medication incidents have been reported recently concerning the prescribing and administration of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs S (NSAIDs) to patients on lithium. Situation Co-administration of a NSAID or cyclo-oxygenase (COX)-2 inhibitor, with lithium increases the risk of lithium toxicity In the last 6 months (Oct.11-Mar.12) there have been 3 Datix incident reports concerning the prescription of a NSAID for in-patients stabilised on lithium. B In each case the NSAID was prescribed “as required”, which increases the risk Background of lithium toxicity due to irregular administration with no increase in lithium monitoring frequency. NSAIDs and COX-2 inhibitors reduce the renal excretion of lithium via their A action on renal prostaglandins, resulting in increased plasma lithium levels. The level of increase is unpredictable (from 10-400%), and the onset of effect is Assessment variable (few days to several months). Risks are increased in patients with impaired renal function, renal artery stenosis or heart failure, and who are dehydrated or on a low salt diet. Co-prescription of NSAIDs or COX-2 inhibitors with lithium is not an absolute R contra-indication, but should be undertaken with extreme caution and only Recommendation when clinically essential. The risk of lithium toxicity is increased with “as required” or intermittent dosing (e.g. when used for menorrhagia), when the effects are less predictable – regular dosing
    [Show full text]
  • Spondyloarthritis: NMA on Pain Outcome RR111467
    NICE CGTSU Spondyloarthritis: NMA on Pain Outcome RR111467 Spondyloarthritis: NMA on pain outcome CGTSU, Bristol (Edna Keeney and Sofia Dias) The purpose of this analysis was to estimate the comparative effectiveness of the following pharmacological interventions for management of pain associated with axial spondyloarthritis: 1. Indomethacin (Reference) 2. Diclofenac 3. Sulindac 4. Fenoprofen 5. Ketoprofen 6. Flurbiprofen 7. Tenoxicam 8. Piroxicam 9. Celecoxib 200mg 10. Celecoxib 400mg 11. Aceclofenac 12. Naproxen 13. Enteric coated Naproxen 14. Etoricoxib 15. Tolfenamic acid 16. Meloxicam 15mg 17. Placebo 23 studies were included in the analyses. The network diagram is shown in Figure 1. Edna Keeney 1 13/10/2015 NICE CGTSU Spondyloarthritis: NMA on Pain Outcome RR111467 Figure 1. Network Diagram for pain outcome Pain Indomethacin Placebo Diclofenac Meloxicam 15mg Sulindac Tolfenamic acid Fenoprofen Etoricoxib Ketoprofen Enteric coated naproxen Flurbiprofen Naproxen Tenoxicam Piroxicam Aceclofenac Celecoxib 400mg Celecoxib 200mg METHODS In order to take all trial information into consideration, Mixed Treatment Comparison meta-analytic techniques, also termed Network meta-analysis (NMA), were employed. NMA is a generalization of standard pairwise meta-analysis for A versus B trials, to data structures that include, for example, A versus B, B versus C, and A versus C trials.1-3 A basic assumption of NMA methods is that direct and indirect evidence estimate the same parameter, that is, the relative effect between A and B measured directly
    [Show full text]
  • Efficacy of Etoricoxib, Celecoxib, Lumiracoxib, Non-Selective Nsaids, and Acetaminophen in Osteoarthritis: a Mixed Treatment Comparison W.B
    6 The Open Rheumatology Journal, 2012, 6, 6-20 Open Access Efficacy of Etoricoxib, Celecoxib, Lumiracoxib, Non-Selective NSAIDs, and Acetaminophen in Osteoarthritis: A Mixed Treatment Comparison W.B. Stam1, J.P. Jansen2 and S.D. Taylor*,3 1Mapi Group, Houten, The Netherlands 2Mapi Group, Boston, MA, USA 3Merck & Co., Inc., Whitehouse Station, NJ, USA Abstract: Objective: To compare the efficacy of etoricoxib, lumiracoxib, celecoxib, non-selective (ns) NSAIDs and acetaminophen in the treatment of osteoarthritis (OA) Methods: Randomized placebo controlled trials investigating the effects of acetaminophen 4000mg, diclofenac 150mg, naproxen 1000mg, ibuprofen 2400mg, celecoxib 100-400mg, lumiracoxib 100-400mg, and etoricoxib 30-60mg with treatment duration of at least two weeks were identified with a systematic literature search. The endpoints of interest were pain, physical function and patient global assessment of disease status (PGADS). Pain and physical function reported on different scales (VAS or LIKERT) were translated into effect sizes (ES). An ES 0.2 - 0.5 was defined as a “small” treatment effect, whereas ES of 0.5 – 0.8 and > 0.8 were defined as “moderate” and “large”, respectively. A negative effect indicated superior effects of the treatment group compared to the control group. Results of all trials were analyzed simultaneously with a Bayesian mixed treatment comparison. Results: There is a >95% probability that etoricoxib (30 or 60mg) shows the greatest improvement in pain and physical function of all interventions compared. ESs of etoricoxib 30mg relative to placebo, celecoxib 200mg, ibuprofen 2400mg, and diclofenac 150mg were -0.66 (95% Credible Interval -0.83; -0.49), -0.32 (-0.50; -0.14), -0.25 (-0.53; 0.03), and -0.17 (-0.41; 0.08), respectively.
    [Show full text]
  • Analgesic Effect of Etoricoxib Compared to Ibuprofen on Post Endodontic Pain
    Analgesic Effect of Etoricoxib Compared to Ibuprofen on Post Endodontic Pain Zahra-Sadat Madani1, Ali Akbar Moghadamnia2, Ali Panahi3, Arash Poorsattar Bejeh Mir4 1Department of Endodontics, Dentistry School, Babol University of Medical Sciences, Babol, Mazandaran Province, Iran. 2Department of Pharmacology, School of Medicine, Babol University of Medical Sciences, Babol, Mazandaran Province, Iran. 3General Dentist, Private Practice, Mazandaran Province, Babol, Iran. 4Dental Materials Research Center, Dentistry School, Babol University of Medical Sciences, Babol, Mazandaran Province, Iran. Abstract Aims: Etoricoxib is a second-generation selective COX-2 inhibitor. There are a few researches investigating analgesic effect of Etoricoxib in dentistry. Methods: This randomized, double-blind, active-control study included sixty patients with clinical pulpal diagnosis of necrosis of the first mandibular molar and an associated periapical radiolucency who experienced severe pain (more than 60 out of 100 in scale of Visual Analog Scale (VAS). The patients were equally randomized into four groups, who received 60 mg etoricoxib (group 1), 90 mg etoricoxib (group 2), 120 mg etoricoxib (group 3), and 400 mg ibuprofen (group 4). All patients randomly received a single dose of the drug after the first session of the root canal therapy. Using VAS, the severity of pain was recorded 2, 4, 6, 12, 24, 48, and 72 hours after the drug was administered. Results: Changing trends of pain over the time was significant for all groups (P=0.003). In addition, there was not a significant difference between various study arms (P=0.146). Conclusion: The results showed that ibuprofen had a comparable effect with various dosage of etoricoxib and may remain as the choice analgesic for dental pulpal pain.
    [Show full text]
  • Safety of Etoricoxib in Patients with Reactions to Nsaids
    ORIGINAL ARTICLE Safety of Etoricoxib in Patients With Reactions to NSAIDs O Quercia, F Emiliani, FG Foschi, GF Stefanini Allergology High Specialty Unit, General Medicine, Faenza Hospital, AUSL Ravenna, Italy ■ Abstract Background: Adverse reactions to nonsteroidal anti-infl ammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are a frequently reported problem due to the fact that these molecules are often used for control of pain and infl ammation. Although the use of selective inhibitors of cyclooxygenase (COX) 2 helps to prevent some of these adverse reactions, they can have cardiac side effects when taken for prolonged periods. Here we report the safety and tolerability of etoricoxib, a selective COX-2 inhibitor with fewer cardiovascular effects, in patients with adverse reactions to NSAIDs. Patients and methods: We performed placebo-controlled oral challenge with etoricoxib in 65 patients with previous adverse reactions to NSAIDs: 13 to salicylates, 18 to arylpropionic acids, 10 to arylacetic acid, 12 to oxicam and derivates, 8 to pyrazolones, and 4 to acetaminophen (paracetamol). The reported symptoms were urticaria or angioedema in 69%, rhinitis in 3%, and 1 case of anaphylactic shock (1.5%). The challenge was done using the placebo on the fi rst day, half dosage of etoricoxib (45 mg) on the second day, and the therapeutic dose of 90 mg on the third day. The challenge was done in the outpatient department of the hospital and the subjects were monitored for a further 4 to 6 hours after challenge. Results: Oral challenge with etoricoxib was well tolerated in 97% of the patients. Only 2 systemic reactions were reported during the challenge test.
    [Show full text]
  • Etoricoxib 30Mg, 60Mg, 90Mg and 120Mg Film-Coated Tablets
    Package leaflet: Information for the user Etoricoxib 30mg, 60mg, 90mg and 120mg Film-coated Tablets etoricoxib Read all of this leaflet carefully before you start • you have diabetes, high cholesterol, or are a smoker. These taking this medicine because it contains important can increase your risk of heart disease. information for you. • you are a woman trying to become pregnant. • Keep this leaflet. You may need to read it again. • you are over 65 years of age. • If you have any further questions, ask your doctor or If you are not sure if any of the above apply to you, talk to your pharmacist. doctor before taking etoricoxib to see if this medicine is • This medicine has been prescribed for you only. Do not pass suitable for you. it on to others. It may harm them, even if their signs of illness are the same as yours. Etoricoxib works equally well in older and younger adult • If you get any side effects, talk to your doctor or patients. If you are over 65 years of age, your doctor will want pharmacist. This includes any possible side effects not to appropriately keep a check on you. No dosage adjustment is listed in this leaflet. See section 4. necessary for patients over 65 years of age. • The full name of this medicine is Etoricoxib 30mg, 60mg, 90mg and 120mg Film-coated Tablets but within this Children and adolescents Do not give this medicine to children and adolescents under 16 leaflet it will be referred to as Etoricoxib Tablets. years of age. What is in this leaflet Other medicines and Etoricoxib Tablets 1 What Etoricoxib Tablets are and what they are Tell your doctor or pharmacist if you are taking, have recently used for taken or might take any other medicines, including medicines 2 What you need to know before you take obtained without a prescription.
    [Show full text]
  • Non Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs
    Non Steroidal Anti‐inflammatory Drugs (NSAIDs) 4 signs of inflammation • Redness ‐ due to local vessel dilatation • Heat ‐ due to local vessel dilatation • Swelling – due to influx of plasma proteins and phagocytic cells into the tissue spaces • Pain – due to local release of enzymes and increased tissue pressure NSAIDs • Cause relief of pain ‐. analgesic • Suppress the signs and symptoms of inflammation. • Exert antipyretic action. • Useful in pain related to inflammation. Esp for superficial/integumental pain . Classification of NSAIDs • Salicylates: aspirin, Sodium salicylate & diflunisal. • Propionic acid derivatives: ibuprofen, ketoprofen, naproxen. • Aryl acetic acid derivatives: diclofenac, ketorolac • Indole derivatives: indomethacin, sulindac • Alkanones: Nabumetone. • Oxicams: piroxicam, tenoxicam Classification of NSAIDs ….. • Anthranilic acid derivatives (fenamates): mefenamic acid and flufenamic acid. • Pyrazolone derivatives: phenylbutazone, oxyphenbutazone, azapropazone (apazone) & dipyrone (novalgine). • Aniline derivatives (analgesic only): paracetamol. Clinical Classif. • Non selective Irreversible COX inhibitors • Non slective Reversible COX inhibitors • Preferential COX 2 inhibitors • 10‐20 fold cox 2 selective • meloxicam, etodolac, nabumetone • Selective COX 2 inhibitors • > 50 fold COX ‐2 selective • Celecoxib, Etoricoxib, Rofecoxib, Valdecoxib • COX 3 Inhibitor? PCM Cyclooxygenase‐1 (COX‐1): -constitutively expressed in wide variety of cells all over the body. -"housekeeping enzyme" -ex. gastric cytoprotection, hemostasis Cyclooxygenase‐2 (COX‐2): -inducible enzyme -dramatically up-regulated during inflammation (10-18X) -constitutive : maintains renal blood flow and renal electrolyte homeostasis Salicylates Acetyl salicylic acid (aspirin). Kinetics: • Well absorbed from the stomach, more from upper small intestine. • Distributed all over the body, 50‐80% bound to plasma protein (albumin). • Metabolized to acetic acid and salicylates (active metabolite). • Salicylate is conjugated with glucuronic acid and glycine. • Excreted by the kidney.
    [Show full text]
  • Inflammatory Drugs
    Solubility of Nonsteroidal Anti- diflunisal, etoricoxib, fenbufen, fentiazac, flufenamic inflammatory Drugs (NSAIDs) in acid, flurbiprofen, ibuprofen, indomethacin, ketopro- Neat Organic Solvents and Organic fen, ketorolac, lornoxicam, mefenamic acid, melox- Solvent Mixtures iam, nabumetone, naproxen, niflumic acid, nimesulide, phenylbutazone, piroxicam, rofecoxib, sodium diclof- William E. Acree enac, sodium ibuprofen, sodium naproxen, sodium J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data 43, 023102 (2014) salicylate, tenoxicam, tolfenamic acid, and valdecoxib. IUPAC-NIST Solubility Data Series, Volume 102 http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4869683 This IUPAC-NIST Solubility Data Series volume reviews experimentally determined solubility data for 33 non- To access recent volumes in the Solubility Data Series, visit http://jpcrd.aip.org/ and steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) dissolved search IUPAC-NIST Solubility Data Series in neat organic solvents and well-defined binary and ternary organic solvent mixtures retrieved from the published chemical and pharmaceutical litera- ture covering the period from 1980 to the beginning of 2014. Except for aspirin (2-acetoxybenzoic acid) and salicylic acid (2-hydroxybenzoic acid), very little Provisional Recommendations physical and chemical property data are available Provisional Recommendations are drafts of IUPAC in the published literature for NSAIDs prior to 1980. recommendations on terminology, nomenclature, and Solubility data are compiled and critically reviewed symbols made widely available to allow interested
    [Show full text]
  • Inflammatory Drugs (Nsaids) for People with Or at Risk of COVID-19
    Evidence review Acute use of non-steroidal anti- inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for people with or at risk of COVID-19 Publication date: April 2020 This evidence review sets out the best available evidence on acute use of non- steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for people with or at risk of COVID-19. It should be read in conjunction with the evidence summary, which gives the key messages. Evidence review commissioned by NHS England Disclaimer The content of this evidence review was up-to-date on 24 March 2020. See summaries of product characteristics (SPCs), British national formulary (BNF) or the MHRA or NICE websites for up-to-date information. For details on the date the searches for evidence were conducted see the search strategy. Copyright © NICE 2020. All rights reserved. Subject to Notice of rights. ISBN: 978-1-4731-3763-9 Contents Contents ...................................................................................................... 1 Background ................................................................................................. 2 Intervention .................................................................................................. 2 Clinical problem ........................................................................................... 3 Objective ...................................................................................................... 3 Methodology ................................................................................................ 4 Summary of included studies
    [Show full text]
  • PRODUCT INFORMATION Etodolac Item No
    PRODUCT INFORMATION Etodolac Item No. 20833 CAS Registry No.: 41340-25-4 Formal Name: 1,8-diethyl-1,3,4,9-tetrahydro- pyrano[3,4-b]indole-1-acetic acid Synonyms: AY 24236, (±)-Etodolac, NIH 9918, H OH NSC 282126 N O O MF: C17H21NO3 FW: 287.4 Purity: ≥98% UV/Vis.: λmax: 224, 273 nm Supplied as: A crystalline solid Storage: Room temperature Stability: As supplied, 2 years from the QC date provided on the Certificate of Analysis, when stored properly Laboratory Procedures Etodolac is supplied as a crystalline solid. A stock solution may be made by dissolving the etodolac in the solvent of choice. Etodolac is soluble in organic solvents such as ethanol, DMSO, and dimethyl formamide (DMF), which should be purged with an inert gas. The solubility of etodolac in ethanol is approximately 20 mg/ml and approximately 30 mg/ml in DMSO and DMF. Further dilutions of the stock solution into aqueous buffers or isotonic saline should be made prior to performing biological experiments. Ensure that the residual amount of organic solvent is insignificant, since organic solvents may have physiological effects at low concentrations. Organic solvent-free aqueous solutions of etodolac can be prepared by directly dissolving the crystalline solid in aqueous buffers. The solubility of etodolac in PBS, pH 7.2, is approximately 0.25 mg/ml. We do not recommend storing the aqueous solution for more than one day. Description Etodolac is a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) that inhibits both COX isoforms in vitro, with modest selectivity for COX-2 (IC50s = 12 µM for COX-1 and 2.2 µM for COX-2 in a human whole blood assay).1 Experimental evidence suggests that etodolac may have favorable tissue pharmacokinetics resulting in further COX-2 selectivity, indicated by favorable reduction in anti-inflammatory action with diminished gastric side effects.2,3 References 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Results of the Etoricoxib Versus Diclofenac Sodium Gastrointestinal Tolerability and Effectiveness (EDGE) Trial
    Gastrointestinal Side Effects of Etoricoxib in Patients with Osteoarthritis: Results of the Etoricoxib versus Diclofenac Sodium Gastrointestinal Tolerability and Effectiveness (EDGE) Trial HERBERT S.B. BARAF, CARLOS FUENTEALBA, MARIA GREENWALD, JAN BRZEZICKI, KATHERINE O’BRIEN, BETH SOFFER, ADAM POLIS, STEVEN BIRD, AMARJOT KAUR, and SEAN P. CURTIS, for the EDGE Study Group ABSTRACT. Objective. To compare the gastrointestinal (GI) tolerability, safety, and efficacy of etoricoxib and diclofenac in patients with osteoarthritis (OA). Methods. In total, 7111 patients (mean age 64 yrs) diagnosed with OA were enrolled in a randomized, double-blind trial. Patients received etoricoxib 90 mg qd (n = 3593) or diclofenac sodium 50 mg tid (n = 3518). Gastroprotective agents and low-dose aspirin were prescribed per treatment guidelines. The primary endpoint was the cumulative rate of discontinuations due to clinical and laboratory GI adverse experiences (AE). General safety was assessed, including adjudication of thrombotic cardiovascular (CV) safety data. Efficacy was evaluated using the least-square (LS) mean change from baseline patient global assessment of disease status (PGADS; 0–4 point scale). Results. Mean (SD, maximum) duration of treatment was 9.3 (4.4, 16.5) and 8.9 (4.5, 16.6) months in the etoricoxib and diclofenac groups, respectively. The cumulative discontinuation rate due to GI AE was significantly lower with etoricoxib than diclofenac [9.4 vs 19.2 events per 100 patient-years (PY), respectively; hazard ratio (HR) 0.50 (95% CI 0.43, 0.58; p < 0.001). Rates of thrombotic CV events were similar with etoricoxib and diclofenac [1.25 vs 1.15 events per 100 PY, respectively; HR 1.07 (95% CI 0.65, 1.74)].
    [Show full text]
  • Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs (Nsaids) in Palliative Care
    GUIDELINES FOR THE USE OF NON- STEROIDAL ANTI-INFLAMMATORY DRUGS (NSAIDS) IN PALLIATIVE CARE 2 9.1 GENERAL PRINCIPLES Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) consist of a heterogenous group 1 of compounds that can be subdivided by virtue of their pharmacology: − Non-selective NSAIDs inhibit both COX-1 and COX-2 receptors e.g. ibuprofen, naproxen. − COX-2 selective NSAIDs display some selectivity for COX-2 receptors but this diminishes as the dose increases e.g. etodolac, meloxicam. − COX-2 inhibitors specifically inhibit COX-2 receptors at therapeutic doses whilst being COX-1 sparing e.g. celecoxib, etoricoxib. All NSAIDs have significant cardiovascular and gastrointestinal toxicity. 2 Consider whether alternative treatment would be appropriate (e.g. topical NSAIDs, paracetamol, tramadol). 1 3 Prescribe the lowest effective dose of NSAID for the shortest time necessary. 29.2 GUIDELINES 29.2.1 Cardiovascular risk and NSAID prescribing COX-2 inhibitors are contraindicated for use in patients with established ischaemic heart disease and / or cerebrovascular disease, and also in patients with peripheral arterial disease. 4 [Level 1] Despite conflicting evidence, non-selective NSAIDs and COX-2 selective NSAIDs are currently licensed for use in these groups of patients, although they should be used with caution. 1 [Level 4] 29.2.2 Renal dysfunction and NSAID prescribing Renal function should be assessed prior to the introduction of a NSAID and within 7 days of starting treatment or increasing the dose. 5, 6 [Level 4] Care is required when prescribing NSAIDs for patients with heart failure, ascites or impaired renal function, particularly those who are dehydrated or have a low effective circulating volume.
    [Show full text]