Efficacy and safety of iguratimod combined with celecoxib in active axial spondyloarthritis: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of iguratimod in adult patients with active axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA). METHOD: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial lasted for 28 weeks. Patients with axSpA were randomized 1:1 to receive iguratimod 25 mg twice daily or a placebo. All patients also took celecoxib 200 mg twice daily for the first 4 weeks and on demand from 4 to 28 weeks. The primary endpoints were ASAS20 at 4 weeks and the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) index at 28 weeks. Other assessment variables included ASAS40, ASAS5/6 response rates, Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada (SPARCC) scores, and adverse events. RESULTS: In total, 35 patients completed the study and were included for analyses. The median (interquartile range) NSAID index was 43.8 (34.9-51.8) in the iguratimod group, which is significantly lower than 68.9 (42.5-86.4) in the placebo group (p = 0.025). ASAS response rates and changes in disease activity scores were similar between the iguratimod and placebo groups. Patients in the iguratimod group had more improvement in median (interquartile range) SPARCC scores for sacroiliac joints than did those in the placebo group [71% (54-100%) vs 40% (0-52%), p = 0.006]. Iguratimod combined with celecoxib was not associated with a greater risk of adverse effects than was monotherapy with celecoxib. No severe adverse events occurred. CONCLUSIONS: In the treatment of active axSpA, iguratimod has a potential NSAID-sparing effect, and may also reduce magnetic resonance imaging-assessed bone marrow oedema in sacroiliac joints. Iguratimod provides an additional treatment option for patients with active axSpA.Clinical trial registration numberChiCTR2000029112, Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (http://www.chictr.org.cn).

[Current challenges for therapy of comorbid patients: a new look at celecoxib. A review].

The use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for a wide range of diseases is increasing, in part due to an increasing elderly population. Elderly patients are more vulnerable to adverse drug reactions, including side effects and adverse effects of drug-drug interactions, often occurring in this category of patients due to multimorbidity and polypharmacy. One of the most popular NSAIDs in the world is celecoxib. It is a selective cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 inhibitor with 375 times more COX-2 inhibitory activity than COX-1. As a result, celecoxib has a better gastrointestinal tract safety profile than non-selective NSAIDs. Gastrointestinal tolerance is an essential factor that physicians should consider when selecting NSAIDs for elderly patients. Celecoxib can be used in a wide range of diseases of the musculoskeletal system and rheumatological diseases, for the treatment of acute pain in women with primary dysmenorrhea, etc. It is also increasingly used as part of a multimodal perioperative analgesia regimen. There is strong evidence that COX-2 is actively involved in the pathogenesis of ischemic brain damage, as well as in the development and progression of neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer's disease. NSAIDs are first-line therapy in the treatment of acute migraine attacks. Celecoxib is well tolerated in patients with risk factors for NSAID-associated nephropathy. It does not decrease the glomerular filtration rate in elderly patients and patients with chronic renal failure. Many meta-analyses and epidemiological studies have not confirmed the increased risk of cardiovascular events reported in previous clinical studies and have not shown an increased risk of cardiovascular events with celecoxib, irrespective of dose. COX-2 activation is one of the key factors contributing to obesity-related inflammation. Specific inhibition of COX-2 by celecoxib increases insulin sensitivity in overweight or obese patients. Combination therapies may be a promising new area of treatment for obesity and diabetes.

Alternative Drug Safety in Children with Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug Hypersensitivity.

INTRODUCTION: Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are frequently used in the pediatric age group as pain relievers, antipyretics and anti-inflammatory drugs. Since NSAIDs are used in many medical conditions, there is a need for alternative NSAIDs to be used safely in people with hypersensitivity reactions. Selective and partially selective COX-2 inhibitors and weak COX-1 inhibitors are generally used as safe alternative drugs. The aim of this study was to evaluate safe NSAIDs determined by oral provocation tests (OPTs) according to phenotypes in children with NSAID hypersensitivity reactions. METHODS: The results of the oral provocation test performed with alternative NSAIDs (paracetamol, meloxicam, nimesulide, celecoxib) in patients followed up with the diagnosis of NSAID hypersensitivity reaction in the Pediatric Immunology and Allergy Department between January 2015 and February 2023 were evaluated retrospectively. RESULTS: During the study period, 91 patients underwent OPTs with 109 alternative drugs 48 (52.7%) of whom were girls, with a median age of 15 years. 91 patients had a history of reactions to 117 drugs. As an alternative NSAID; OPT was performed with paracetamol in 58 patients, meloxicam in 44 patients, nimesulide in 5 patients, and celecoxib in 2 patients. Since 15 patients used paracetamol safely at home, no tests were performed with paracetamol. Reactions were observed in 3 of the 73 patients (4.1%) who underwent OPT with paracetamol and in 2 of the 44 (4.5%) who underwent OPT with meloxicam. Reactions to nimesulide were also observed in the latter 2 patients (2/5, 40%), but they appeared to tolerate celecoxib. No reaction was observed in the 2 patients who were tested with celecoxib. CONCLUSION: Paracetamol, meloxicam, and nimesulide can be used as safe alternative drugs in most children with NSAID hypersensitivity. Selective COX-2 inhibitors should be tried as an alternative in patients who cannot tolerate them.

Drug-induced liver injury (DILI) ascribed to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in the USA-Update with genetic correlations.

OBJECTIVE: To describe patients with NSAID-DILI, including genetic factors associated with idiosyncratic DILI. METHODS: In DILIN, subjects with presumed DILI are enrolled and followed for at least 6 months. Causality is adjudicated by a Delphic approach. HLA sequencing of multiethnic NSAID-DILI patients and HLA allele imputation of matching population controls were performed following overall, class and drug-based association analysis. Significant results were tested in a non-Hispanic White (NHW) case-control replication cohort. RESULTS: Between September 2004 and March 2022, causality was adjudicated in 2498, and 55 (41 [75%] women) were assessed as likely due to NSAIDs. Median age at onset was 55 y (range 22-83 y). Diclofenac was the causative drug in 29, celecoxib in 7, ibuprofen in 5, etodolac and meloxicam each in 4. Except for meloxicam and oxaprozin (n = 2), the liver injury was hepatocellular with median R 15-25. HLA-DRB1*04:03 and HLA-B*35:03 were significantly more frequent in NSAID-DILI patients than in non-NSAID DILI controls. Interestingly, 85% of the HLA-DRB1*04:03 carriers developed DILI due to the use of acetic acid derivative NSAIDs, supporting the hypothesis that HLA-DRB1*04:03 could be a drug and/or class risk factor. HLA-B*35:03 but not HLA-DRB1*04:03 association was confirmed in the independent NHW replication cohort, which was largely driven by diclofenac. CONCLUSIONS: Despite prevalent use, NSAID-DILI is infrequent in the United States. Diclofenac is the most commonly implicated, and adherence to warnings of risk and close observation are recommended. The increased frequency of HLA-B*35:03 and DRB1*04:03, driven by diclofenac, suggests the importance of immune-mediated responses.

Emotional Blunting in Depression in the PREDDICT Clinical Trial: Inflammation-Stratified Augmentation of Vortioxetine With Celecoxib.

BACKGROUND: Emotional symptoms are recognized as a key feature in individuals with major depressive disorder. Previously, emotional blunting has been described both as a side effect of antidepressant treatment and as a symptom of depression. Little is known about the change of emotional blunting during antidepressant treatment. METHODS: The PREDDICT trial is a randomized, placebo-controlled, 6-week trial on the augmentation of vortioxetine with the anti-inflammatory agent celecoxib or placebo. Presently we report on exploratory secondary outcomes of changes in emotional blunting in depression assessed with the Oxford Depression Questionnaire (ODQ) total score and subscores from baseline to 8-week, 3-month, and 6-month follow-up assessments. RESULTS: In the whole group, there was a significant improvement in the ODQ total score and all subscores after 8 weeks. After stratification of participants into the treatment groups, the ODQ total score as well as subscores related to emotional blunting as a symptom of depression (reduction in positive emotions, not caring) improved between baseline and all follow-up time points in both treatment groups. Changes in subscores considered as a side effect of antidepressants (general reduction in emotions, emotional detachment) were inconclusive in both treatment groups. Overall, the placebo-augmented group showed slightly better results in changes of emotional blunting scores than the celecoxib group as did those with elevated inflammation at screening, regardless of treatment group. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis suggests favorable effects of vortioxetine on emotional blunting in both short- and long-term course. The beneficial impact of vortioxetine on emotional blunting was weaker in celecoxib-augmented patients compared with placebo, possibly due to pharmacokinetic interactions. Clinical Trials Registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR), ACTRN12617000527369p. Registered on 11 April 2017, http://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?ACTRN=12617000527369p.

Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of a herbal formulation for rheumatoid arthritis - A non-inferiority randomized controlled trial.

ETHNOPHARMACOLOGICAL RELEVANCE: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a diverse disease characterized by a variable, progressive course of articular and extra-articular symptoms that are linked with pain, disability, and mortality. The exact cause of rheumatoid arthritis is still being investigated, and there is no cure for this debilitating, persistent, painful disease. Qurs-e-Mafasil, a herbal Unani preparation, is regarded as a potent treatment for Waja'al-Mafasil, a condition clinically similar to rheumatoid arthritis, but scientific evidence is scarce. AIM OF THE STUDY: This study aimed to assess the non-inferiority of Qurs-e-Mafasil compared to celecoxib in the treatment of patients with rheumatoid arthritis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This randomized controlled trial was conducted on seventy patients diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis between the ages of 35 and 55 years. The participants were randomly allocated in a ratio of 3:2, with 42 participants in the test group and 28 participants in the control group. The test group was administered 2 tablets (each having 500 mg) of Qurs-e-Mafasil, while the control group was administered 1 capsule of Celecoxib 100 mg. Both medications were delivered for four weeks. The primary outcome measure was European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) response criteria based on Disease Activity Score-28 (DAS28) assessed before and after therapy, whereas the secondary outcome measure was the change in joint pain severity as determined by a 100 mm Visual Analog Scale (VAS) at baseline and each follow-up. The safety of the interventions was evaluated based on adverse event monitoring at each follow-up and laboratory tests including hemogram, Liver Function Tests (LFTs), Kidney Function Tests (KFTs), and a complete urine examination performed at baseline and after four weeks of treatment. RESULTS: The per-protocol analysis was done on 50 participants (30 in test group and 20 in control group) who completed the study duration. Thus, at the conclusion of the trial, participants in the test and control groups had either a moderate or no response based on EULAR response criteria. The odds ratio for no response versus moderate response between the test and the control groups was 0.71 (95% CI: 0.20-2.55) with p = 0.744. Moreover, the observed mean differences in VAS scores between the test and the control groups at 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and final follow-up were -0.33 (95% CI: -6.65 to 5.99, p = 0.916), 0.50 (95% CI: -5.63 to 6.63, p = 0.870), 2.42 (95% CI: -2.95 to 7.78, p = 0.370), and 3.00 (95% CI: -1.82 to 7.84, p = 0.219), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The differences in primary and secondary outcomes between the two groups indicate that Qurs-e-Mafasil, a herbal Unani formulation containing Zingiber officinale Roscoe rhizome, Colchicum luteum Baker root, Piper nigrum L. fruit, and Withania somnifera (L.) Dunal. root, is comparable to celecoxib in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis.

Co-crystal of Tramadol-Celecoxib Versus Tramadol or Placebo for Acute Moderate-to-Severe Pain After Oral Surgery: Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase 3 Trial (STARDOM1).

INTRODUCTION: Co-crystal of tramadol-celecoxib (CTC) is the first analgesic co-crystal for acute pain. This completed phase 3 multicenter, double-blind trial assessed the efficacy and safety/tolerability of CTC in comparison with that of tramadol in the setting of moderate-to-severe pain up to 72 h after elective third molar extraction requiring bone removal. METHODS: Adults (n = 726) were assigned randomly to five groups (2:2:2:2:1): orally administered twice-daily CTC 100 mg (44 mg rac-tramadol hydrochloride/56 mg celecoxib; n = 164), 150 mg (66/84 mg; n = 160) or 200 mg (88/112 mg; n = 160); tramadol 100 mg four times daily (n = 159); or placebo four times daily (n = 83). Participants in CTC groups also received twice-daily placebo. The full analysis set included all participants who underwent randomization. The primary endpoint was the sum of pain intensity differences over 0 to 4 h (SPID0-4; visual analog scale). Key secondary endpoints included 4-h 50% responder and rescue medication use rates. Safety endpoints included adverse events (AEs), laboratory measures, and Opioid-Related Symptom Distress Scale (OR-SDS) score. RESULTS: All CTC doses were superior to placebo (P < 0.001) for primary and key secondary endpoints. All were superior to tramadol for SPID0-4 (analysis of covariance least squares mean differences [95% confidence interval]: - 37.1 [- 56.5, - 17.6], - 40.2 [- 59.7, - 20.6], and - 41.7 [- 61.2, - 22.2] for 100, 150, and 200 mg CTC, respectively; P < 0.001) and 4-h 50% responder rate. Four-hour 50% responder rates were 32.9% (CTC 100 mg), 33.8% (CTC 150 mg), 40.6% (CTC 200 mg), 20.1% (tramadol), and 7.2% (placebo). Rescue medication use was lower in the 100-mg (P = 0.013) and 200-mg (P = 0.003) CTC groups versus tramadol group. AE incidence and OR-SDS scores were highest for tramadol alone. CONCLUSIONS: CTC demonstrated superior pain relief compared with tramadol or placebo, as well as an improved benefit/risk profile versus tramadol. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02982161; EudraCT number, 2016-000592-24.

Co-crystal of tramadol-celecoxib (CTC) for acute moderate-to-severe pain.

OBJECTIVE: This narrative review aims to provide a clinical perspective on the potential role of co-crystal of tramadol-celecoxib (CTC) in the management of acute moderate-to-severe pain by synthesizing the available preclinical and clinical data, with emphasis on phase 3 trials. METHODS: A non-systematic literature review was performed using a targeted PubMed search for articles published between January 1, 2000, and May 2, 2023; all publication types were permitted, and selected articles were limited to those published in English. Search results were manually reviewed to identify references based on their preclinical and clinical relevance to CTC and management of acute moderate-to-severe pain. RESULTS: The crystalline structure of CTC alters the physicochemical properties of tramadol and celecoxib, modifying their pharmacokinetics. If taken in a free combination, tramadol reduces absorption of celecoxib. Conversely, administration of CTC slows tramadol absorption and lowers its maximum plasma concentration, while increasing celecoxib plasma concentration through its enhanced release. In clinical studies across models of acute moderate-to-severe pain, CTC demonstrated an early onset of analgesia, with improved efficacy and lower rescue medication use, compared with either agent alone. CTC's safety profile was in line with that expected for the individual components; no additive effects were observed. CTC exhibited tramadol-sparing effects, with efficacy seen at lower daily/cumulative opioid doses vs. tramadol alone. CONCLUSIONS: Results from phase 3 trials suggest that the modified physicochemical properties of tramadol and celecoxib in CTC translate into an improved clinical benefit-risk profile, including fewer opioid-related adverse effects due to lower overall opioid dosing.

Efficacy and safety of celecoxib for treatment of mild to moderate postpartum depression: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

PURPOSE: Evidence has demonstrated the roles of inflammatory processes in pathogenesis of depression. We aim to assess the effects of adjunctive celecoxib with cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), an anti-inflammatory agent, in treatment of postpartum depression and on levels of Brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) and inflammatory cytokines. METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to investigate the effects of adjunctive celecoxib with CBT on postpartum depression. Fifty outpatient women with postpartum depression, participated in this study. Patients randomly received either a celecoxib capsule twice a day or a placebo capsule twice a day for 6 weeks. Patients were assessed using the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) and the adverse event checklist at baseline and weeks 2, 4, and 6. RESULTS: Patients in the celecoxib group showed a greater decline in HDRS scores from baseline to all three study time points compared to the placebo group (p = 0.12 for week 2, p = 0.001 for week 4, p < 0.001 for week 6). Rate of response to treatment was significantly higher in the celecoxib group compared to the placebo group at week 4 (60 vs 24%, p = 0.010) and week 6 (96 vs 44%, p < 0.001). Rate of remission was significantly higher in the celecoxib group compared to the placebo group at week 4 (52 vs 20%, p = 0.018) and week 6 (96 vs 36%, p < 0.001). Levels of most inflammatory markers were significantly lower in the celecoxib group compared to the placebo group at week 6. Levels of BDNF were significantly higher in the celecoxib group compared to the placebo group at week 6 (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest adjunctive celecoxib is an effective treatment for the improvement of postpartum depressive symptoms.

A Blend of Tamarindus Indica and Curcuma Longa Extracts Alleviates Monosodium Iodoacetate (MIA)-Induced Osteoarthritic Pain and Joint Inflammation in Rats.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: NXT15906F6 (TamaFlexTM) is a proprietary herbal composition containing Tamarindus indica seeds and Curcuma longa rhizome extracts. NXT15906F6 supplementation has been shown clinically effective in reducing knee joint pain and improving musculoskeletal functions in healthy and knee osteoarthritis (OA) subjects. The objective of the present study was to assess the possible molecular basis of the anti-OA efficacy of NXT15906F6 in a monosodium iodoacetate (MIA)-induced model of OA in rats. METHODS: Healthy male Sprague Dawley rats (age: 8-9 wk body weight, B.W.: 225-308 g (n = 12) were randomly assigned to one of the six groups, (a) vehicle control, (b) MIA control, (c) Celecoxib (10 mg/kg B.W.), (d) TF-30 (30 mg/kg B.W.), (e) TF-60 (60 mg/kg B.W.), and (f) TF-100 (100 mg/kg B.W.). OA was induced by an intra-articular injection of 3 mg MIA into the right hind knee joint. The animals received either Celecoxib or TF through oral gavage over 28 days. The vehicle control animals received intra-articular sterile normal saline. RESULTS: Post-treatment, NXT15906F6 groups showed significant (p < 0.05) dose-dependent pain relief as evidenced by improved body weight-bearing capacity on the right hind limb. NXT15906F6 treatment also significantly reduced the serum tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α, p < 0.05) and nitrite (p < 0.05) levels in a dose-dependent manner. mRNA expression analyses revealed the up-regulation of collagen type-II (COL2A1) and down-regulation of matrix metalloproteinases (MMP-3, MMP-9 and MMP-13) in the cartilage tissues of NXT15906F6-supplemented rats. Cyclooxygenase-2 and inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS) protein expressions were down-regulated. Decreased immunolocalization of NF-κß (p65) was observed in the joint tissues of NXT15906F6-supplemented rats. Furthermore, microscopic observations revealed that NXT15906F6 preserved MIA-induced rats' joint architecture and integrity. CONCLUSION: NXT15906F6 reduces MIA-induced joint pain, inflammation, and cartilage degradation in rats.

The efficacy and safety of adding celecoxib to escitalopram for improving symptoms of major depressive disorder.

OBJECTIVE: There is growing evidence that adding non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs to some psychopharmacological treatments may help to improve symptoms in patients suffering from major depressive disorder. The present study examined the therapeutic efficacy of adding celecoxib to escitalopram and the safety of doing so. METHOD: In this double-blind randomized controlled trial, 60 patients with major depressive disorder were randomly assigned to either treatment with escitalopram plus celecoxib (intervention group) or escitalopram and placebo. All patients were evaluated blind to treatment group with the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) before the intervention as well at 4 and 8 weeks after initiating treatment. Chi-square and paired t-test were used to examine between-group differences at those assessment times. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in depressive symptoms between intervention and placebo groups at baseline. However, at 4 and 8 weeks after the beginning of treatment, there were significant between-group differences in HDRS scores, favoring the intervention group. No between-group differences were found in treatment-related side effects. CONCLUSIONS: Adding celecoxib to escitalopram may improve symptoms of depression in patients with major depressive disorder without increasing the risk of drug-related side effects.

Potential inhibition of 12-O-tetradecanoylphorbol-13-acetate-induced inflammation, hyperproliferation, and hyperplasiogenic responses by celecoxib in mouse skin.

PURPOSE: Skin exposure to noxious agents leads to cutaneous lesion marked by an increase in inflammation, cellular proliferation, and hyperplasiogenic reactions. Studies have demonstrated that these damages breach the skin integrity resulting in the aetiology of various cutaneous disorders like atopic dermatitis, eczema, psoriasis, and development of non-melanoma skin cancer. Celecoxib, a cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitor, is an effective treatment for a variety of inflammatory diseases. Its importance in the therapy of skin problems, however, remains under appreciated. METHODS: We tested efficacy of topically applied celecoxib in mitigating skin inflammation, cellular proliferation, and hyperplasia induced by the phorbol ester 12-O-tetradecanoylphorbol-13-acetate (TPA) in Swiss albino mice. RESULTS: Celecoxib (5 and 10 µmol) markedly reduced TPA (10 nmol) induced prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) production, oedema formation, myeloperoxidase (MPO) activity, and levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines such as tumour necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α), interleukin-1 beta (IL-1ß), and interleukin-6 (IL-6). It also resulted in a considerable decrease in ornithine decarboxylase (ODC) activity and the incorporation of [3H]-thymidine into DNA. In addition, there was a significant reduction in histoarchitectural abnormalities such as epidermal thickness, number of epidermal cell layers, neutrophil infiltration, intercellular oedema, and vasodilation. CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrate that topical celecoxib can reduce the inflammation, hyperproliferation, and hyperplasiogenic events of skin insults suggesting that it may prove to be a valuable management option for cutaneous lesion and associated illnesses such as atopic dermatitis, eczema, and psoriasis, as well as the emergence of non-melanoma cancer.

1,4-Diaryl-1,2,3-triazole neolignan-celecoxib hybrids inhibit experimental arthritis induced by zymosan.

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic autoimmune disease that causes cartilage damage. Anti-inflammatories are widely used in the management of RA, but they can have side effects such as gastrointestinal and/or cardiovascular disorders. Studies published by our group showed that the synthesis of hybrid triazole analogs neolignan-celecoxib containing the substituent groups sulfonamide (L15) or carboxylic acid (L18) exhibited anti-inflammatory activity in an acute model of inflammation, inhibited expression of P-selectin related to platelet activation and did not induce gastric ulcer, minimizing the related side effects. In continuation, the present study evaluated the anti-inflammatory effects of these analogs in an experimental model of arthritis and on the functions of one of the important cells in this process, macrophages. Mechanical hyperalgesia, joint edema, leukocyte recruitment to the joint and damage to cartilage in experimental arthritis and cytotoxicity, spread of disease, phagocytic activity and nitric oxide (NO) and hydrogen peroxide production by macrophages were evaluated. Pre-treatment with L15 and L18 reduced mechanical hyperalgesia, joint edema and the influx of leukocytes into the joint cavity after different periods of the stimulus. The histological evaluation of the joint showed that L15 and L18 reduced cartilage damage and there was no formation of rheumatoid pannus. Furthermore, L15 and L18 were non-cytotoxic. The analogs inhibited the spreading, the production of NO and hydrogen peroxide. L15 decreased the phagocytosis. Therefore, L15 and L18 may be potential therapeutic prototypes to treat chronic inflammatory diseases such as RA.

Exploratory Analysis of the Effects of Celecoxib on Cognitive Function in Vortioxetine-Treated Patients With Major Depressive Disorder in the PREDDICT Study: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial.

Objective: Major depressive disorder (MDD) remains difficult to treat, with many patients resistant to existing treatments or experiencing relapse. Cognitive dysfunction is associated with more severe clinical outcomes. Vortioxetine has shown efficacy in remediating depression-associated cognitive impairment. Anti-inflammatory augmentation of antidepressants is a new strategy in treating depression and has not previously been assessed for effects on cognition in depression.Methods: Exploratory analyses were performed on secondary outcome cognitive data from the PREDDICT parallel-group, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial at the University of Adelaide (Australia). Participants (N = 119) with MDD (validated with Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview for DSM-IV) were treated with vortioxetine and celecoxib or vortioxetine and placebo for 6 weeks between December 2017 and April 2020. Measures included objective cognition composite scores (Choice Reaction Time, N-Back, Digit Symbol Substitution Test, Trail Making Task Part B), subjective cognition scores (Perceived Deficits Questionnaire), and global cognition composite scores (combined objective and subjective scores) derived from the THINC integrated tool (THINC-it). High-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) measured at baseline and week 6 was tested for a predictive relationship with cognitive outcomes.Results: Cognition composite scores demonstrated improvement by week 6 in both treatment groups. However, there was no significant interaction between change over time and treatment group. HsCRP did not have a significant relationship with any tested cognition measures.Conclusions: Both treatment groups showed a reduction in depression-associated cognitive impairment. No superior clinical effect was reported for the add-on celecoxib group. HsCRP was modulated by neither vortioxetine nor add-on celecoxib.Trial Registration: ANZCTR identifier: ACTRN12617000527369.

Celecoxib attenuates neuroinflammation, reactive astrogliosis and promotes neuroprotection in young rats with experimental hydrocephalus.

Hydrocephalus is a neurological condition with altered cerebrospinal fluid flow (CSF). The treatment is surgical and the most commonly used procedure is ventricle-peritoneal shunt. However, not all patients can undergo immediate surgery or achieve complete lesion reversal. Neuroprotective measures are valuable in such cases. It was evaluated whether the use of celecoxib, a selective inhibitor of COX-2, associated or not with ventricular-subcutaneous derivation, could offer benefits to the brain structures affected by experimental hydrocephalus. Seven-day-old male Wistar Hannover rats induced by intracisternal injection of kaolin 15% were used, divided into five groups with ten animals each: intact control (C), untreated hydrocephalus (H), hydrocephalus treated with celecoxib 20 mg/kg intraperitoneal (HTC), hydrocephalus treated with shunt (HTS) and hydrocephalus treated with shunt and celecoxib 20 mg/kg intraperitoneal (HTCS). Celecoxib was administered for 21 consecutive days, starting the day after hydrocephalus induction and continuing until the end of the experimental period. The surgery was performed seven days after inducing hydrocephalus. Multiple assessment methods were used, such as behavioral tests (water maze and open field), histological analysis (hematoxylin and eosin), immunohistochemistry (caspase-3, COX-2, and GFAP), and ELISA analysis of GFAP. The results of the behavioral and memory tests indicated that celecoxib improves the neurobehavioral response. The improvement can be attributed to the reduced neuroinflammation (p < 0.05), and astrogliosis (p < 0.05) in different brain regions. In conclusion, the results suggest that celecoxib holds great potential as an adjuvant neuroprotective drug for the treatment of experimental hydrocephalus.

Efficacy and safety of diacerein and celecoxib combination therapy for knee osteoarthritis: A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Osteoarthritis is a degenerative disease with a growing burden in South Korea. Corresponding drugs are commonly used for pain relief and joint function improvement. Specifically, symptomatic slow-acting drugs for osteoarthritis are frequently used, with diacerein being the most common symptomatic slow-acting drugs for osteoarthritis in South Korea. In this study, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of diacerein and celecoxib combination therapy in patients with osteoarthritis. METHODS: A total of 71 subjects were randomly assigned to group 1 (diacerein and celecoxib), 2 (diacerein and placebo), or 3 (celecoxib and placebo). The primary outcome measure was the change in the visual analog scale (VAS) score 12 weeks after treatment. RESULTS: The combination therapy group exhibited a significant decrease in the VAS score, alongside the other control monotherapy groups. Although there was no significant difference between the groups, the combination therapy group exhibited a greater decrease in the absolute value of the VAS score than the other groups. Four weeks after treatment, the combination therapy group showed significantly higher improvement in the stiffness and physical function categories of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index than the other groups. Additionally, no serious adverse events occurred following combination therapy, with most adverse events being mild and resolving without specific treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Diacerein and celecoxib combination therapy is as safe and effective as corresponding monotherapies. A relatively early improvement in stiffness and physical function following treatment with this combination therapy indicates that physicians should consider this for the early-stage treatment of patients with symptomatic osteoarthritis.

Angioedema without urticaria after recent initiation of celecoxib.

Angioedema is potentially life-threating swelling of integument and mucosa that has multiple potential aetiologies with varying mechanisms. Drug-induced angioedema is often easily correlated with the offending agent and can be prevented with discontinuation of the medication. Many medications have now been implicated in drug-induced angioedema but the two most common are ACE inhibitors and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). This case highlights severe angioedema secondary to celecoxib and reviews varying aetiologies of angioedema and NSAID hypersensitivity reactions.

Selective COX-2 inhibitors do not increase gastrointestinal reactions after colorectal cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of selective COX-2 inhibitors in preventing colorectal cancer recurrence has been demonstrated, however it is unknown how safe and successful they will be over the long term. As a result, we looked at the efficacy, safety, and consequences of adding COX-2 inhibitors to the treatment plan afterward. METHODS: In patients with advanced colorectal cancer, we compared the efficacy of celecoxib at two different doses (200 mg twice day and 400 mg twice daily) with placebo. To evaluate the impacts of post-treatment, several datasets from inception to June 2022 were searched. Response rate, illness control rate, and 3-year survival were the main results. And evaluated several safety outcomes, particularly those that were susceptible to adverse events. RESULTS: The study comprised a total of 9 randomized controlled trials (3206 participants). Celecoxib and rofecoxib doidn't significantly improved the 1-3 year remission rate (OR, 1.57 [95% CI: 0.95-2.57]) and disease control rate (OR, 1.08 [95% CI: 0.99-1.17]). Subgroup analysis of different doses showed that 400 mg of celecoxib significantly improved the response rate (OR, 2.82 [95%CI: 1.20-6.61]). 200 mg celecoxib was not significant (OR, 1.28 [95% CI: 0.66-2.49]). Rofecoxib also did not fully improve disease response rates. Celecoxib at any dose improved 3-year survival (OR, 1.21 [95% CI: 1.02-1.45]). It is important to note that COX-2 inhibitors did not significantly enhance the likelihood of adverse events including gastrointestinal or cardiovascular side effects at any dose. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with advanced colorectal cancer, a reasonable chemoprevention regimen can include celecoxib 400 mg twice daily.

Efficacy of Aceclofenac and Ilaprazole Combination Therapy versus Celecoxib Monotherapy for Treating NSAID-Induced Dyspepsia in Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Patients.

Background and Objectives: Dyspepsia is a common adverse event associated with the use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis. Although proton pump and cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors are potential treatment options, the optimal strategy remains unclear. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of combination therapy with aceclofenac and ilaprazole versus celecoxib monotherapy for the treatment of dyspepsia caused by NSAID use in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis. Materials and Methods: This prospective, double-blind, randomized, actively controlled study was conducted at Seoul National University Bundang Hospital in South Korea from July 2020 to September 2021. The participants were randomized into one of two treatment groups: celecoxib monotherapy (control group) and combination therapy with aceclofenac and ilaprazole (test group). The primary efficacy endpoint was the mean change in the Short-Form Leeds Dyspepsia Questionnaire (SF-LDQ) scores from baseline to treatment week 8. The secondary efficacy endpoint was the mean change in Short-Form-12 (SF-12) scores from baseline (week 0) to treatment week 8. Results: The study enrolled 140 patients who were randomly assigned to receive combination therapy with aceclofenac and, ilaprazole or celecoxib. In the per protocol set, the mean change in SF-LDQ scores from week 0 to week 8 was -0.51 ± 4.78 and 1.85 ± 6.70 in the combination therapy and celecoxib group, respectively (p = 0.054). SF-12 scores did not differ significantly between the two groups. Adverse events were reported in both groups, but there was no significant difference in incidence. Conclusions: Combination therapy with aceclofenac and ilaprazole can be a treatment option for NSAID-induced dyspepsia in some situations.

Postoperative analgesic efficacy and safety of imrecoxib versus celecoxib in hip osteoarthritis patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty: a multi-center, randomized, controlled, non-inferiority study.

BACKGROUND: Imrecoxib, a novel cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor, possesses a certain postoperative analgesic effect for several orthopedic surgeries. This multi-center, randomized, controlled, non-inferiority study intended to investigate the postoperative analgesic efficacy and safety profile of imrecoxib (versus celecoxib) in hip osteoarthritis patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA). METHODS: 156 hip osteoarthritis patients planned for THA were randomized into imrecoxib (N = 78) and celecoxib (N = 78) groups. Patients were orally administrated with imrecoxib or celecoxib 200 mg at 2 h (h) after THA, 200 mg every 12 h to day (D)3, and 200 mg every 24 h to D7; additionally, each patient received patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) for 2 days. RESULTS: Resting pain visual analogue scale (VAS) score at 6 h, 12 h, D1, D2, D3, and D7 post THA was not varied between imrecoxib and celecoxib groups (all P > 0.050), neither was moving pain VAS score (all P > 0.050). Importantly, the upper of 95% confidence interval of pain VAS score margin between imrecoxib and celecoxib groups was within the non-inferiority threshold (Δ = 1.0), indicating the fact that non-inferiority was established. The additional and total consumption of PCA was not varied between imrecoxib and celecoxib groups (both P > 0.050). Also, no difference was seen in Harris hip score, European Quality of Life 5-Dimensions (EQ-5D) total and VAS scores at month (M)1, M3 between the two groups (all P > 0.050). Besides, the incidences of all adverse events were not different between imrecoxib and celecoxib groups (all P > 0.050). CONCLUSION: Imrecoxib is non-inferior to celecoxib for postoperative analgesia in hip osteoarthritis patients undergoing THA.