Prostanoids in Cardiac and Vascular Remodeling.

Prostanoids are biologically active lipids generated from arachidonic acid by the action of the COX (cyclooxygenase) isozymes. NSAIDs, which reduce the biosynthesis of prostanoids by inhibiting COX activity, are effective anti-inflammatory, antipyretic, and analgesic drugs. However, their use is limited by cardiovascular adverse effects, including myocardial infarction, stroke, hypertension, and heart failure. While it is well established that NSAIDs increase the risk of atherothrombotic events and hypertension by suppressing vasoprotective prostanoids, less is known about the link between NSAIDs and heart failure risk. Current evidence indicates that NSAIDs may increase the risk for heart failure by promoting adverse myocardial and vascular remodeling. Indeed, prostanoids play an important role in modulating structural and functional changes occurring in the myocardium and in the vasculature in response to physiological and pathological stimuli. This review will summarize current knowledge of the role of the different prostanoids in myocardial and vascular remodeling and explore how maladaptive remodeling can be counteracted by targeting specific prostanoids.

[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.

Derivation and validation of a risk prediction score for nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug-related serious gastrointestinal complications in the elderly.

AIMS: Few studies have quantified the impact of risk factors on GI complications in elderly nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) users. This study aimed to develop and validate a risk prediction score for severe GI complications to identify high-risk elderly patients using NSAID. METHODS: We used the following two Korean claims datasets: customized data with an enrolment period 2016-2017 for model development, and the sample data in 2019 for external validation. We conducted a nested case-control study for model development and validation. NSAID users were identified as the elderly (≥65 years) who received NSAIDs for more than 30 days. Serious GI complications were defined as hospitalizations or emergency department visits, with a main diagnosis of GI bleeding or perforation. We applied the logistic least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression model for variable selection and model fitting. RESULTS: We identified 8176 cases and 81 760 controls with a 1:10 matched follow-up period in the derivation cohort. In the external validation cohort, we identified 372 cases from 254 551 patients. The risk predictors were high-dose NSAIDs, nonselective NSAID, complicated GI ulcer history, male sex, concomitant gastroprotective agents, relevant co-medications, severe renal disease and cirrhosis. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.79 (95% confidence interval, 0.77-0.81) in the external validation dataset. CONCLUSIONS: The prediction model may be a useful tool for reducing the risk of serious GI complications by identifying high-risk elderly patients.

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.

Pyridazine derivatives as selective COX-2 inhibitors: A review on recent updates.

Selective cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 inhibitors have several advantages over nonselective COX inhibitors (nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs [NSAIDs]), including the absence of adverse effects (renal and hepatic disorders) associated with the long-term use of standard NSAIDs, as well as an improved gastrointestinal profile. The pyridazine nucleus is regarded as a promising scaffold for the development of powerful COX-2 inhibitors, particularly when selectively functionalized. This article summarizes some methods for the synthesis of pyridazine derivatives. Furthermore, it covers all of the pyridazine derivatives that have appeared as selective COX-2 inhibitors, making it useful as a reference for the rational design of novel selective COX-2 inhibitors.

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.

Lessons from 20 years with COX-2 inhibitors: Importance of dose-response considerations and fair play in comparative trials.

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) inhibit the enzyme cyclooxygenase (COX), which forms prostaglandins involved in pain and inflammation. COX inhibitors have analgesic and anti-inflammatory effects, but also increase risks for gastrointestinal ulcers, bleeding, and renal and cardiovascular adverse events. Identification of two isoforms of COX, COX-1 and COX-2, led to the development of selective COX-2 inhibitors, which were launched as having fewer gastrointestinal side effects since gastroprotective prostaglandins produced via COX-1 are spared. The balance between COX-1 mediated prothrombotic thromboxane and COX-2 mediated antithrombotic prostacyclin is important for thrombotic risk. An increased risk of suffering myocardial infarction and death with COX-2 inhibitor treatment is well established from clinical trials and observational research. Rofecoxib (Vioxx) was withdrawn from the market for this reason, but the equally COX-2 selective etoricoxib has replaced it in Europe but not in the United States. The "traditional" NSAID diclofenac is as COX-2 selective as celecoxib and increases cardiovascular risk dose dependently. COX inhibitor dosages should be lower in osteoarthritis than in rheumatoid arthritis. Randomized trials comparing COX-2 inhibitors with NSAIDs have exaggerated their gastrointestinal benefits by using maximal NSAID doses regardless of indication, and/or hidden the cardiovascular risk by comparing with COX-2 selective diclofenac instead of low-dose ibuprofen or naproxen. Observational studies show increased cardiovascular risks within weeks of treatment with COX-2 inhibitors and high doses of NSAIDs other than naproxen, which is the safest alternative. COX inhibitors are symptomatic drugs that should be used intermittently at the lowest effective dosage, especially among individuals with an increased cardiovascular risk.

Celecoxib-induced drug fever: A rare case report and literature review.

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: Drug fever is frequently misdiagnosed, especially during concurrent infection. Celecoxib causes various adverse effects; however, celecoxib-induced drug fever is rarely reported. CASE SUMMARY: A 32-year-old man presented with pyrexia after 17 days of celecoxib therapy, which was reintroduced following 3-day total drug cessation. His fever recurred after this unsuspected rechallenge, which aided in the ultimate identification of the offending drug. A Naranjo Score of 8 led us to infer that drug fever was "probably" caused by celecoxib. WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION: This is the first report of celecoxib-induced drug fever, aimed at assisting its diagnosis, particularly with rarely suspected causative drugs.

Pharmacology, safety, efficacy and clinical uses of the COX-2 inhibitor robenacoxib.

Robenacoxib is a veterinary-approved non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) of the coxib group. It possesses anti-hyperalgesic, anti-inflammatory and anti-pyretic properties. Robenacoxib inhibits the cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 isoform of COX selectively (in vitro IC50 ratios COX-1:COX-2, 129:1 in dogs, 32:1 in cats). At registered dosages (2 mg/kg subcutaneously in dogs and cats, 1-4 mg/kg orally in dogs and 1-2.4 mg/kg orally in cats), robenacoxib produces significant inhibition of COX-2 whilst sparing COX-1. The pharmacokinetic (PK) profile of robenacoxib is characterized by a high degree of binding to plasma proteins (>98%) and moderate volume of distribution (at steady state, 240 ml/kg in dogs and 190 ml/kg in cats). In consequence, the terminal half-life in blood (<2 h) is short, despite moderate body clearance (0.81 L/kg/h) in dogs and low clearance (0.44 L/kg/h) in cats. Excretion is principally in the bile (65% in dogs and 72% in cats). Robenacoxib concentrates in inflamed tissues, and clinical efficacy is achieved with once-daily dosing, despite the short blood terminal half-life. In dogs, no relevant breed differences in robenacoxib PK have been detected. Robenacoxib has a wide safety margin; in healthy laboratory animals daily oral doses 20-fold (dog, 1 month), eight-fold (cat, 6 weeks) and five-fold (dog, 6 months) higher than recommended clinical doses were well tolerated. Clinical efficacy and safety have been demonstrated in orthopaedic and soft tissue surgery, and in musculoskeletal disorders in dogs and cats.

NSAIDs, gastrointestinal toxicity and inflammatory bowel disease. / AINE, toxicidad gastrointestinal y enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal.

Non-steroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are currently one of the most widely used drugs. The use of NSAIDs is associated with gastrointestinal toxicity, affecting both upper gastrointestinal tract (peptic ulcer disease) and lower gastrointestinal tract (NSAID-induced enteropathy). NSAIDs use has been associated with an increased risk of clinical relapse in inflammatory bowel disease patients. In this article, we review the upper and lower gastrointestinal toxicity of NSAIDs, with a focus on the risks and specific data of these drugs in inflammatory bowel disease patients, giving recommendations for its appropriate use in the clinical practice. Although evidence is scarce, short-term use of NSAIDs appears to be safe, and the data available suggest that selective COX-2 inhibitors are the safer option. NSAIDs should be avoided as long-term treatment or with high doses, especially in patients with active inflammation.

Which non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) is safer in patients with Non-steroids Exacerbated Respiratory Disease (N-ERD)? A single-center retrospective study.

Introduction: In patients with NSAID-Exacerbated Respiratory Disease (N-ERD), respiratory symptoms occur as a result of the use of cyclooxygenase (COX)-1 inhibitor non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Patients with N-ERD generally tolerate selective COX-2 inhibitor NSAIDs. However, respiratory symptoms may be exacerbated in patients with N-ERD due to the intake of selective COX-2 inhibitor NSAIDs. The aim of this study was to evaluate which selective or partial COX-2 inhibitor NSAID is safer in patients with N-ERD. Materials and Methods: Forty-nine patients with a history of respiratory hypersensitivity reactions to NSAIDs (N-ERD) who underwent a drug challenge test with celecoxib, nimesulide, meloxicam, and paracetamol between January 2021-April 2022 were retrospectively evaluated. Result: Of the 49 patients who underwent the drug challenge tests, 16 (32.7%) were male and 33 (67.3%) were female and the mean age was 37.67 ± 11.62 years. The most common comorbidities were chronic urticaria [n= 21 (42.9%)] and allergic rhinitis [n= 21 (42.9%)]. As a result of drug challenge tests, celecoxib, nimesulide, meloxicam, and paracetamol drug challenge tests were positive in 2 (4.1%), 8 (16.3%), 7 (14.3%) and 11 (22.4) patients, respectively. The rate of allergic reaction to celecoxib was statistically significantly lower than other drugs (p= 0.001). In paired comparisons of the drugs, the allergic reaction rate with celecoxib was statistically significantly lower than with nimesulide (p= 0.031) and paracetamol (p= 0.004). Conclusions: Selective COX-2 inhibitor NSAIDs are safe in patients with N-ERD. NSAIDs should be prescribed to these patients following general medical precautions and drug challenge tests.

New horizons in the roles and associations of COX-2 and novel natural inhibitors in cardiovascular diseases.

Age-related cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death in elderly populations. Coxibs, including celecoxib, valdecoxib, etoricoxib, parecoxib, lumiracoxib, and rofecoxib, are selective cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors used to treat osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis. However, many coxibs have been discontinued due to adverse cardiovascular events. COX-2 contains cyclooxygenase (COX) and peroxidase (POX) sites. COX-2 inhibitors block COX activity without affecting POX activity. Recently, quercetin-like flavonoid compounds with OH groups in their B-rings have been found to serve as activators of COX-2 by binding the POX site. Galangin-like flavonol compounds serve as inhibitors of COX-2. Interestingly, nabumetone, flurbiprofen axetil, piketoprofen-amide, and nepafenac are ester prodrugs that inhibit COX-2. The combination of galangin-like flavonol compounds with these prodrug metabolites may lead to the development of novel COX-2 inhibitors. This review focuses on the most compelling evidence regarding the role and mechanism of COX-2 in cardiovascular diseases and demonstrates that quercetin-like compounds exert potential cardioprotective effects by serving as cofactors of COX-2.

Meloxicam and/or Etoricoxib Could Be Administered Safely in Two Equal Doses during an Open Oral Challenge in Patients with Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug Hypersensitivity.

BACKGROUND: Hypersensitivity reactions to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are common. These patients require an effective and safe analgesic alternative. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to demonstrate the safety of meloxicam and etoricoxib administered by open oral challenge in 2 equal steps in patients with NSAID hypersensitivity. METHODS: A cross-sectional, descriptive study of patients with a diagnosis of NSAID hypersensitivity who underwent an oral drug provocation test (DPT) with meloxicam or etoricoxib between January 2011 and August 2017 was conducted. The analysis was performed from a database in BD Clinic. RESULTS: Two hundred and twenty-eight oral provocations were performed with an alternative NSAID (203 with meloxicam and 25 with etoricoxib) in 217 patients with hypersensitivity to NSAIDs. The median age was 38 years. Ninety-eight percent of meloxicam and 100% of etoricoxib DPTs were performed in 2 steps (without previous placebo), and 52% and 64% of meloxicam and etoricoxib DPTs, respectively, were performed with 50% of the therapeutic dose in each step. Tolerance to meloxicam was demonstrated in 192 patients (94.5%) and in 100% of patients receiving etoricoxib. CONCLUSIONS: Open oral provocation with meloxicam and etoricoxib carried out in 2 steps without placebo seems to be safe and implies less costs and less time expenditure. Also, it could be performed with 2 equal doses.

Cardiovascular Biology of Prostanoids and Drug Discovery.

Prostanoids are a group of bioactive lipids that are synthesized de novo from membrane phospholipid-released arachidonic acid and have diverse functions in normal physiology and disease. NSAIDs (non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs), which are among the most commonly used medications, ameliorate pain, fever, and inflammation by inhibiting COX (cyclooxygenase), which is the rate-limiting enzyme in the biosynthetic cascade of prostanoids. The use of NSAIDs selective for COX-2 inhibition increases the risk of a thrombotic event (eg, myocardial infarction and stroke). All NSAIDs are associated with an increased risk of heart failure. Substantial variation in clinical responses to aspirin exists and is associated with cardiovascular risk. Limited clinical studies suggest the involvement of prostanoids in vascular restenosis in patients who received angioplasty intervention. mPGES (microsomal PG [prostaglandin] E synthase)-1, an alternative target downstream of COX, has the potential to be therapeutically targeted for inflammatory disease, with diminished thrombotic risk relative to selective COX-2 inhibitors. mPGES-1-derived PGE2 critically regulates microcirculation via its receptor EP (receptor for prostanoid E) 4. This review summarizes the actions and associated mechanisms for modulating the biosynthesis of prostanoids in thrombosis, vascular remodeling, and ischemic heart disease as well as their therapeutic relevance.

Long-term safety evaluation of Daxocox® tablets (enflicoxib) in dogs after weekly oral administrations for seven months.

BACKGROUND: Daxocox® [Ecuphar/Animalcare Group] contains the selective COX-2 inhibitor enflicoxib, approved in the EU for the treatment of pain and inflammation associated with osteoarthritis in dogs. The safety of Daxocox® was evaluated in a target animal safety study: Groups of 4 dogs per sex each were treated once weekly with placebo or Daxocox tablets at 1-, 3- and 5-times (1X, 3X and 5X) the maximum recommended therapeutic dose of enflicoxib (0, 4, 12 or 20 mg/kg, respectively). After an initial loading dose, dogs in the placebo control, 1X and 3X groups were administered for 32 weeks, and those in the 5X group were administered for 13 weeks. Dogs were subjected to daily food consumption measurements and clinical and dose observations. Body weight measurements, physical examinations, clinical pathology, urinalysis, faecal occult blood (FOB) and electrocardiographic (ECG) and blood pressure measurements, buccal mucosal bleeding time (BMBT), ophthalmology and gastroduodenal endoscopy examinations were conducted throughout the study. At study completion, all dogs were subjected to gross necropsy. Histopathology was performed on selected tissues from all animals in all groups. RESULTS: No clinical signs were noted, and no toxicologically relevant dose-associated effects were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Results show that Daxocox® is well-tolerated and has a broad safety margin when administered as directed in dogs.

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for acute gout.

BACKGROUND: Gout is an inflammatory arthritis resulting from the deposition of monosodium urate crystals in and around joints. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are commonly used to treat acute gout. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2014. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (including cyclo-oxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors (COXIBs)) for acute gout. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase for studies to 28 August 2020. We applied no date or language restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: We considered randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing NSAIDs with placebo or another therapy for acute gout. Major outcomes were pain, inflammation, function, participant-reported global assessment, quality of life, withdrawals due to adverse events, and total adverse events. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures as expected by Cochrane. MAIN RESULTS: We included in this update 28 trials (3406 participants), including 5 new trials. One trial (30 participants) compared NSAIDs to placebo, 6 (1244 participants) compared non-selective NSAIDs to selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors (COXIBs), 5 (712 participants) compared NSAIDs to glucocorticoids, 13 compared one NSAID to another NSAID (633 participants), and single trials compared NSAIDs to rilonacept (225 participants), acupuncture (163 participants), and colchicine (399 participants). Most trials were at risk of selection, performance, and detection biases. We report numerical data for the primary comparison NSAIDs versus placebo and brief results for the two comparisons - NSAIDs versus COX-2 inhibitors and NSAIDs versus glucocorticoids. Low-certainty evidence (downgraded for bias and imprecision) from 1 trial (30 participants) shows NSAIDs compared to placebo. More participants (11/15) may have a 50% reduction in pain at 24 hours with NSAIDs than with placebo (4/15) (risk ratio (RR) 2.7, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.1 to 6.7), with absolute improvement of 47% (3.5% more to 152.5% more). NSAIDs may have little to no effect on inflammation (swelling) after four days (13/15 participants taking NSAIDs versus 12/15 participants taking placebo; RR 1.1, 95% CI 0.8 to 1.5), with absolute improvement of 6.4% (16.8% fewer to 39.2% more). There may be little to no difference in function (4-point scale; 1 = complete resolution) at 24 hours (4/15 participants taking NSAIDs versus 1/15 participants taking placebo; RR 4.0, 95% CI 0.5 to 31.7), with absolute improvement of 20% (3.3% fewer to 204.9% more). NSAIDs may result in little to no difference in withdrawals due to adverse events (0 events in both groups) or in total adverse events; two adverse events (nausea and polyuria) were reported in the placebo group (RR 0.2, 95% CI 0.0, 3.8), with absolute difference of 10.7% more (13.2% fewer to 38% more). Treatment success and health-related quality of life were not measured. Moderate-certainty evidence (downgraded for bias) from 6 trials (1244 participants) shows non-selective NSAIDs compared to selective COX-2 inhibitors (COXIBs). Non-selective NSAIDs probably result in little to no difference in pain (mean difference (MD) 0.03, 95% CI 0.07 lower to 0.14 higher), swelling (MD 0.08, 95% CI 0.07 lower to 0.22 higher), treatment success (MD 0.08, 95% CI 0.04 lower to 0.2 higher), or quality of life (MD -0.2, 95% CI -6.7 to 6.3) compared to COXIBs. Low-certainty evidence (downgraded for bias and imprecision) suggests no difference in function (MD 0.04, 95% CI -0.17 to 0.25) between groups. Non-selective NSAIDs probably increase withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 2.3, 95% CI 1.3 to 4.1) and total adverse events (mainly gastrointestinal) (RR 1.9, 95% CI 1.4 to 2.8). Moderate-certainty evidence (downgraded for bias) based on 5 trials (712 participants) shows NSAIDs compared to glucocorticoids. NSAIDs probably result in little to no difference in pain (MD 0.1, 95% CI -2.7 to 3.0), inflammation (MD 0.3, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.6), function (MD -0.2, 95% CI -2.2 to 1.8), or treatment success (RR 0.9, 95% CI 0.7 to 1.2). There was no difference in withdrawals due to adverse events with NSAIDs compared to glucocorticoids (RR 2.8, 95% CI 0.5 to 14.2). There was a decrease in total adverse events with glucocorticoids compared to NSAIDs (RR 1.6, 95% CI 1.0 to 2.5). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Low-certainty evidence from 1 placebo-controlled trial suggests that NSAIDs may improve pain at 24 hours and may have little to no effect on function, inflammation, or adverse events for treatment of acute gout. Moderate-certainty evidence shows that COXIBs and non-selective NSAIDs are probably equally beneficial with regards to improvement in pain, function, inflammation, and treatment success, although non-selective NSAIDs probably increase withdrawals due to adverse events and total adverse events. Moderate-certainty evidence shows that systemic glucocorticoids and NSAIDs probably are equally beneficial in terms of pain relief, improvement in function, and treatment success. Withdrawals due to adverse events were also similar between groups, but NSAIDs probably result in more total adverse events. Low-certainty evidence suggests no difference in inflammation between groups. Only low-certainty evidence was available for the comparisons NSAID versus rilonacept and NSAID versus acupuncture from single trials, or one NSAID versus another NSAID, which also included many NSAIDs that are no longer in clinical use. Although these data were insufficient to support firm conclusions, they do not conflict with clinical guideline recommendations based upon evidence from observational studies, findings for other inflammatory arthritis, and expert consensus, all of which support the use of NSAIDs for acute gout.

Pre-emptive and preventive NSAIDs for postoperative pain in adults undergoing all types of surgery.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative pain is a common consequence of surgery and can have many negative perioperative effects. It has been suggested that the administration of analgesia before a painful stimulus may improve pain control. We defined pre-emptive nonsteroidal anti-inflammatories (NSAIDs) as those given before surgery but not continued afterwards and preventive NSAIDs as those given before surgery and continued afterwards. These were compared to a control group given the NSAIDs after surgery instead of before surgery. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy of preventive and pre-emptive NSAIDs for reducing postoperative pain in adults undergoing all types of surgery. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following electronic databases: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, AMED and CINAHL (up to June 2020). In addition, we searched for unpublished studies in three clinical trial databases, conference proceedings, grey literature databases, and reference lists of retrieved articles. We did not apply any restrictions on language or date of publication. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included parallel-group randomized controlled trials (RCTs) only. We included adult participants undergoing any type of surgery. We defined pre-emptive NSAIDs as those given before surgery but not continued afterwards and preventive NSAIDs as those given before surgery and continued afterwards. These were compared to a control group given the NSAIDs after surgery instead of before surgery. We included studies that gave the medication by any route but not given on the skin. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used the standard methods expected by Cochrane, as well as a novel publication bias test developed by our research group. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome. Outcomes included acute postoperative pain (minimal clinically important difference (MCID): 1.5 on a 0-10 scale), adverse events of NSAIDs, nausea and vomiting, 24-hour morphine consumption (MCID: 10 mg reduction), time to analgesic request (MCID: one hour), pruritus, sedation, patient satisfaction, chronic pain and time to first bowel movement (MCID: 12 hours). MAIN RESULTS: We included 71 RCTs. Seven studies are awaiting classification. We included 45 studies that evaluated pre-emptive NSAIDs and 26 studies that evaluated preventive NSAIDs. We considered only four studies to be at low risk of bias for most domains. The operations and NSAIDs used varied, although most studies were conducted in abdominal, orthopaedic and dental surgery. Most studies were conducted in secondary care and in low-risk participants. Common exclusions were participants on analgesic medications prior to surgery and those with chronic pain. Pre-emptive NSAIDs compared to post-incision NSAIDs For pre-emptive NSAIDs, there is probably a decrease in early acute postoperative pain (MD -0.69, 95% CI -0.97 to -0.41; studies = 36; participants = 2032; I2 = 96%; moderate-certainty evidence). None of the included studies that reported on acute postoperative pain reported adverse events as an outcome. There may be little or no difference between the groups in short-term (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.34 to 2.94; studies = 2; participants = 100; I2 = 0%; low-certainty evidence) or long-term nausea and vomiting (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.38; studies = 5; participants = 228; I2 = 29%; low-certainty evidence). There may be a reduction in late acute postoperative pain (MD -0.22, 95% CI -0.44 to 0.00; studies = 28; participants = 1645; I2 = 97%; low-certainty evidence). There may be a reduction in 24-hour morphine consumption with pre-emptive NSAIDs (MD -5.62 mg, 95% CI -9.00 mg to -2.24 mg; studies = 16; participants = 854; I2 = 99%; low-certainty evidence) and an increase in the time to analgesic request (MD 17.04 minutes, 95% CI 3.77 minutes to 30.31 minutes; studies = 18; participants = 975; I2 = 95%; low-certainty evidence). There may be little or no difference in opioid adverse events such as pruritus (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.09 to 1.76; studies = 4; participants = 254; I2 = 0%; low-certainty evidence) or sedation (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.68; studies = 4; participants = 281; I2 = 0%; low-certainty evidence), although the number of included studies for these outcomes was small. No study reported patient satisfaction, chronic pain or time to first bowel movement for pre-emptive NSAIDs. Preventive NSAIDs compared to post-incision NSAIDs For preventive NSAIDs, there may be little or no difference in early acute postoperative pain (MD -0.14, 95% CI -0.39 to 0.12; studies = 18; participants = 1140; I2 = 75%; low-certainty evidence). One study reported adverse events from NSAIDs (reoperation for bleeding) although the events were low which did not allow any meaningful conclusions to be drawn (RR 1.95; 95% CI 0.18 to 20.68). There may be little or no difference in rates of short-term (RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.49 to 3.30; studies = 1; participants = 76; low-certainty evidence) or long-term (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.38; studies = 5; participants = 456; I2 = 29%; low-certainty evidence) nausea and vomiting. There may be a reduction in late acute postoperative pain (MD -0.33, 95% CI -0.59 to -0.07; studies = 21; participants = 1441; I2 = 81%; low-certainty evidence). There is probably a reduction in 24-hour morphine consumption (MD -1.93 mg, 95% CI -3.55 mg to -0.32 mg; studies = 16; participants = 1323; I2 = 49%; moderate-certainty evidence). It is uncertain if there is any difference in time to analgesic request (MD 8.51 minutes, 95% CI -31.24 minutes to 48.27 minutes; studies = 8; participants = 410; I2 = 98%; very low-certainty evidence). As with pre-emptive NSAIDs, there may be little or no difference in other opioid adverse events such as pruritus (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.09 to 3.35; studies = 3; participants = 211; I2 = 0%; low-certainty evidence) and sedation (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.63; studies = 5; participants = 497; I2 = 0%; low-certainty evidence). There is probably little or no difference in patient satisfaction (MD -0.42; 95% CI -1.09 to 0.25; studies = 1; participants = 72; moderate-certainty evidence). No study reported on chronic pain. There is probably little or no difference in time to first bowel movement (MD 0.00; 95% CI -15.99 to 15.99; studies = 1; participants = 76; moderate-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There was some evidence that pre-emptive and preventive NSAIDs reduce both pain and morphine consumption, although this was not universal for all pain and morphine consumption outcomes. Any differences found were not clinically significant, although we cannot exclude this in more painful operations. Moreover, without any evidence of reductions in opioid adverse effects, the clinical significance of these results is questionable although few studies reported these outcomes. Only one study reported clinically significant adverse events from NSAIDs administered before surgery and, therefore, we have very few data to assess the safety of either pre-emptive or preventive NSAIDs. Therefore, future research should aim to adhere to the highest methodology and be adequately powered to assess serious adverse events of NSAIDs and reductions in opioid adverse events.

Etoricoxib-induced fixed drug eruption: Report of seven cases.

BACKGROUND: Fixed drug eruption (FDE) is a characteristic form of intraepidermal CD8+ T cell-mediated drug reaction, with repeated appearance of isolated or multiple skin lesions in the same location after receiving the offending drug. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) are the most common cause. Selective inhibitors of inducible cyclooxygenase 2 (COX-2) provoke a lesser degree of allergic or idiosyncratic adverse reactions than conventional NSAID, but they can cause skin reactions of variable severity. OBJECTIVE: Etoricoxib has been related to a variety of unusual skin reactions, including several reports of FDE. METHODS: We perfomed epicutaneous test to diagnose patients with suspected etoricoxib fixe drug rash due to clinical features and reproducibility on at least two occasions. RESULTS: We present seven new cases of etoricoxib-induced fixed drug eruption, with a diagnosis based on clinical presentation. This diagnosis was confirmed by an etoricoxib-positive lesional patch test in six cases and by a positive low-dose oral challenge in the other one. Two patients showed negative patch tests with celecoxib (10% in pet.) on the residual lesions, and oral tolerance was confirmed in one. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the largest series on FDE induced by etoricoxib reported to date.

Effect of Celecoxib vs Placebo Added to Standard Adjuvant Therapy on Disease-Free Survival Among Patients With Stage III Colon Cancer: The CALGB/SWOG 80702 (Alliance) Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Aspirin and cyclooxygenase 2 (COX-2) inhibitors have been associated with a reduced risk of colorectal polyps and cancer in observational and randomized studies. The effect of celecoxib, a COX-2 inhibitor, as treatment for nonmetastatic colon cancer is unknown. Objective: To determine if the addition of celecoxib to adjuvant chemotherapy with fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) improves disease-free survival in patients with stage III colon cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: Cancer and Leukemia Group B (Alliance)/Southwest Oncology Group 80702 was a 2 × 2 factorial design, phase 3 trial conducted at 654 community and academic centers throughout the United States and Canada. A total of 2526 patients with stage III colon cancer were enrolled between June 2010 and November 2015 and were followed up through August 10, 2020. Interventions: Patients were randomized to receive adjuvant FOLFOX (every 2 weeks) for 3 vs 6 months with or without 3 years of celecoxib (400 mg orally daily; n = 1263) vs placebo (n = 1261). This report focuses on the results of the celecoxib randomization. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was disease-free survival, measured from the time of randomization until documented recurrence or death from any cause. Secondary end points included overall survival, adverse events, and cardiovascular-specific events. Results: Of the 2526 patients who were randomized (mean [SD] age, 61.0 years [11 years]; 1134 women [44.9%]), 2524 were included in the primary analysis. Adherence with protocol treatment, defined as receiving celecoxib or placebo for more than 2.75 years or continuing treatment until recurrence, death, or unacceptable adverse events, was 70.8% for patients treated with celecoxib and 69.9% for patients treated with placebo. A total of 337 patients randomized to celecoxib and 363 to placebo experienced disease recurrence or died, and with 6 years' median follow-up, the 3-year disease-free survival was 76.3% for celecoxib-treated patients vs 73.4% for placebo-treated patients (hazard ratio [HR] for disease recurrence or death, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.76-1.03; P = .12). The effect of celecoxib treatment on disease-free survival did not vary significantly according to assigned duration of adjuvant chemotherapy (P for interaction = .61). Five-year overall survival was 84.3% for celecoxib vs 81.6% for placebo (HR for death, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.72-1.04; P = .13). Hypertension (any grade) occurred while treated with FOLFOX in 14.6% of patients in the celecoxib group vs 10.9% of patients in the placebo group, and a grade 2 or higher increase in creatinine levels occurred after completion of FOLFOX in 1.7% vs 0.5% of patients, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with stage III colon cancer, the addition of celecoxib for 3 years, compared with placebo, to standard adjuvant chemotherapy did not significantly improve disease-free survival. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01150045.

Efficacy and safety between early use and late use of celecoxib in hip osteoarthritis patients who receive total hip arthroplasty: a randomized, controlled study.

Celecoxib is commonly used for pain management after total hip arthroplasty (THA), while the optimal timing of analgesic celecoxib remains unclear. This randomized, controlled study aimed to investigate the pain control efficacy and safety of preoperative celecoxib versus postoperative celecoxib in osteoarthritis (OA) patients undergoing THA. Totally, 192 hip OA patients about to undergo THA were randomized into pre-treatment group (N = 96) and post-treatment group (N = 96). The former was given 400 mg celecoxib at 4 h before THA, 200 mg at 4 h after THA, and then 200 mg every 12 h until 72 h post-operation. The latter was given 400 mg celecoxib at 4 h after THA, and then 200 mg every 12 h until 72 h post-operation. Pain at rest visual analog scale (VAS) score at 6 h, and pain at flexion VAS scores at 6 h, 12 h, and on D1, D2 were decreased in pre-treatment group compared to post-treatment group (all P < 0.05). Furthermore, additional consumption of patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) (P = 0.006) and total consumption of PCA (P = 0.006) were both reduced in pre-treatment group compared to post-treatment group. Meanwhile, compared to post-treatment group, patient satisfaction in pre-treatment group was higher on D1 (P = 0.010) and D2 (P = 0.039). While, Harris hip score showed no difference between pre-treatment group and post-treatment group on M1 or M3 (both P > 0.05). In conclusion, preoperative celecoxib exhibits better analgesic efficacy and patients' satisfaction management with similar tolerance compared to postoperative celecoxib in hip OA patients undergoing THA.