Efficacy and Safety of Proton-Pump Inhibitors in High-Risk Cardiovascular Subsets of the COGENT Trial.

BACKGROUND: Proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) have been demonstrated to reduce rates of gastrointestinal events in patients requiring dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). Data are limited regarding the efficacy and safety of PPIs in high-risk cardiovascular subsets after acute coronary syndrome or percutaneous coronary intervention. METHODS: All patients enrolled in COGENT (Clopidogrel and the Optimization of Gastrointestinal Events Trial) were initiated on DAPT (with aspirin and clopidogrel) for various indications within the prior 21 days. These post hoc analyses of the COGENT trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of omeprazole compared with placebo in subsets of patients requiring DAPT for the 2 most frequent indications: 1) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (for any indication) within 14 days of randomization (n = 2676; 71.2%); and 2) patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome managed with or without percutaneous coronary intervention (n = 1573; 41.8%). Unadjusted Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate effect sizes through final follow-up. RESULTS: Median follow-up duration was 110 days (interquartile range 55-167). In percutaneous coronary intervention-treated patients, omeprazole significantly reduced rates of composite gastrointestinal events at 180 days (1.2% vs 2.7%; hazard ratio [HR] 0.43; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.22-0.85; P = .02) without increasing composite cardiovascular events (5.4% vs 6.3%; HR 1.00; 95% CI, 0.67-1.50; P = 1.00). Similarly, omeprazole lowered risk of the primary gastrointestinal endpoint at 180 days in patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome (1.1% vs 2.7%; HR 0.37; 95% CI, 0.13-1.01; P = .05) without a significant excess in cardiovascular events (5.6% vs 4.5%; HR 1.40; 95% CI, 0.77-2.53; P = .27). CONCLUSIONS: PPI therapy attenuates gastrointestinal bleeding risk without significant excess in major cardiovascular events in high-risk cardiovascular subsets, regardless of indication for DAPT. Future studies will be needed to clarify optimal gastroprotective strategies for higher-intensity and longer durations of DAPT.

Proton-Pump Inhibitors Reduce Gastrointestinal Events Regardless of Aspirin Dose in Patients Requiring Dual Antiplatelet Therapy.

BACKGROUND: The COGENT (Clopidogrel and the Optimization of Gastrointestinal Events Trial) showed that proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) safely reduced rates of gastrointestinal (GI) events in patients requiring dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). However, utilization of appropriate prophylactic PPI therapy remains suboptimal, especially with low-dose aspirin. OBJECTIVES: The authors investigated the safety and efficacy of PPI therapy in patients receiving DAPT in low- and high-dose aspirin subsets. METHODS: Randomized patients with available aspirin dosing information in COGENT (N = 3,752) were divided into "low-dose" (≤ 100 mg) and "high-dose" (>100 mg) aspirin groups. The primary GI and cardiovascular endpoints were composite upper GI events and major adverse cardiac events, respectively. All events were adjudicated by independent, blinded gastroenterologists and cardiologists. RESULTS: Median duration of follow-up was 110 days. Low-dose aspirin users (n = 2,480; 66.1%) were more likely to be older, female, and have higher rates of peripheral artery disease, prior stroke, and hypertension, whereas high-dose aspirin users (n = 1,272; 33.9%) had higher rates of hyperlipidemia, smoking, a history of percutaneous coronary intervention, and were more than twice as likely to be enrolled from sites within the United States (80.4% vs. 39.8%). High-dose aspirin was associated with similar 180-day Kaplan-Meier estimates of adjudicated composite GI events (1.7% vs. 2.1%; adjusted hazard ratio: 0.88; 95% confidence interval: 0.46 to 1.66) and major adverse cardiac events (4.8% vs. 5.5%; adjusted hazard ratio: 0.73; 95% confidence interval: 0.48 to 1.11) compared with low-dose aspirin. Randomization to PPI therapy reduced 180-day Kaplan-Meier estimates of the primary GI endpoint in low-dose (1.2% vs. 3.1%) and high-dose aspirin subsets (0.9% vs. 2.6%; p for interaction = 0.80), and did not adversely affect the primary cardiovascular endpoint in either group. CONCLUSIONS: Gastroprotection with PPI therapy should be utilized in appropriately selected patients with coronary artery disease requiring DAPT, even if the patients are on low-dose aspirin. (Clopidogrel and the Optimization of Gastrointestinal Events Trial [COGENT]; NCT00557921).

Long-Term Safety of a Coordinated Delivery Tablet of Enteric-Coated Aspirin 325 mg and Immediate-Release Omeprazole 40 mg for Secondary Cardiovascular Disease Prevention in Patients at GI Risk.

INTRODUCTION: In two, 6-month, randomized, double-blind Phase 3 trials, PA32540 (enteric-coated aspirin 325 mg and immediate-release omeprazole 40 mg) compared to aspirin alone was associated with fewer endoscopic gastric and duodenal ulcers in patients requiring aspirin therapy for secondary cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention who were at risk for upper gastrointestinal (UGI) events. AIMS: In this 12-month, open-label, multicenter Phase 3 study, we evaluated the long-term cardiovascular and gastrointestinal safety of PA32540 in subjects who were taking aspirin 325 mg daily for ≥ 3 months for secondary CVD prevention and were at risk for aspirin-associated UGI events. Enrolled subjects received PA32540 once daily for up to 12 months and were assessed at baseline, month 1, month 6, and month 12. RESULTS: The overall safety population consisted of 379 subjects, and 290 subjects (76%) were on PA32540 for ≥ 348 days (12-month completers). Adverse events (AEs) caused study withdrawal in 13.5% of subjects, most commonly gastroesophageal reflux disease (1.1%). Treatment-emergent AEs occurred in 76% of the safety population (11% treatment-related) and 73% of 12-month completers (8% treatment-related). The most common treatment-related AE was dyspepsia (2%). One subject had a gastric ulcer observed on for-cause endoscopy. There were five cases of adjudicated nonfatal myocardial infarction, one nonfatal stroke, and one cardiovascular death, but none considered treatment-related. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term treatment with PA32540 once daily for up to 12 months in subjects at risk for aspirin-associated UGI events is not associated with any new or unexpected safety events.

PA32540 (a coordinated-delivery tablet of enteric-coated aspirin 325 mg and immediate-release omeprazole 40 mg) versus enteric-coated aspirin 325 mg alone in subjects at risk for aspirin-associated gastric ulcers: results of two 6-month, phase 3 studies.

BACKGROUND: Discontinuations and/or interruptions in aspirin therapy for secondary cardioprotection due to upper gastrointestinal (UGI) complications or symptoms have been shown to increase the risk for subsequent cardiovascular events. PA32540 is a coordinated-delivery, combination tablet consisting of enteric-coated aspirin (EC-ASA) 325 mg and immediate-release (IR) omeprazole 40 mg. METHODS: Two identically-designed, 6-month, randomized, double-blind trials evaluated PA32540 vs. EC-ASA 325 mg in a secondary cardiovascular disease prevention population taking aspirin 325 mg daily for ≥3 months and at risk for ASA-associated gastric ulcers (GUs). The combined study population was 1049 subjects (524 randomized to PA32540, 525 to EC-ASA 325 mg). The primary endpoint was the occurrence of endoscopically-determined gastric ulceration over 6 months. Safety outcomes included the rates of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and UGI symptoms. RESULTS: Significantly fewer PA32540-treated subjects (3.2%) developed endoscopic GUs vs. EC-ASA 325 mg-treated subjects (8.6%) (P < .001). Overall occurrence of MACE was low (2.1%), with no significant differences between treatments in types or incidence of MACE. PA32540-treated subjects had significantly fewer UGI symptoms (P < .001) and significantly fewer discontinuations due to pre-specified UGI adverse events (1.5% vs. 8.2%, respectively; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: PA32540 reduced the incidence of endoscopic GUs compared to EC-ASA 325 mg, but with a similar cardiovascular event profile. Due to fewer UGI symptoms, continuation on aspirin therapy was greater in the PA32540 treatment arm.

Low rate of postpolypectomy bleeding among patients who continue thienopyridine therapy during colonoscopy.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: It is not clear whether the cardiovascular risk of discontinuing treatment with antiplatelet agents, specifically the thienopyridines, before elective colonoscopy outweighs the risks of postpolypectomy bleeding (PPB). We studied the rate of PPB in patients who continue thienopyridine therapy during colonoscopy. METHODS: We performed a prospective study of 516 patients not taking warfarin who received polypectomies during elective colonoscopies; 219 were receiving thienopyridines, and 297 were not (controls). The occurrence of immediate PPB and delayed PPB was recorded. Delayed PPB was categorized as clinically important if it resulted in repeat colonoscopy, hospitalization, or blood transfusion. RESULTS: Patients receiving thienopyridines were older and had significantly more comorbid diseases than controls; the mean number of polyps removed per patient was significantly higher (3.9 vs 2.9) in the thienopyridine group. Immediate PPB developed in 16 patients in the thienopyridine group (7.3%) and in 14 in the control group (4.7%, P = .25). Among patients who completed a 30-day follow-up analysis (96% of patients enrolled), clinically important, delayed bleeding occurred in 2.4% of patients receiving thienopyridines and in none of the controls (P = .01). All PPB events in both groups were resolved without surgery, angiography, or death. CONCLUSIONS: Although a significantly higher percentage of patients who continue thienopyridine therapy during colonoscopy and polypectomy develop clinically important delayed PPB than patients who discontinue therapy, the rate of PPB events is low (2.4%), and all are resolved without sequelae. The risk for catastrophic cardiovascular risks among patients who discontinue thienopyridine therapy before elective colonoscopies could therefore exceed the risks of PPB. ClinicalTrials.gov, Number NCT01647568.

Prone positioning of obese patients for colonoscopy results in shortened cecal intubation times: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Obesity is a risk factor for colorectal cancer, and colonoscopy can be technically challenging in obese patients. It has been proposed (with little supporting data) that prone positioning of obese patients might facilitate a difficult colonoscopy. AIM: The aim of this study was to determine if starting colonoscopy in the prone position for obese patients decreases cecal intubation times. METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized study conducted at the North Texas VA Medical Center. Patients with a body mass index of ≥30 kg/m(2) undergoing elective colonoscopy were randomized 1:1 to either initial prone positioning or standard, left-lateral positioning. The outcome measurements were cecal intubation time, frequency of repositioning, sedative medications used, reports of pain, complications, and procedure tolerability. RESULTS: Fifty patients were randomized to have colonoscopy starting in the standard, left-lateral decubitus position, and 51 to the prone position. The average cecal intubation time for the standard group was 550 vs. 424 s in the prone group (p = 0.03). Patient repositioning was used in 28 % of patients in the standard group versus 8 % in the prone group (p = 0.009). There was no difference in subjective reports of pain between groups (p = 0.95) or in average pain scores (p = 0.79). Follow-up interviews were conducted in 93 % of patients, all of whom said that they would be willing to have repeat colonoscopy in the same position. CONCLUSIONS: Performance of colonoscopy in the prone position for obese patients results in significantly shorter cecal intubation times and decreased need for patient repositioning. Prone positioning is well accepted and does not significantly increase procedure-related discomfort.

A fixed-dose combination of naproxen and esomeprazole magnesium has comparable upper gastrointestinal tolerability to celecoxib in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee: results from two randomized, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trials.

BACKGROUND. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are associated with poor upper gastrointestinal (UGI) tolerability and increased ulcer risk, but patient adherence to gastroprotective co-therapy is frequently inadequate. A fixed-dose combination of enteric-coated naproxen 500 mg and immediate-release esomeprazole magnesium 20 mg was evaluated: efficacy is reported by Hochberg et al. (Curr Med Res Opin 2011;27:1243-53); tolerability findings are reported here. PATIENTS AND METHODS. In two 12-week double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter, phase III studies (PN400-307 and PN400-309), patients aged ≥ 50 years with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis randomly (2:2:1) received naproxen/esomeprazole magnesium BID, celecoxib 200 mg QD, or placebo. Tolerability end-points included: modified Severity of Dyspepsia Assessment (mSODA); heartburn severity; and UGI adverse events (AEs). RESULTS. Overall, 619 (PN400-307) and 615 (PN400-309) patients were randomized; mSODA scores improved (baseline to week 12) in each group, with no significant treatment differences between naproxen/esomeprazole magnesium and celecoxib (95% CIs: PN400-307: -0.4, 1.9; PN400-309: -1.8, 0.6). Naproxen/esomeprazole magnesium-treated patients reported significantly more heartburn-free days versus celecoxib (95% CIs: PN400-307: 2.1, 12.7; PN400-309: 2.5, 13.4). UGI AE incidence (PN400-307: 17.3%; PN400-309: 20.3%) was similar between treatment groups. UGI AEs resulted in few discontinuations (< 4%, either study). CONCLUSIONS. Naproxen/esomeprazole magnesium has comparable UGI tolerability to celecoxib in patients with osteoarthritis.

The cross-sectional relationship of hemoglobin levels and functional outcomes in women with self-reported osteoarthritis: results from the Women's Health Initiative.

OBJECTIVES: Gastrointestinal blood loss is a recognized complication of the use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDS) in patients with arthritis. We examined the cross-sectional relationship of patient-reported outcomes of overall health, physical function, vitality, and quality of life to hemoglobin (hgb) levels in postmenopausal women with self-reported osteoarthritis to determine whether hgb levels as potential markers of chronic blood loss were associated with these functional outcomes. METHODS: Postmenopausal women (N = 64,850) with self-reported osteoarthritis (srOA) at baseline in the Women's Health Initiative study, excluding participants with chronic or hemolytic diseases associated with anemia, had hgb levels measured and completed Short-Form Health Surveys. General linear models analysis adjusting for potential confounders was performed. RESULTS: A nonlinear plateauing relationship between hgb levels and functional outcomes was found. Participants with srOA had statistically significantly worse overall health, physical function, and vitality, but not quality of life, for each gram of hgb below 14 g/dL, compared with those with hgb 14 g/dL (P < 0.001). Participants with srOA taking NSAIDS had worse functional outcomes for each level of hgb compared with those not reporting NSAIDS use. CONCLUSIONS: In cross-sectional analyses of postmenopausal women with srOA, differences in hgb levels are related to differences in functional outcomes of overall health, physical function, and vitality at clinically important levels. Prospective studies evaluating whether changes in hgb levels result in changes in functional outcomes in participants with osteoarthritis are needed to confirm of our findings and before any changes in therapeutics based on hemoglogin levels are considered in the care of patients with osteoarthritis.

Clopidogrel with or without omeprazole in coronary artery disease.

BACKGROUND: Gastrointestinal complications are an important problem of antithrombotic therapy. Proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) are believed to decrease the risk of such complications, though no randomized trial has proved this in patients receiving dual antiplatelet therapy. Recently, concerns have been raised about the potential for PPIs to blunt the efficacy of clopidogrel. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with an indication for dual antiplatelet therapy to receive clopidogrel in combination with either omeprazole or placebo, in addition to aspirin. The primary gastrointestinal end point was a composite of overt or occult bleeding, symptomatic gastroduodenal ulcers or erosions, obstruction, or perforation. The primary cardiovascular end point was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, revascularization, or stroke. The trial was terminated prematurely when the sponsor lost financing. RESULTS: We planned to enroll about 5000 patients; a total of 3873 were randomly assigned and 3761 were included in analyses. In all, 51 patients had a gastrointestinal event; the event rate was 1.1% with omeprazole and 2.9% with placebo at 180 days (hazard ratio with omeprazole, 0.34, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.18 to 0.63; P<0.001). The rate of overt upper gastrointestinal bleeding was also reduced with omeprazole as compared with placebo (hazard ratio, 0.13; 95% CI, 0.03 to 0.56; P = 0.001). A total of 109 patients had a cardiovascular event, with event rates of 4.9% with omeprazole and 5.7% with placebo (hazard ratio with omeprazole, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.68 to 1.44; P = 0.96); high-risk subgroups did not show significant heterogeneity. The two groups did not differ significantly in the rate of serious adverse events, though the risk of diarrhea was increased with omeprazole. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients receiving aspirin and clopidogrel, prophylactic use of a PPI reduced the rate of upper gastrointestinal bleeding. There was no apparent cardiovascular interaction between clopidogrel and omeprazole, but our results do not rule out a clinically meaningful difference in cardiovascular events due to use of a PPI. (Funded by Cogentus Pharmaceuticals; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00557921.).

Do non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs cause exacerbations of inflammatory bowel disease?

The safety of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) remains unclear. This report discusses potential mechanisms whereby NSAIDs might exacerbate IBD and reviews the available clinical data on the role of NSAIDs in causing exacerbations of ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD).

Mortality associated with gastrointestinal bleeding events: Comparing short-term clinical outcomes of patients hospitalized for upper GI bleeding and acute myocardial infarction in a US managed care setting.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the short-term mortality rates of gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding to those of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) by estimating the 30-, 60-, and 90-day mortality among hospitalized patients. METHODS: United States national health plan claims data (1999-2003) were used to identify patients hospitalized with a GI bleeding event. Patients were propensity-matched to AMI patients with no evidence of GI bleed from the same US health plan. RESULTS: 12,437 upper GI-bleed patients and 22,847 AMI patients were identified. Propensity score matching yielded 6,923 matched pairs. Matched cohorts were found to have a similar Charlson Comorbidity Index score and to be similar on nearly all utilization and cost measures (excepting emergency room costs). A comparison of outcomes among the matched cohorts found that AMI patients had higher rates of 30-day mortality (4.35% vs 2.54%; p < 0.0001) and rehospitalization (2.56% vs 1.79%; p = 0.002), while GI bleed patients were more likely to have a repeat procedure (72.38% vs 44.95%; p < 0.001) following their initial hospitalization. The majority of the difference in overall 30-day mortality between GI bleed and AMI patients was accounted for by mortality during the initial hospitalization (1.91% vs 3.58%). CONCLUSIONS: GI bleeding events result in significant mortality similar to that of an AMI after adjusting for the initial hospitalization.

Drug-induced injury in the gastrointestinal tract: clinical and pathologic considerations.

Drug toxicity in the gastrointestinal tract is a common and serious medical problem; the number of drugs that can harm the gastrointestinal tract is impressive. The morbidity, mortality, and medical costs associated with drug toxicity, even when restricted to the gastrointestinal tract, are probably underestimated. Drug-induced gastrointestinal tract pathology is very diverse and can mimic many non-drug-related conditions. Drug toxicity, whether direct or indirect, can be restricted to a segment of the gastrointestinal tract or affect the entire gastrointestinal tract. The consequences of drug toxicity are also quite variable and can range from unimportant pathology (e.g. the relatively common and usually benign drug-induced diarrhea) at one end of the spectrum, to fatal gastrointestinal tract hemorrhage or perforation at the other end of the spectrum. Better awareness of the possibility of drug-induced gastrointestinal tract pathology, by both gastroenterologists and pathologists, and better communication between gastroenterologists, pathologists and other specialists will improve the recognition of drug-induced gastrointestinal tract pathology, and, ultimately, improve patient care. This Review focuses on the most common and well-described drug-related clinicopathologic conditions of the gastrointestinal tract. Much discussion is, therefore, dedicated to NSAIDs--the most commonly prescribed drugs and consequently the drugs most commonly associated with gastrointestinal tract toxicity.