A walking model to assess the onset of analgesia in osteoarthritis knee pain.

OBJECTIVE: To assess a walking model utilizing a set of standardized treadmill walks to measure acute analgesic response in osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee. DESIGN: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multiple dose, three-period crossover study. Patients > or =45 years of age (N=22) with symptomatic knee OA were randomized to naproxen 500 mg bid, tramadol/acetaminophen 37.5 mg/325 mg in forced titration, or placebo in each of three periods. Patients performed multiple 20-minute treadmill walks on Day 1 and Day 3 at a consistent self-selected pace predetermined at screening. Pain intensity (PI) during the walks was assessed on an 11-point numerical rating scale at 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, and 20 min. The primary endpoint was the time-weighted average (TWA) change from baseline PI on Day 3 for the two self-paced walks for the active treatments vs placebo. Time to moderate pain (TTMP) was a key secondary endpoint. RESULTS: Compared with placebo, the TWA change from baseline PI on Day 3 was significantly better with tramadol/acetaminophen (P=0.043) but not with naproxen (P=0.089). TWA change from baseline on Day 1 was also significantly better with both tramadol/acetaminophen (P=0.001) and naproxen (P=0.048) compared with placebo. TTMP was significantly better for tramadol/acetaminophen and naproxen than placebo (P<0.001 to P=0.015) for walks on Day 1 after a single dose and on Day 3. CONCLUSIONS: This novel OA pain model was able to discriminate both tramadol/acetaminophen and naproxen from placebo after single and multiple doses. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00772967.

Cholesterol-lowering effect of mevinolin, an inhibitor of 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-coenzyme a reductase, in healthy volunteers.

Mevinolin reduces cholesterol synthesis by inhibiting 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-coenzyme A reductase. The safety and effectiveness of this agent was evaluated in a double-blind, placebo-controlled study in 59 healthy men (serum cholesterol 3.88--7.76 mmol/liter) in five centers. Subjects maintained their usual diet and activities. Doses of 6.25, 12.5, 25, or 50 mg twice daily for 4 wk produced mean reductions of total serum cholesterol fo 23--27% [vs. placebo (4%), P less than 0.01]. Mean low density lipoprotein cholesterol fell 35--45%, while high density lipoprotein and very low density lipoprotein cholesterol, and triglycerides were not significantly affected. Mean apolipoprotein B fell 27--34%. 50 mg was not significantly more effective than 6.25 mg. Mevinolin was generally well tolerated, and no serious clinical or laboratory abnormalities occurred. One subject (12.5 mg) was withdrawn because of abdominal pain and diarrhea. These results suggest that if long-term safety can be demonstrated, inhibitors of 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-coenzyme A reductase are likely to prove useful in the treatment of hypercholesterolemia.

Gastrointestinal tolerability of the selective cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitor rofecoxib compared with nonselective COX-1 and COX-2 inhibitors in osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: Most nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are nonselective cyclooxygenase (COX-1 and COX-2) inhibitors and are associated with a variety of upper gastrointestinal (GI) tract symptoms. The roles of COX-1 and COX-2 in the pathogenesis of these symptoms are unclear. To test whether COX-2 inhibition with rofecoxib would have greater GI tolerability than nonselective COX-1 and COX-2 inhibition, we compared the incidences of (1) treatment discontinuations for GI adverse events (AEs) and (2) prespecified dyspeptic-type GI AEs among patients with osteoarthritis treated with rofecoxib vs NSAIDs. METHODS: A prespecified, combined analysis of investigator-reported GI AEs in all 8 double-blind, randomized, phase 2b/3 osteoarthritis trials of rofecoxib was conducted. Patients included men and women with osteoarthritis (N = 5435); there was no upper age limit for entry. Treatments tested included rofecoxib, 12.5, 25, or 50 mg (combined), vs ibuprofen, diclofenac, or nabumetone (combined). Primary outcomes were the time (by survival analysis) to (1) treatment discontinuation due to GI AEs and (2) first reported dyspeptic-type GI AE. Between-treatment comparisons were made by log-rank test. RESULTS: The number of treatment discontinuations caused by GI AEs during 12 months was significantly lower (P=.02) with rofecoxib vs NSAIDs (8.2 vs 12.0 per 100 patient-years; relative risk, 0.70; 95% confidence interval, 0.52-0.94). The incidence of prespecified dyspeptic-type GI AEs during the first 6 months was significantly lower (P=.02) with rofecoxib vs NSAIDs (69.3 vs 85.2 per 100 patient-years; relative risk, 0.85; 95% confidence interval, 0.74-0.97). However, the difference between treatments in dyspeptic-type GI AEs was attenuated after 6 months. CONCLUSION: Rofecoxib was associated with a lower incidence of treatment discontinuations due to GI AEs over 12 months and a lower incidence of dyspeptic-type GI AEs over 6 months than treatment with nonselective COX inhibitors, or NSAIDs. Arch Intern Med. 2000;160:2998-3003

A randomized trial of the efficacy and tolerability of the COX-2 inhibitor rofecoxib vs ibuprofen in patients with osteoarthritis. Rofecoxib/Ibuprofen Comparator Study Group.

BACKGROUND: Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) inhibit both cyclooxygenase-1 (COX-1) and cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2). It is not known whether a specific inhibitor of COX-2 will provide efficacy in osteoarthritis (OA) comparable with NSAIDs. Therefore, we compared the efficacy and safety of the rofecoxib, which specifically inhibits COX-2, with those of the NSAID ibuprofen in patients with OA. OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical efficacy and tolerability of rofecoxib (12.5 and 25 mg once daily) with ibuprofen (800 mg 3 times daily). METHODS: A randomized, double-blind trial of 809 adults with OA was conducted. Patients with OA in whom the knee or hip was the primary source of pain were randomized to 1 of 4 treatment groups on demonstration of disease activity: placebo; rofecoxib, 12.5 or 25 mg once daily; or ibuprofen, 800 mg 3 times daily. Clinical efficacy and safety were monitored during a 6-week treatment period. RESULTS: Both doses of rofecoxib demonstrated efficacy clinically comparable with ibuprofen as assessed by 3 primary end points (pain walking on a flat surface [Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index], patient global assessment of response to therapy, and investigator global assessment of disease status) according to predefined comparability criteria. Both rofecoxib doses and the ibuprofen dose provided significantly (P<.001) greater efficacy than placebo on all primary end points. Results from secondary end points were consistent with those of the primary end points. All treatments were well tolerated; the overall incidence rates of clinical adverse experiences were not significantly different (P>.05) among the treatment groups. CONCLUSION: Rofecoxib was well tolerated and provided clinical efficacy comparable with a high dose of the NSAID ibuprofen.

Oral administration of the growth hormone secretagogue MK-677 increases markers of bone turnover in healthy and functionally impaired elderly adults. The MK-677 Study Group.

Growth hormone (GH) stimulates osteoblasts in vitro and increases bone turnover and stimulates osteoblast activity when given to elderly subjects. Probably a major effect of GH on bone is mediated through stimulation of either circulating or locally produced insulin-like growth factor I (IGF-I). We determined the effect of chronic administration of the GH secretagogue, MK-677, on serum IGF-I and markers of bone turnover in 187 elderly adults (65 years or older) enrolled in three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical studies lasting 2-9 weeks. Urine was collected for determination of N-telopeptide cross-links (NTXs), a marker of bone resorption, and blood was collected for determination of serum osteocalcin and bone-specific alkaline phosphatase (BSAP), as bone formation markers, and serum IGF-I levels pre- and post-treatment. Dose response data were initially obtained in healthy elderly subjects who received oral doses of 10 mg or 25 mg of MK-677 or placebo for 2 weeks (n = 10-12/group). Treatment with 10 mg and 25 mg of MK-677 for 2 weeks increased mean urine NTXs 10% and 17%, respectively (p < 0.05 vs. placebo). Additionally, 50 healthy elderly subjects received either placebo (n = 20) for 4 weeks or 25 mg of MK-677 (n = 30) daily for 2 weeks followed by 50 mg daily for 2 weeks. MK-677 increased mean serum osteocalcin by 8% (p < 0.05 vs. placebo). In both studies, MK-677 increased serum IGF-I levels significantly (55-94%). Subsequently, the biological effects of MK-677 were studied in 105 elderly subjects who met objective criteria for functional impairment. Subjects were randomized to receive oral doses of placebo for 9 weeks or either 5, 10, or 25 mg of MK-677 daily for an initial 2 weeks followed by 25 mg of MK-677 daily for the next 7 weeks(n = 63 on MK-677 and n = 28 on placebo completed 9 weeks of therapy). Treatment with MK-677 (all MK-677 groups combined) for 9 weeks increased mean serum osteocalcin by 29.4% and BSAP by 10.4% (p < 0.001 vs. placebo) and mean urinary NTX excretion by 22.6% (p < 0.05 vs. placebo). The change from baseline serum osteocalcin correlated with the change from baseline serum IGF-I in the MK-677 group (r = 0.37; p < 0.01). In conclusion, once daily dosing with MK-677, an orally active GH secretagogue, stimulates bone turnover in elderly subjects based on elevations in biochemical markers of bone resorption and formation.

Effects of a 7-day treatment with a novel, orally active, growth hormone (GH) secretagogue, MK-677, on 24-hour GH profiles, insulin-like growth factor I, and adrenocortical function in normal young men.

To assess the effects of prolonged administration of a novel analog of GH-releasing peptide (MK-677), nine healthy young men participated in a randomized, double blind, three-period cross-over comparison of orally administered placebo and 5- and 25-mg doses of MK-677. Each period involved bedtime administration of the drug for 7 consecutive days. At the end of each period, plasma levels of insulin-like growth factor I (IGF-I) and IGF-binding protein-3 (IGFBP-3) were measured at 0745 h, and 24-h profiles of plasma GH and cortisol were obtained at 15-min intervals together with the 24-h urinary excretion of free cortisol. Profiles of plasma free cortisol were calculated at hourly intervals. The amounts of GH secreted were similar in all three conditions, but GH pulse frequency was increased with both dosages of the drug, primarily because of an increase in the number of low amplitude pulses. Plasma IGF-I levels were increased in a dose-dependent manner, whereas IGFBP-3 levels were increased only with the highest dosage. There was a positive relationship between GH pulse frequency and IGF-I increase. Except for an advance in the nocturnal nadir and in the morning elevation, MK-677 had no effect on cortisol profiles. In particular, 24-h mean levels of plasma total and free cortisol and urinary excretion of free cortisol were similar under all conditions. The present data suggest that the use of MK-677 for the treatment of relative somatotropic deficiency, particularly in older adults compromised by such deficiency, deserves further investigation.

A randomized trial measuring fecal blood loss after treatment with rofecoxib, ibuprofen, or placebo in healthy subjects.

PURPOSE: Gastrointestinal microbleeding, as assessed by the measurement of (51)chromium-labeled red blood cells, is a marker of the mucosal injury associated with the use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. This study tested the hypotheses that cyclooxygenase-2 specific inhibition with rofecoxib would cause less fecal blood loss than a therapeutic dose of ibuprofen and would be equivalent to placebo. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind group study, gastrointestinal blood loss was assessed by measurement of fecal (51)chromium radioactivity during a 1-week placebo baseline period and during 4 weeks of treatment with rofecoxib (25 mg or 50 mg once daily), ibuprofen (800 mg three times daily), or placebo in 67 healthy subjects. Gastrointestinal blood loss during treatment weeks 2 to 4 (versus the baseline period) was expressed as the geometric mean ratio of fecal radioactivity in weeks 2 to 4 compared with baseline. RESULTS: Ibuprofen caused significantly (P <0.001) greater gastrointestinal blood loss (geometric mean ratio of 5.2, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.2 to 6.3) than the 25-mg dose of rofecoxib (2.6, 95% CI: 2.2 to 3.1), the 50-mg dose of rofecoxib (2.6, 95% CI: 2.2 to 3.0), or placebo (2.1, 95% CI: 1.8 to 2.5). In contrast, gastrointestinal blood loss with both doses of rofecoxib were equivalent to placebo by a predetermined clinical similarity bound. CONCLUSIONS: In healthy subjects, treatment with rofecoxib, at 2 to 4 times the doses that are currently recommended for the treatment of patients with osteoarthritis, produced significantly less fecal blood loss than a therapeutic dose of ibuprofen and was equivalent to placebo.

Influence of risk factors on endoscopic and clinical ulcers in patients taking rofecoxib or ibuprofen in two randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Highly selective inhibitors of the inducible cyclooxygenase-2 enzyme (coxibs) have been associated with less gastrotoxicity than nonselective NSAIDs in clinical studies. AIM: To evaluate the influence of risk factors for NSAID-induced gastrotoxicity on endoscopic and clinical ulcers in patients taking rofecoxib or ibuprofen. METHODS: We analysed pooled data from two identical double-blind, randomized, 12-week endoscopy studies which compared the gastroduodenal toxicity of placebo (n=371), rofecoxib 25 mg (n=390), rofecoxib 50 mg (n=379), and ibuprofen 2400 mg daily (n=376) in patients with osteoarthritis. The potential risk factors evaluated were: age (< 65, > or = 65 years), sex, race (white, nonwhite), Helicobacter pylori status, presence of gastroduodenal erosions at baseline, a history of upper gastrointestinal disease, prior NSAID use within 30 days of study entry, and smoking. We also evaluated these factors for possible association with the development of clinically-evident gastrointestinal perforations, ulcers or bleeds over 12 weeks. RESULTS: Across all treatment groups, the likelihood of detecting endoscopic ulcers, or of clinical presentation with a bleed, over 12 weeks was increased approximately 4-5-fold in patients with previous upper gastrointestinal disease (relative risk [95% confidence interval] of 4.2 [2.5, 7.1] for endoscopic ulcers; 3.8 [1.4, 10.6] for bleeds), or those with gastroduodenal erosions at baseline endoscopy (relative risk of 4.4 [2.6, 7.5] for endoscopic ulcers; 5.0 [1.9, 13.5] for bleeds). H. pylori infection did not increase the risk of endoscopic ulcers or bleeds (relative risk of 1.1 [0.8, 1.6] for endoscopic ulcers; 0.3 [0.1, 0.9] for bleeds). The risk factor sub-group effects were constant across all treatment groups, and the significantly higher incidence of ulcers with ibuprofen as compared to rofecoxib and placebo was maintained in all risk factor subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Gastroduodenal erosions at baseline and a clinical history of upper gastrointestinal disease, but not H. pylori colonization, increased the risk for endoscopically-detected ulcers and clinical bleeds. Rofecoxib did not magnify the risk in any of the patient subgroups studied.

Specific inhibition of cyclooxygenase-2 with MK-0966 is associated with less gastroduodenal damage than either aspirin or ibuprofen.

BACKGROUND: Compared with currently available NSAIDs (which inhibit COX-1 and COX-2 isoforms of cyclooxygenase), MK-0966 (a specific COX-2 inhibitor) is expected to cause less gastrointestinal toxicity. AIM: To compare the effect on the upper gastrointestinal mucosae of a high dose of MK-0966 with that of conventional doses of ibuprofen and aspirin. METHODS: Healthy subjects (n = 170; age range 18-54 years) with endoscopically normal gastric and duodenal mucosa were randomized to either MK-0966 250 mg q.d. (n = 51), ibuprofen 800 mg t.d.s. (n = 51), aspirin 650 mg q.d.s. (n = 17), or placebo (n = 51) in this 7-day, double-blind, parallel-group study. The mucosae were evaluated by endoscopy using a predefined scale; scores could range from 0 to 4. The primary end-point was the percentage of subjects who developed a mucosal score >/= 2 (i.e. the development of one or more erosions). To evaluate COX-1 activity, serum thromboxane B2 levels were determined in a subset of the population. RESULTS: The percentage of subjects who developed a mucosal score >/= 2 in the MK-0966 group (12%) was significantly lower (P < 0.001) than that in the ibuprofen (71%) and aspirin (94%) groups, and was similar to that in the placebo group (8%). Only ibuprofen and aspirin significantly (P < 0.0001) reduced baseline thromboxane B2 levels. All treatments were generally well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: In this acute short-term endoscopic study, MK-0966 250 mg q.d. (a dose at least 10 times higher than that demonstrated to reduce the signs and symptoms of osteoarthritis) produced significantly less gastrointestinal mucosal damage than either ibuprofen 800 mg t.d.s. or aspirin 650 mg q.d.s. and was comparable to placebo in this regard.

The safety profile, tolerability, and effective dose range of rofecoxib in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. Phase II Rofecoxib Rheumatoid Arthritis Study Group.

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. (NSAIDs) inhibit both cyclooxygenase (COX)-1 and COX-2 isoenzymes and are effective in the treatment of inflammatory disorders. This 8-week, double-masked, placebo-controlled trial was undertaken to assess the safety profile, tolerability, and effective dose range of once-daily rofecoxib, a COX-2-specific inhibitor, in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). After a 3- to 15-day washout of prior NSAID therapy, 658 patients were randomly allocated to receive placebo or rofecoxib 5 mg, 25 mg, or 50 mg once daily. Safety profile, tolerability, and efficacy were evaluated after 2, 4, and 8 weeks of therapy. Six hundred fifty-eight patients (168, 158, 171, and 161 in the placebo and 5-mg, 25-mg, and 50-mg rofecoxib groups, respectively) were enrolled at 79 clinical centers in the United States. Mean age was 55 years, mean duration of RA was 10 years, and 506 (77%) of the 658 patients were female. All groups had similar baseline demographic characteristics. Patients taking rofecoxib 25 and 50 mg showed significant clinical improvement compared with those taking placebo; 43.9% in the rofecoxib 25-mg group and 49.7% in the rofecoxib 50-mg group completed the treatment period and achieved an American College of Rheumatology 20 response (P = 0.025 and 0.001 vs. placebo, respectively). The 5-mg dose of rofecoxib did not differ significantly from placebo. Patients in the rofecoxib 25- and 50-mg groups showed significant improvement in key individual efficacy measurements, including patient global assessment of pain, patient and investigator global assessment of disease activity, and Stanford Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (P<0.05 vs placebo). Compared with placebo, significantly fewer patients in the 25-mg and 50-mg rofecoxib groups discontinued therapy because of lack of efficacy (P = 0.02 and P = 0.032, respectively). Our results show that rofecoxib 25 and 50 mg once daily was effective and generally well-tolerated in patients with RA.

Use of gastroprotective agents and discontinuations due to dyspepsia with the selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor etoricoxib compared with non-selective NSAIDs.

BACKGROUND: Most nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are non-selective cyclooxygenase-1 (COX-1) and COX-2 inhibitors and are associated with upper gastrointestinal (GI) dyspeptic symptoms often resulting in GI co-medication usage or treatment discontinuation. OBJECTIVE: To compare the rates of new use of gastroprotective agents and discontinuations due to dyspepsia with the COX-2 selective inhibitor etoricoxib compared with non-selective NSAIDs. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This pre-specified combined analysis used data from nine randomized, double-blind, controlled, clinical trials with etoricoxib in patients with osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, chronic low back pain, or ankylosing spondylitis. The cumulative incidences of (1) new use (new prescription or increased dose) of gastroprotective agents (GPA) and (2) discontinuation due to dyspeptic symptoms were compared among patients treated with etoricoxib (60 mg, 90 mg, or 120 mg daily) vs. non-selective NSAIDs (diclofenac 50 mg. t.i.d. or naproxen 500 mg. b.i.d.). RESULTS: The overall rates/100 patient-years for new use of GPAs were 9.1 and 13.0 for etoricoxib and NSAIDs, respectively (RR = 0.75; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.64, 0.89; p < 0.001). A benefit with etoricoxib was seen in the first 6 months when most new GPA usage occurred; after 6 months new use of GPAs was similar between etoricoxib and NSAIDs. The rates/100 patient-years of treatment discontinuation due to dyspeptic symptoms with etoricoxib and NSAIDs were 1.5 and 2.7, respectively (RR = 0.60; 95% CI 0.41, 0.87; p = 0.007). Analyses of placebo-controlled treatment periods showed significantly more new GPA use and more discontinuations due to dyspeptic symptoms with NSAIDs vs. placebo, but not with etoricoxib vs. placebo. CONCLUSION: In this combined analysis of clinical trials of patients with OA, RA, chronic low back pain, or AS, new use of gastroprotective agents was significantly lower with etoricoxib than with the comparator non-selective NSAIDs during the initial 6 months of treatment and similar thereafter. There were significantly fewer discontinuations for dyspeptic symptoms with etoricoxib than with NSAIDs over the entire follow-up period.

Diflunisal ('Dolobid') once-a-day in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis.

A 4-week, double-blind, controlled multi-centre study was carried out in 235 patients with active rheumatoid arthritis to compare the efficacy and tolerance of 500 mg or 1000 mg diflunisal per day administered once daily, in the evening, or in divided, twice daily dosage. The results showed that diflunisal given once daily was at least as effective as diflunisal given twice daily. Day pain, morning stiffness, average grip strength and erythrocyte sedimentation rate improved similarly in both groups. Significant differences favouring the once-daily regimen were observed for improvement in night pain, Ritchie index and overall assessments by patient and investigator. Adverse experiences were slightly more common in patients taking diflunisal once daily (24% vs 19%) but this difference was not significant. It is concluded, therefore, that diflunisal once-a-day is an alternative regimen for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. It is at least as effective as the twice-daily regimen and may provide additional convenience to the patient and potential enhancement of compliance.

Enalapril in congestive heart failure: acute and chronic invasive hemodynamic evaluation.

Following hemodynamic evaluation using invasive and noninvasive methods, 73 patients were treated in an open, uncontrolled, multicenter study with single oral doses of enalapril maleate 1.25 to 40 mg until the optimal dose for each patient (based upon hemodynamic response) was achieved. Diuretics were withheld and reinstituted only if necessary. Hemodynamic measurements were made at 0 (predrug), 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12 and 24 hours postdrug. Patients were discharged on their optimal dose, treated 1 to 4 months and then rehospitalized for repeat hemodynamic measurements. The optimal enalapril single dose was associated with the following mean peak responses: increased cardiac index 42% (SE = 6) and decreased pulmonary capillary wedge pressure 40% (SE = 3), systemic vascular resistance 39% (SE = 2), and mean arterial pressure 23% (SE = 1.5). These changes persisted during chronic therapy. Chronic treatment with enalapril also improved exercise capacity 40% (P less than 0.01), ejection fraction 18% (P less than 0.05) and clinical status (N.Y.H.A. functional class, P less than 0.01). Ten and 20 mg/day, taken as once- or twice-daily regimens, were the most commonly effective doses.

Effect of rofecoxib therapy on measures of health-related quality of life in patients with osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: Bodily pain and physical disability can negatively impact health-related quality of life (HRQL) in patients with osteoarthritis (OA). OBJECTIVE: To assess the effects of treatment with a new agent, rofecoxib, on HRQL in patients with OA. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized, double-blind, 6-week clinical trial comparing treatment with rofecoxib, 5 to 50 mg, with placebo in 672 patients with OA of the hip or knee. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Patient HRQL was assessed at baseline and at the end of treatment using the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36). RESULTS: At 6 weeks, mean change from baseline in all SF-36 mental and physical health domain scores demonstrated significant improvement with rofecoxib use (P < .05 for all doses for all SF-36 domains), with evidence of a dose-response relation. Improvements in mental and physical HRQL domains with rofecoxib treatment were significantly greater than those with placebo treatment (P < .05 for each dose of rofecoxib vs placebo for all domains except general health) and highly correlated with improvements observed using disease-specific OA outcome measures such as the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index-visual Analog 3.0 OA index pain and physical function subscales. The effect of rofecoxib vs placebo treatment on mental health largely disappeared after adjustment for improvement in OA disease-specific measures. CONCLUSIONS: Rofecoxib treatment increased physical and mental HRQL domain scores on the SF-36. Improvements in mental health with rofecoxib use primarily resulted from effective treatment of OA (i.e., reduction in pain and improvement in physical function).

Gastrointestinal medications and procedures in osteoarthritis patients treated with rofecoxib compared with nonselective NSAIDs.

CONTEXT: Patients treated with nonselective cyclooxygenase inhibitors (nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs [NSAIDs]) often experience dyspepsia and upper gastrointestinal (GI) adverse effects, and frequently require GI comedications and diagnostic procedures. OBJECTIVE: This study combined existing data to test the hypothesis that GI comedications and GI diagnostic procedures occur less frequently in osteoarthritis (OA) patients treated with rofecoxib compared with nonselective NSAIDs. DESIGN: Combined analysis of 8 randomized controlled clinical trials. SETTING: Rheumatology and general practice clinics. PATIENTS: Men and women aged 40 years and older with OA. INTERVENTIONS: Random assignment to placebo (n = 514), rofecoxib (n = 3357; 12.5, 25, or 50 mg daily combined; average 24.7 mg), or NSAIDs (n = 1564; ibuprofen 800 mg thrice daily, diclofenac 50 mg thrice daily, or nabumetone 1500 mg daily, combined). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The cumulative incidence of patients using GI comedications (antacids, antispasmodics, antiflatulents, antiregurgitants, H2 antagonists, proton pump inhibitors, sucralfate, prostaglandins, other antiulcer therapy) and needing GI procedures (upper GI barium studies, upper or lower GI endoscopies) over 12 months. RESULTS: Compared with those treated with NSAIDs, patients treated with rofecoxib had a significantly lower incidence of GI comedication use (17.5% vs 27.0%, P <.001) and GI procedures (3.3% vs 5.3%, P =.02) over 12 months. Similar results were seen in analyses of protocols with placebo; in these studies, rates of GI comedications and procedures were highest with NSAIDs, while those with rofecoxib and placebo were similar to each other. CONCLUSIONS: OA patients treated with rofecoxib for up to 12 months required significantly less GI comedication and significantly fewer GI procedures than those treated with NSAIDs.

A Monte Carlo comparison of three up-and-down designs for dose ranging.

One of the first objectives in the clinical study of a new drug is to determine the range of effective dosages to be studied further. That is, to determine the threshold and plateau doses of the dose response. To this end, three up-and-down designs are described for use when a dichotomous (binary) response of primary interest can be defined. Each design involves entering the subjects chronologically, with each subject's dose being chosen based on the response of the preceeding subject: up one dose level after a response, down one after no response. The three designs were compared using Monte Carlo simulated results from a typical sample size of 30 observations each and dose-response relationship with a range of 5 increasing doses. The design involving one observation on each of 30 subjects was found to be most efficient, although the other two involving three observations on each of 10 subjects performed adequately.

Assessment of equivalence on multiple endpoints.

Some clinical trials aim to demonstrate therapeutic equivalence on multiple primary endpoints. For example, therapeutic equivalence studies of agents for the treatment of osteoarthritis use several primary endpoints including investigator's global assessment of disease activity, patient's global assessment of response to therapy, and pain. In this paper, thoughts on simultaneous equivalence assessment on three endpoints are presented. As pointed out by Berger and Hsu (1996), the conventional intersection-union test can be conservative. Simulation and computation are conducted to provide an insight on the conservativeness. We also provide a method to lower the confidence level and at the same time maintain the type I error when endpoints have normal distributions and are independent. If, in a particular analysis, the goal is to demonstrate equivalence on as many endpoints as possible, a step-up procedure can be used for selecting those endpoints for which equivalence may be demonstrated. This step-up procedure at the same time controls experimentwise error rate. The techniques are illustrated by a data example.

Response relationship of VAS and Likert scales in osteoarthritis efficacy measurement.

OBJECTIVE/BACKGROUND: Efficacy in osteoarthritis (OA) is principally measured using subjective visual analogue (VAS) and/or Likert scale responses. The relationship between these two scales and their relative precision in discriminating active from placebo treatment in OA patients was determined. DESIGN/METHODS: Patient overall pain assessment, and patient and investigator global assessments were each measured on a 100mm VAS and on a 0 to 4 point Likert scale in a 6-week OA study of rofecoxib vs placebo. The relationship between the VAS and Likert responses was examined graphically and via summary statistics. Analysis of variance was used to assess consistency of the VAS/Likert relationship over time and across the different endpoints. Precision was compared using effect size, and normality of VAS scale of measurement was assessed using the Shapiro-Wilk test. RESULTS: Mean VAS scores and changes from baseline at individual time points were generally highly correlated with corresponding Likert responses (r-values generally approximately 0.7-0.8). The magnitude of VAS values and changes varied depending on endpoint, on the associated magnitude of increment of Likert score, and on the Likert baseline value (i.e., where on the Likert scale the change was occurring). Precision of VAS and Likert responses to detect difference between treatments was generally similar with effect sizes approximately 1. Normality and homogeneity of variance of VAS scores was most closely approximated by actual changes in comparison to percent change or log-transformed measures. CONCLUSIONS: VAS and Likert responses are highly correlated and yield similar precision for discriminating treatments in OA patients. Since Likert responses are easier to administer and interpret, they may be preferable to measure OA response.

Precision of composite measures of osteoarthritis efficacy in comparison to that of individual endpoints.

OBJECTIVE: Osteoarthritis (OA) clinical studies generally employ various endpoints to evaluate a spectrum of disease manifestations. Compared with individual endpoints, a composite measure might (1) provide a uniform outcome measure of OA efficacy with greater face validity, (2) address multiplicity, and (3) enhance precision. Combinations of endpoints were analyzed to investigate precision of composite measures of OA efficacy. METHODS: We reanalyzed three 6 week, placebo controlled, double blind, parallel group studies (2 by the same protocol) of the cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) specific inhibitor rofecoxib. The average change from baseline at study weeks 2, 4, and 6 was assessed for 10 individual response variables, including patient and investigator global assessments, WOMAC 3.0V OA Index pain, stiffness and physical function subscales, graded study joint tenderness, and rescue analgesic use. Relationships among variables were evaluated using pairwise correlations and principal components analysis. The precision of variables to differentiate rofecoxib from placebo was evaluated using effect size (i.e., mean difference between rofecoxib versus placebo divided by pooled SD). RESULTS: Correlations among all pairs of response variables ranged from 0.5 to 0.9, except those with tenderness (0.4 to 0.6) and those with analgesic use (0.2 to 0.4). The first principal component explained about 70% of the total variability, with weights generally similar (0.17 for rescue analgesic use, 0.25 for tenderness, and 0.30 to 0.37 for the others). These results indicate that nearly all measures are closely related. Based on these results, various linear combinations of the 9 endpoints were formed and their precision to discriminate active treatment from placebo was compared to that of the individual endpoints. Effect sizes of the individual endpoints ranged from 0.6 to 1.1; those of the composites from 0.7 to 0.9. The results were very consistent between study protocols. CONCLUSION: In comparison to individual endpoints, composite analyses of OA clinical endpoints do not increase precision to discriminate active treatment from placebo.