Parecoxib is the only COX-2 inhibitor available for intravenous or intramuscular administration and is indicated for post-operative pain.
CARDIOVASCULAR SAFETY OF OTHER
COX-2 INHIBITORS
Parecoxib
is the only COX-2 inhibitor available for intravenous or intramuscular
administration and is indicated for post-operative pain. Parecoxib is a prodrug
of valdecoxib, which is available in oral form. Cardiovascular safety profiles
of the two drugs are assumed to be the same. Ott and colleagues reported
general safety information from a placebo-controlled trial of parecoxib and
valdecoxib in patients after coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery, in
which patients assigned to the active treatment group received intravenous
parecoxib 40 mg every 12 hours during the first 3 days, followed by oral
valde-coxib 40 mg every 12 hours for up to 11 days (Ott et al., 2003). All serious adverse events occurred more frequently among the
parecoxib–valdecoxib group than among the placebo group (19 versus, 9.9%), but
the difference in cardiovascular adverse events did not reach statistical
significance.
White
and colleagues reviewed cardiovascular safety data from 10 clinical trials of
oral valde-coxib in approximately 8000 patients with osteoarthri-tis or
rheumatoid arthritis and found no increased risk of thrombotic events among the
valdecoxib users when compared with patients who used non-selective NSAIDs or
placebo (White et al., 2004).
Nussmeier
and colleagues reported a larger trial of parecoxib–valdecoxib among CABG
patients than that reported by Ott and colleagues (Nussmeier et al., 2005). In the three-arm study,
one group of patients was randomly assigned to receive one dose of intravenous
parecoxib 40 mg followed by 20 mg every 12 hours for 3 days and oral valdecoxib
20 mg once-daily for up to 10 days; the second arm of patients received
intra-venous placebo for three days followed by the same regimen of oral
valdecoxib as in the first arm; the third arm received both intravenous and
oral placebo. Increased frequency of thromboembolic events was found in the
active drug groups (Table 47.1). Data from the two post-CABG trials clearly
showed an increased cardiovascular risk for parecoxib–valdecoxib if used for
post-CABG pain management, therefore this regimen is contraindicated for use in
CABG patients in countries where the regimen is available.
In
addition to increased cardiovascular risk, report-ing rates of Stevens–Johnson
syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis were higher for valdecoxib than that
for other COX-2 inhibitors or NSAIDs (La Grenade et al., 2005). The increased risk of cutaneous toxicity led to the
market suspension of valdecoxib in the US in April 2005.
A
large-scale randomized trial, the Therapeutic Arthritis Research and
Gastrointestinal Event Trial (TARGET), was conducted to evaluate the efficacy
and safety of lumiracoxib (Schnitzer et
al., 2004 and Farkouh et al.,
2004; Table 47.1). During one year of follow-up, risk of upper gastrointestinal
ulcer compli-cations was substantially lower in the lumiracoxib group when
compared with patients on naproxen or ibuprofen (relative risk 0.34; 95% CI,
0.22–0.52). The risk reduction was more pronounced among patients not receiving
low dose aspirin (relative risk 0.21; 95% CI, 0.12–0.37), but the 95% CI of the
relative risk estimate for patients who received low dose aspirin included one.
Cardiovascular outcomes of interest were defined by the APTC criteria. In the
primary analysis of all subjects, lumiracoxib– naproxen and
lumiracoxib–ibuprofen comparisons, and subgroups stratified by low dose aspirin
use, 95% CIs of the relative risk estimates for adverse cardiovascular events
all included one. Scientists from the manufacturer of lumiracoxib combined data
from all lumiracoxib trials of duration between one week and one year and
reported the cardiovascular safety information in 2005 (Matchaba et al., 2005). For ATPC end points,
relative risk was 1.08 (95% CI, 0.41–2.86) for the lumiracoxib–placebo
comparison,0.83 (95% CI, 0.46–1.51) for the lumiracoxib–non-naproxen NSAIDs
comparison, and 1.49 (95% CI, 0.94–2.36) for the lumiracoxib–naproxen
compari-son. Twelve and six trials involving lumiracoxib were included in the
meta-analysis reports by Kearney and colleagues and Zhang and colleagues,
respec-tively, but the number of adverse cardiovascular events reported in the
trials was not large enough to provide definitive inference (Kearney et al., 2006; Zhang, Ding and Song,
2006).
Etoricoxib
is developed by the same manufacturer of rofecoxib. At the time of market
withdrawal of rofe-coxib, a large trial by the name of Etoricoxib versus
Diclofenac sodium Gastrointestinal Tolerability and Effectiveness (EDGE) was
ongoing to evaluate the tolerability and efficacy of etoricoxib 90 mg daily
versus diclofenac sodium 50 mg three times a day in patients with
osteoarthritis. Some results have been reported in professional society
meetings and an FDA advisory committee meeting, but the results have not been
published in peer-reviewed journals (Schiffen-bauer, 2005). Seventeen and
fifteen trials involving etoricoxib were included in the meta-analysis reports
by Kearney and colleagues (Kearney et al.,
2006) and Zhang and colleagues (Zhang, Ding and Song, 2006), respectively.
Aldington and colleagues independently reviewed cardiovascular safety
information from five published etoricoxib trials (Aldington et al., 2005), but the number of adverse
cardiovascular events reported in the trials in these three meta-analysis
reports was not large enough to provide definitive inference.
As
etoricoxib is already available in some coun-tries, it is anticipated that more
safety reports based on observational studies will be available in the near
future. For example, Andersohn reported that etori-coxib was associated with an
increased risk of stroke when compared with no NSAID use (relative risk 2.38;
95% CI, 1.10–5.13).
Related Topics
TH 2019 - 2024 pharmacy180.com; Developed by Therithal info.