Əsas səhifə

Çap

Əks əlaqə

İnfo
Celecoxib for rheumatoid arthritis

Mündəricat

Celecoxib for rheumatoid arthritis

Sübutlu məlumatların xülasələri
13.07.2017 • Sonuncu dəyişiklik 13.07.2017
Editors

Celecoxib appears to have similar effect and lower incidence of gastroduodenal ulcers and lower rate of total withdrawals than traditional NSAIDs for rheumatoid arthritis at short-term.

The quality of evidence is downgraded by study limitations (high loss to follow-up and differential loss to follow-up in the compared groups).

Summary

A Cochrane review included 8 studies with a total of 3 988 adult subjects. Study durations varied from 4 to 24 weeks. Participants had rheumatoid arthritis for an average of 9.2 years, their mean age was 54 years, and most of them (73%) were women.

Celecoxib versus placebo: Participants who received celecoxib (200 mg or 400 mg daily) showed significant clinical improvement and reported less pain compared with those receiving placebo, but results were inconclusive for improvement in physical function (table ). There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of gastroduodenal ulcers or short-term serious adverse events between the groups. There were fewer withdrawals among people who received celecoxib. Cardiovascular events (myocardial infarction, stroke) were not reported. However, regulatory agencies warn of increased cardiovascular event risk associated with celecoxib.

Celecoxib versus placebo (follow-up: 12 weeks except for clinical improvement for which follow-up range 4 weeks to 12 weeks)
OutcomeRelative effect (95% CI)Risk eith placeboRisk with celecoxib (95% CI)NNTB/NNTH (95% CI)Participants (studies)
* higher scores means worse functional ability ; ** statistically significant heterogeneity I² = 86%
Clinical improvement (ACR 20)RR 1.53 (1.25 to 1.86)288 per 1000441 per 1000 (360 to 536) NNTB 7 (5 to 13)873 (2 studies)
Pain (VAS from 0 to 100)-Mean pain 60Mean pain was 11 points lower (14.04 lower to 7.96 lower) NNTB 4 (3 to 6)706 (1 study)
Physical function (HAQ scale 0 to 3*)-Mean change in physical function -0.1Mean change in physical function was 0.1 point better (0.29 better to 0.1 worse)**-706 (1 study)
Incidence of gastroduodenal ulcers ≥ 3 mmPeto OR 1.26 (0.44 to 3.63)40 per 100051 per 1000 (17 to 142)-392 (1 study)
Short-term serious adverse eventsPeto OR 0.87 (0.28 to 2.69)22 per 100019 per 1000 (6 to 55)-706 (1 study)
Total withdrawalsRR 0.61 (0.52 to 0.72)563 per 1000343 per 1000 (293 to 405)NNTH 5 (4 to 7)706 (1 study)

Celecoxib versus traditional NSAIDs (tNSAIDs: amtolmetin guacyl, diclofenac, ibuprofen, meloxicam, nabumetone, naproxen, pelubiprofen): Pooled analysis showed no statistically significant difference between celecoxib and tNSAIDs in ACR20 improvement criteria (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.23; 4 studies, n=1 981), in pain (MD -1.59, 95% CI -3.83 to 0.65; 3 studies, n=1 504), or in self-reported physical function assessed using the HAQ (MD 0.00, 95% CI -0.13 to 0.13; 2 studies, n=849). People who received celecoxib had a lower incidence of gastroduodenal ulcers ≥ 3 mm compared with those who received tNSAIDs (RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.32; 5 studies, n=1 568). There were 7% fewer withdrawals among people who received celecoxib (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.86; 6 studies, n=2 639) compared to tNSAIDs. Results were inconclusive for short-term serious adverse events (Peto OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.28; 5 studies, 2 154 participants) and cardiovascular events (Peto OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.07 to 18.33; 1 study, n=149) between celecoxib and tNSAIDs.

Comments

Contraindications to the systemic use of celecoxib include coronary heart disease, diagnosed disorders of the cerebral circulation, heart failure, and peripheral vascular disease.

A Cochrane review included 5 studies with a total of 4 465 subjects. The evidence reviewed suggests that celecoxib controls the symptoms of RA to a similar degree to that of the active comparators examined (naproxen, diclofenac and ibuprofen). When compared to placebo, the percentage of patients showing improvement according to ACR 20 criteria at week 4 were 42/82 (51%) in the twice daily celecoxib 200 mg group and 43/82 (52%) in the twice daily celecoxib 400 mg group; these were significantly different from the placebo group in which 25/85 (29%) improved. The six month data reviewed support a reduced rate of UGI complications with celecoxib but there is also evidence to suggest that these benefits may not be evident in the long-term and that celecoxib offers no additional benefit in patients who are also receiving cardio-prophylactic low dose aspirin. The reviewers conclude that for an individual with RA the potential benefits of celecoxib need to be balanced against the uncertainty that the short-term reduced incidence of upper GI complications are maintained in the long-term and its increased cost in comparison to traditional NSAIDs. Note: Celecoxib has been associated with an increased risk of serious adverse cardiovascular events (FDA Alert: 4/7/2005 ).

Ədəbiyyat

  1. Fidahic M, Jelicic Kadic A, Radic M et al. Celecoxib for rheumatoid arthritis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017;(6):CD012095.