Rheumatoid Arthritis: Eisen G

Rabeneck L, Wristers K, Goldstein JL, Eisen G, Dedhiya SD, Burke TA. · Department of Veterans Affairs Health Services Research and Development Center of Excellence and Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA. · Am J Gastroenterol. · Pubmed #11808967 No free full text.

Abstract: OBJECTIVES: We aimed to assess the Severity of Dyspepsia Assessment (SODA) scales as measures of change in dyspepsia-related health in a blinded, randomized, controlled trial in arthritis patients treated with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. METHODS: Three thousand nine hundred seven arthritis patients completed SODA at baseline and weeks 4, 13, 26, and 52 and/or at early termination. Using baseline and 4-wk data, reliability was evaluated with Cronbach's a and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Dyspepsia adverse events were defined based on a combined set of World Health Organization Adverse Reaction Terminology terms. The ability of SODA to measure change in dyspepsia-related health was evaluated by comparing SODA change scores by dyspepsia adverse event severity level and withdrawal status. Responsiveness was further evaluated by the area under the curve (AUC) from receiver operating characteristic curves using withdrawal due to dyspepsia as the criterion. RESULTS: The SODA scales--Pain Intensity (alpha = 0.93), Non Pain Symptoms (alpha = 0.82), and Satisfaction (alpha = 0.89)--demonstrated excellent internal consistency reliability using baseline data. Reproducibility was fair to good: Pain Intensity ICC = 0.49, Non Pain Symptoms ICC = 0.61, and Satisfaction ICC = 0.45. SODA change scores (4-wk score - baseline score) increased, or worsened, with increasing dyspepsia severity and differentiated between adjacent levels of dyspepsia severity for eight of nine adjacent comparisons (p < 0.05). SODA change scores also differentiated between those who did and did not withdraw (p < 0.001). Responsiveness was highest with the Pain Intensity scale (AUC = 0.78), followed by the Non Pain Symptoms (AUC = 0.74) and Satisfaction (AUC = 0.75) scales. CONCLUSIONS: SODA is a reliable, valid instrument for use as a measure of dyspepsia tolerability in future clinical trials involving cyclo-oxygenase-2-specific and/or traditional nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.

Silverstein FE, Faich G, Goldstein JL, Simon LS, Pincus T, Whelton A, Makuch R, Eisen G, Agrawal NM, Stenson WF, Burr AM, Zhao WW, Kent JD, Lefkowith JB, Verburg KM, Geis GS. · Pharmacia Clinical Research and Development, 4901 Searle Pkwy, Bldg A3E, Skokie, IL 60077, USA. · JAMA. · Pubmed #10979111 links to  free full text

Abstract: CONTEXT: Conventional nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are associated with a spectrum of toxic effects, notably gastrointestinal (GI) effects, because of inhibition of cyclooxygenase (COX)-1. Whether COX-2-specific inhibitors are associated with fewer clinical GI toxic effects is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether celecoxib, a COX-2-specific inhibitor, is associated with a lower incidence of significant upper GI toxic effects and other adverse effects compared with conventional NSAIDs. DESIGN: The Celecoxib Long-term Arthritis Safety Study (CLASS), a double-blind, randomized controlled trial conducted from September 1998 to March 2000. SETTING: Three hundred eighty-six clinical sites in the United States and Canada. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 8059 patients (>/=18 years old) with osteoarthritis (OA) or rheumatoid arthritis (RA) were enrolled in the study, and 7968 received at least 1 dose of study drug. A total of 4573 patients (57%) received treatment for 6 months. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive celecoxib, 400 mg twice per day (2 and 4 times the maximum RA and OA dosages, respectively; n = 3987); ibuprofen, 800 mg 3 times per day (n = 1985); or diclofenac, 75 mg twice per day (n = 1996). Aspirin use for cardiovascular prophylaxis (</=325 mg/d) was permitted. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Incidence of prospectively defined symptomatic upper GI ulcers and ulcer complications (bleeding, perforation, and obstruction) and other adverse effects during the 6-month treatment period. RESULTS: For all patients, the annualized incidence rates of upper GI ulcer complications alone and combined with symptomatic ulcers for celecoxib vs NSAIDs were 0.76% vs 1.45% (P =.09) and 2. 08% vs 3.54% (P =.02), respectively. For patients not taking aspirin, the annualized incidence rates of upper GI ulcer complications alone and combined with symptomatic ulcers for celecoxib vs NSAIDs were 0.44% vs 1.27% (P =.04) and 1.40% vs 2.91% (P =.02). For patients taking aspirin, the annualized incidence rates of upper GI ulcer complications alone and combined with symptomatic ulcers for celecoxib vs NSAIDs were 2.01% vs 2.12% (P =.92) and 4.70% vs 6.00% (P =.49). Fewer celecoxib-treated patients than NSAID-treated patients experienced chronic GI blood loss, GI intolerance, hepatotoxicity, or renal toxicity. No difference was noted in the incidence of cardiovascular events between celecoxib and NSAIDs, irrespective of aspirin use. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, celecoxib, at dosages greater than those indicated clinically, was associated with a lower incidence of symptomatic ulcers and ulcer complications combined, as well as other clinically important toxic effects, compared with NSAIDs at standard dosages. The decrease in upper GI toxicity was strongest among patients not taking aspirin concomitantly. JAMA. 2000;284:1247-1255