Search

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are established as treatment for managing pain associated with primary dysmenorrhea. However, the efficacy and tolerability of lumiracoxib 200 mg once daily (q.d.) has not previously been examined in primary dysmenorrhea.Two randomized, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover studies of similar design have assessed the efficacy and tolerability of two regimens of lumiracoxib compared with placebo (Study 1) or naproxen and placebo (Study 2) in women (aged 18-45 years) with moderate to severe primary dysmenorrhea. In Study 1 (n = 132), patients received lumiracoxib 200 mg q.d., lumiracoxib 200 mg with a 200 mg redose (p.r.n.) on day 1, or placebo. In Study 2 (n = 144), patients received lumiracoxib 200 mg q.d., lumiracoxib 200 mg with a 200 mg redose p.r.n. on day 1, naproxen 500 mg twice daily (b.i.d.), or placebo. Patients recorded study medication use, efficacy assessments, and rescue medication use.The primary efficacy variable, summed (time-weighted) pain intensity difference (categorical scale) over the first 8 hours (SPID-8), was similar between all active treatments (e.g., p = 0.939 for naproxen 500 mg b.i.d. vs. lumiracoxib 200 mg q.d. in Study 2), and all active treatments were superior to placebo (p0.001). Median time-to-onset of analgesia was similar between lumiracoxib 200 mg q.d. and naproxen 500 mg b.i.d. Similar trends were observed for all other secondary efficacy variables. All treatments were well tolerated.Short-term administration of lumiracoxib 200 mg q.d. is effective and well tolerated and provides an alternative treatment option for the management of moderate to severe pain associated with primary dysmenorrhea.

The depletion of CD4+ T cells in AIDS is correlated with high turnover of the human immunodeficiency virus HIV-1 and associated with apoptosis. The molecular mechanism of apoptosis in HIV infection, however, is largely unknown. T-cell apoptosis might be affected by viral proteins such as HIV-1 Tat and gp120 (refs 10, 11). T-cell-receptor (TCR)-induced apoptosis was recently shown to involve the CD95 (APO-1/Fas) receptor. We show here that HIV-1 Tat strongly sensitizes TCR- and CD4(gp120)-induced apoptosis by upregulation of CD95 ligand expression. Concentrations of Tat found to be effective in cultures of HIV-1-infected cells were also observed in sera from HIV-1-infected individuals. Taken together, our results indicate that HIV-1 Tat and gp120 accelerate CD95-mediated, activation-induced T-cell apoptosis, a mechanism that may contribute to CD4+ T-cell depletion in AIDS.

Background Lumiracoxib is a selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor effective in the treatment of osteoarthritis (OA) with a superior gastrointestinal (GI) safety profile as compared to traditional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs, ibuprofen and naproxen). This safety study compared the GI tolerability, the blood pressure (BP) profile and the incidence of oedema with lumiracoxib and rofecoxib in the treatment of OA. Rofecoxib was withdrawn worldwide due to an associated increased risk of CV events and lumiracoxib has been withdrawn from Australia, Canada, Europe and a few other countries following reports of suspected adverse liver reactions. Methods This randomised, double-blind study enrolled 309 patients (aged greater than or equal to 50 years) with primary OA across 51 centres in Europe. Patients were randomly allocated to receive either lumiracoxib 400 mg od (four times the recommended dose in OA) (n = 154) or rofecoxib 25 mg od (n = 155). The study was conducted for 6 weeks and assessments were performed at Weeks 3 and 6. The primary safety measures were the incidence of predefined GI adverse events (AEs) and peripheral oedema. The secondary safety measures included effect of treatment on the mean sitting systolic and diastolic blood pressure (msSBP and msDBP). Tolerability of lumiracoxib 400 mg was assessed by the incidence of AEs. Results Lumiracoxib and rofecoxib displayed similar GI safety profiles with no statistically significant difference in predefined GI AEs between the two groups (43.5% vs. 37.4%, respectively). The incidence and severity of individual predefined GI AEs was comparable between the two groups. The incidence of peripheral oedema was low and identical in both the groups (n = 9, 5.8%). Only one patient in the lumiracoxib group and three patients in the rofecoxib group had a moderate or severe event. At Week 6 there was a significantly lower msSBP and msDBP in the lumiracoxib group compared to the rofecoxib group (p < 0.05). A similar percentage of patients in both groups showed an improvement in target joint pain and disease activity. The tolerability profile was similar in both the treatment groups. Conclusion Lumiracoxib 400 mg od (four times the recommended dose in OA) provided a comparable GI safety profile to rofecoxib 25 mg od (therapeutic dose). However, lumiracoxib was associated with a significantly better BP profile as compared to rofecoxib. Trial registration number - NCT00637949

The circulation of poor-quality medicines continues to undermine the fight against many life-threatening diseases. Anti-malarial medicines appear to have been particularly compromised and present a major public health threat in malaria-endemic countries, negatively affecting individuals and their communities. Concerted collaborative efforts are required from global, regional and national organizations, involving the public and private sectors, to address the problem. While many initiatives are underway, a number of unmet needs deserve urgent and increased multisector attention. At the global level, there is a need for an international public health legal framework or treaty on poor-quality medicines, with statutes suitable for integration into national laws. In addition, increased international efforts are required to strengthen the governance of global supply chains and enhance cooperation between national medicine regulation authorities and law enforcement bodies. Increased investment is needed in innovative technologies that will enable healthcare teams to detect poor-quality medicines at all levels of the supply chain. At the regional level, a number of initiatives would be beneficial-key areas are standardization, simplification, and reciprocal recognition of registration processes and development of quality control capacity in regional centres of excellence that are better aligned with public health needs; improved surveillance methods and creation of a framework for compulsory and transparent reporting of poor-quality medicines; additional support for national medicine regulation authorities and other national partner authorities; and an increase in support for regional laboratories to boost their capabilities in detecting poor-quality medicines. It is vital that all stakeholders involved in efforts against poor-quality anti-malarial medicines extend and strengthen their actions in these critical areas and thus effectively support global health development and malaria elimination programmes.