Search

Introduction: Aceclofenac, a NSAID is widely used in the treatment of pain and inflammation associated with osteoarthritis. Nabumetone, a recently developed preferential cyclo-oxygenase 2 inhibitor has also proved to be equally effective. The present study was undertaken to evaluate the 'real better' drug, amongst these with better efficacy and gastro-intestinal tolerability as well., Methods: Four hundred and twenty-three patients of either sex, aged 40-64 years with uncomplicated osteoarthritis of knee joint were randomly allocated into three equal groups receiving aceclofenac, nabumetone or placebo. A baseline pain measurement was done with Visual Analogue Scale (VAS: 0-10 scale) and Investigator Global Assessment of Disease status (IGADS: 0-4 point scale). Code was broken at the end of two weeks or earlier to eliminate any real fatal outcome. Final evaluation of efficacy was done at the end of four weeks. The significance of difference between the treatment outcomes was analyzed using one way ANOVA test., Results: During the active comparator controlled period, the most common reason for discontinuation was unacceptable adverse events. While 108 (76.6%) participants could take the full course of treatment with aceclofenac, 118 (83.7%) of the nabumetone group completed the study. Drop outs were highest in the placebo group (33.9%) followed by the aceclofenac group (12.1%) and nabumetone group (8.5%). Discontinuation due to G.I. intolerance was least in the placebo group (2.1%) followed by the nabumetone group (5%) and aceclofenac group (7.8%)., Conclusions: The preferential inhibition of cyclo-oxygenase 2 by nabumetone was postulated to afford better clinical efficacy and gastrointestinal tolerability in osteoarthritis as compared to aceclofenac.

Background: Rofecoxib and nabumetone were developed to provide gastrointestinal benefits over traditional nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). However, there is limited comparative information relating to these 2 drugs., Objective: The objective of this study was to compare rofecoxib and nabumetone, at their lower, recommended doses, in patients with osteoarthritis (OA)., Methods: Nine hundred seventy-eight patients with knee OA and a positive history of NSAID response were randomized to 12.5 mg rofecoxib per day (N=390), nabumetone 500 mg twice a day (N=392), or placebo (N=196) for 6 weeks. The primary efficacy end point was percent of patients with a "good" or "excellent" Patient Global Assessment of Response to Therapy (PGART) at week 6; PGART was also evaluated over days 1 to 6. Additional end points included investigator assessment of response, pain walking over 6 days and 6 weeks, joint tenderness, discontinuation as a result of lack of efficacy, and quality of life. Adverse experiences (AEs) were collected., Results: Significantly more rofecoxib (50.4%) than nabumetone (43.3%, P=0.043) or placebo (29.5%, P<0.001) patients had a good or excellent PGART at week 6. Median time to a good or excellent PGART was significantly shorter with rofecoxib (52 hours) than nabumetone (100 hours, P=0.001) or placebo (>124 hours, P<0.001). Results for rofecoxib and nabumetone were similar in all additional end points except pain in walking over 6 days and 6 weeks, in both of which the rofecoxib treatment group demonstrated better results. There were significantly (P<0.050) more overall and serious AEs and discontinuations resulting from AEs with rofecoxib than nabumetone. Five rofecoxib and one nabumetone patients had confirmed thrombotic cardiovascular events (P=0.123). Information on thrombotic cardiovascular events from this study was included in a published, prespecified pooled analysis and is included here for completeness., Conclusions: At their recommended starting doses for OA, both agents were more effective than placebo. Rofecoxib at a dosage of 12.5 mg demonstrated significantly better efficacy in PGART than 1000 mg nabumetone in these patients known to be NSAID responders. Significantly more AEs occurred with rofecoxib than nabumetone. Considering these data and other recent safety information regarding cyclooxygenase-2 selective and nonselective NSAIDS, physicians must make risk/benefit assessments for each individual patient when considering the use of these agents, as recommended by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

Unlabelled: We compared onset of efficacy (during days 1 to 6) of 2 coxibs (rofecoxib, celecoxib) with acetaminophen and nabumetone by using a prespecified approach to data from 4 similarly designed 6-week randomized osteoarthritis trials. In 2 trials, rofecoxib (12.5 mg and 25 mg once daily) was compared with celecoxib (200 mg once daily) and acetaminophen (4000 mg daily). In the other 2 trials, rofecoxib (12.5 mg) was compared with nabumetone (1000 mg once daily) and placebo. Efficacy end points included Patient Global Response to Therapy and Western Ontario and McMaster Osteoarthritis Index scores. Rofecoxib (12.5- and 25-mg doses) consistently demonstrated a faster onset of osteoarthritis (OA) efficacy than the comparator drugs during the first 6 days of therapy of OA patients experiencing "flare." Acetaminophen resulted in the slowest onset of efficacy. There was a strong correlation (0.7) between efficacy response during days 1 to 6 and that averaged over 6 weeks. Rates of discontinuation as a result of lack of efficacy were significantly lower (P < .02) for each of the coxib-treated groups compared with acetaminophen and for rofecoxib 12.5 mg (P = .01) compared with nabumetone. Rofecoxib treatment, with its faster onset of OA efficacy and lower rates of related discontinuations, might provide efficacy advantages in the treatment of OA pain., Perspective: The efficacy of rofecoxib, celecoxib, nabumetone, and acetaminophen is established for the majority of OA patients within the first 6 days of therapy, and this predicts efficacy during the longer term. Rofecoxib provides significantly faster time to onset of efficacy and better improvement on multiple measures versus the comparators.

Objectives: To evaluate the use of starting doses of rofecoxib and nabumetone in patients with osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee., Design: A 6-week, randomized, parallel-group, double-blind, placebo-controlled study., Setting: One hundred thirteen outpatient sites in the United States., Participants: A total of 1,042 male and female patients aged 40 and older with OA of the knee (>6 months)., Interventions: Rofecoxib 12.5 mg once a day (n=424), nabumetone 1,000 mg once a day (n=410), or placebo (n=208) for 6 weeks., Measurements: The primary efficacy endpoint was patient global assessment of response to therapy (PGART) over 6 weeks, which was also specifically evaluated over the first 6 days. The main safety measure was adverse events during the 6 weeks of treatment., Results: The percentage of patients with a good or excellent response to therapy as assessed using PGART at Week 6 was significantly higher with rofecoxib (55.4%) than nabumetone (47.5%; P=.018) or placebo (26.7%; P<.001 vs rofecoxib or nabumetone). Median time to first report of a good or excellent PGART response was significantly shorter in patients treated with rofecoxib (2 days) than with nabumetone (4 days, P=.002) and placebo (>5 days, P<.001) (nabumetone vs placebo; P=.007). The safety profiles of rofecoxib and nabumetone were generally similar, including gastrointestinal, hypertensive, and renal adverse events., Conclusion: Rofecoxib 12.5 mg daily demonstrated better efficacy over 6 weeks of treatment and quicker onset of OA efficacy over the first 6 days than nabumetone 1,000 mg daily. Both therapies were generally well tolerated.

Objective: To comparre the safety and efficacy of naproxen CR (1,000 mg once daily) with that of nabumetone (1,000 mg once daily) in the treatment of patients with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis(OA)., Methods: A total of 159 Korean patients (80 in the naproxen CR group and 79 in the nabumetone group) were enrolled in this 4-week, single-blind, controlled, randomized, parallel study and an intention-to-treat model was used for data analysis. Six efficacy parameters were measured: Lequesne index, visual analogue pain scale at rest and atactivity, patient's and physician's global assessment, and time to walk 50 feet., Results: Significant improvement in all efficacy parameters except time to walk 50 feet occurred at Week 2 and Week 4 in both groups. Themean improvement from baseline at Week 2 and Week 4 for the efficacy variables was not different between naproxen CR and nabumetone group. Twenty-four patients (30%) in the naproxen CR group and 18 patients (22.8%) in the nabumetone group withdrew from the study. Among them, only 1patient in the naproxen CR group terminated the study prematurely due to an adverse event of dyspepsia. No statistically significant difference in the frequency of adverse events, including gastrointestinal symptoms, was observed between these 2 groups during the treatment period. Significant laboratory abnormalities also did not occur during the study period in both groups., Conclusions: Naproxen CR is an effective and tolerable drug in the treatment of knee OA. Efficacy and safety profiles are comparable to those of nabumetone.

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are commonly prescribed for the treatment of signs and symptoms of osteoarthritis (OA). Nabumetone and oxaprozin are 2 of the newer NSAIDs and have been shown to have similar safety and efficacy profiles. Nabumetone 1000 mg to 1500 mg once a day (QD) and oxaprozin 1200 mg QD are commonly recommended doses. This study compared the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) of patients receiving oxaprozin 1200 mg QD with that of patients receiving nabumetone 1000 mg QD or nabumetone 1500 mg QD for the treatment of signs and symptoms of OA of the knee. Two similarly designed, independent, randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled clinical trials were conducted. In trial 1, patients were randomized to receive oxaprozin 1200 mg QD (n = 109), nabumetone 1000 mg QD (n = 110), or placebo (n = 109); in trial 2, patients received oxaprozin 1200 mg QD (n = 116), nabumetone 1500 mg QD (n = 115), or placebo (n = 116). HRQOL was measured by the Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form-36 Health Survey (1-week recall period) at baseline and weeks 2 and 6. Data from the 2 trials were combined to assess differences across the 4 groups in 8 domains and 2 summary scores at baseline, and changes in HRQOL scores at weeks 2 and 6. At week 2, the oxaprozin group showed significantly greater improvement than the placebo group in role physical, vitality, and mental component summary (MCS) scores (P < 0.05), and in physical functioning, bodily pain, social functioning, and physical component summary (PCS) scores (P < 0.01). The nabumetone 1500-mg group showed significantly greater improvement than the placebo group in bodily pain and social functioning (P < 0.05), and in vitality and MCS score (P < 0.01). No significant differences were observed between the nabumetone 1000-mg and placebo groups. At week 2, the oxaprozin group showed a greater change than the nabumetone 1000-mg group in PCS score (P < 0.05). At week 6, oxaprozin treatment resulted in significantly greater improvement than placebo in physical functioning, role physical, and bodily pain (P < 0.05); social functioning, role emotional, and mental health (P < 0.01); and vitality and MCS score (P < 0.001). The nabumetone 1500-mg group showed significantly greater responses than the placebo group in vitality (P < 0.05), mental health (P < 0.01), and MCS score (P < 0.001). The oxaprozin group had significantly better scores than the nabumetone 1500-mg group in the PCS (P < 0.05), and it showed significantly greater improvement than the nabumetone 1000 mg group in role physical and PCS score (P < 0.01) and in role emotional (P < 0.05). No statistically significant differences were found between placebo and nabumetone 1000 mg at week 6. Results of this study suggest that oxaprozin 1200 mg QD has a significant positive impact on the HRQOL of patients with OA of the knee compared with nabumetone 1000 mg QD and placebo.