Search

1. The dose-peak effect relationship of lisinopril was evaluated in a double-blind, parallel study in 83 patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension (supine diastolic blood pressure = 95-115 mm Hg). 2. After a 4 week placebo washout, patients were randomly assigned to one of four treatments: lisinopril 2.5, 10, 20 or 80 mg day-1 for 1 week. 3. Lisinopril 10 and 20 mg day-1 produced similar peak antihypertensive effects which were greater than that produced by 2.5 mg day-1, but less than that of 80 mg day-1. If the incidence of first- dose symptomatic hypotension is related to the peak effect, then an initial lisinopril dose of 20 mg should not pose any greater risk than a 10 mg dose. 4. The magnitude of antihypertensive response at 24 h postdrug appeared to be dose related across the 2.5 to 80 mg day-1 range. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

1. The local responses to intradermal injection of PAF, histamine and PGE2 were investigated in eight healthy male volunteers. Acute effects were monitored by weal and flare measurement; delayed effects were investigated by pain threshold testing and skinfold thickness measurements. 2. PAF and PGE2 were found to induce weal and flare responses which were clearly distinguishable from vehicle and dose related. 3. PAF was approximately 50 times as potent as PGE2 at inducing weal on a molar basis. 4. A dose related hyperalgesia was recorded in response to PGE2. No hyperalgesia could be demonstrated following PAF injection compared with vehicle. 5. PAF and histamine elicited an increase in skinfold thickness up to 2 h after injection which was distinguishable from vehicle. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The dose-response relationship of enalapril was evaluated in a double- blind, balanced, two-period, incomplete-block study in 91 patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension. Patients were randomly assigned to two of six treatments: placebo, 2.5, 5, 10, 20 and 40 mg/day of enalapril maleate. There were two 3-week treatment periods, each preceded by a 4-week, single-blind placebo washout. Each dose of enalapril produced significant decreases in standing and supine systolic and diastolic blood pressure after 2 and 3 weeks of treatment. There were no significant changes on placebo. There was a significant linear dose response relationship for both mean blood pressure and mean change from baseline in blood pressure (P less than 0.01 for systolic and mean arterial pressure, and P less than 0.05 for diastolic pressure). Enalapril was associated with an increasing dose-response relationship across the 2.5-40 mg/day range. The 2.5 mg/dose is effective in some patients; however, doses greater than or equal to 10 mg/day may be necessary to achieve satisfactory blood pressure control. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Twelve healthy male volunteers received single daily oral doses of enalapril (EN) 10 mg for 8 consecutive days. Serum samples for prolactin (PRL) assay were taken on day 0 (baseline) at 12.00 h and 16.00 h, and on days 1 and 8 at 08.00 h (pre-drug), 12.00 h and 16.00 h. The 08.00 h values on day 1 served as the pre-drug baseline. There were no significant changes from baseline in serum PRL levels on days 1 and 8. All mean serum PRL levels on day 8 were significantly (P less than 0.01) lower than the upper limit of the normal range (2-15 ng/ml) found for healthy males in this laboratory. It is concluded that therapeutic doses of EN (10 mg/day, p.o.) for 8 consecutive days do not raise mean serum PRL levels above the normal range in healthy male volunteers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Cyclo-oxygenase-2 (COX-2) selective inhibitors have been associated with an increased risk of thrombotic cardiovascular events in placebo-controlled trials, but no clinical trial has been reported with the primary aim of assessing relative cardiovascular risk of these drugs compared with traditional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). The MEDAL programme was designed to provide a precise estimate of thrombotic cardiovascular events with the COX-2 selective inhibitor etoricoxib versus the traditional NSAID diclofenac.Methods: We designed a prespecified pooled analysis of data from three trials in which patients with osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis were randomly assigned to etoricoxib (60 mg or 90 mg daily) or diclofenac (150 mg daily). The primary hypothesis stated that etoricoxib is not inferior to diclofenac, defined as an upper boundary of less than 1.30 for the 95% CI of the hazard ratio for thrombotic cardiovascular events in the per-protocol analysis. Intention-to-treat analyses were also done to assess consistency of results. These trials are registered at http://www.clinicaltrials.gov with the numbers NCT00092703, NCT00092742, and NCT00250445.Findings: 34 701 patients (24 913 with osteoarthritis and 9 787 with rheumatoid arthritis) were enrolled. Average treatment duration was 18 months (SD 11.8). 320 patients in the etoricoxib group and 323 in the diclofenac group had thrombotic cardiovascular events, yielding event rates of 1.24 and 1.30 per 100 patient-years and a hazard ratio of 0.95 (95% CI 0.81-1.11) for etoricoxib compared with diclofenac. Rates of upper gastrointestinal clinical events (perforation, bleeding, obstruction, ulcer) were lower with etoricoxib than with diclofenac (0.67 vs 0.97 per 100 patient-years; hazard ratio 0.69 [0.57-0.83]), but the rates of complicated upper gastrointestinal events were similar for etoricoxib (0.30) and diclofenac (0.32).Interpretation: Rates of thrombotic cardiovascular events in patients with arthritis on etoricoxib are similar to those in patients on diclofenac with long-term use of these drugs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Efficacy of conventional opioids can be limited by adverse events (AEs). TRV130 is a structurally novel biased ligand of the μ-opioid receptor that activates G protein signaling with little β-arrestin recruitment. In this phase 2, randomized, placebo- and active-controlled study, we investigated the efficacy and tolerability of TRV130 in acute pain after bunionectomy. We used an adaptive study design in which 144 patients experiencing moderate-to-severe acute pain after bunionectomy were randomized to receive double-blind TRV130, placebo, or morphine in a pilot phase. After pilot phase analysis, 195 patients were randomized to receive double-dummy TRV130 0.5, 1, 2, or 3 mg every 3 hours (q3h); placebo; or morphine 4 mg q4h intravenously. The primary end point was the time-weighted average change in numeric rating scale pain intensity over the 48-hour treatment period. Secondary end points included stopwatch and categorical assessments of pain relief. Safety and tolerability were also assessed. TRV130 2 and 3 mg q3h, and morphine 4 mg q4h produced statistically greater mean reductions in pain intensity than placebo over 48 hours (P < 0.005). TRV130 at 2 and 3 mg produced significantly greater categorical pain relief than morphine (P < 0.005) after the first dose, with meaningful pain relief occurring in under 5 minutes. TRV130 produced no serious AEs, with tolerability similar to morphine. These results demonstrate that TRV130 rapidly produces profound analgesia in moderate-to-severe acute pain, suggesting that G-protein-biased μ-opioid receptor activation is a promising target for development of novel analgesics.

Background: Conventional opioids provide powerful analgesia but also produce efficacy-limiting adverse effects, limiting their clinical utility (CU). TRV130 is being evaluated to determine whether CU can be expanded by way of increased efficacy, decreased adverse effects, or some combination thereof., Methods: This phase 2 study of TRV130 blends traditional objectives with novel design features aimed toward the specific strategic goal of optimizing the attributes of TRV130 efficacy and tolerability compared with the conventional opioid, morphine. The adaptive maximizing design (AMD) was developed to maximize assignment of future patients to doses that demonstrate maximum balance between efficacy and tolerability (ie, CU) assessed via a CU function., Results: Our evaluation of the AMD performance characteristics reveals that the AMD has a strong capacity to estimate the TRV130 dose-regimens with maximum CU, assign more patients to the TRV130 dose-regimens with maximum CU, and, conversely, assign fewer patients to doses away from the those with maximum or near-maximum CU., Conclusions: Based on this evaluation of performance characteristics of the AMD versus a traditional study design, the AMD was selected for this proof-of-concept and dose-regimen finding study of TRV130.

Objective: The aim of this study is to assess the Pain Quality Assessment Scale (PQAS) in predicting pregabalin in peripheral neuropathic pain (NP)., Study Design: Post hoc analysis of a double-blind, placebo-controlled, enriched enrollment, randomized withdrawal trial evaluating pregabalin in 99 patients with NP who completed the PQAS, which comprises 20 questions regarding individual pain domains and qualities that are scored into three scales: paroxysmal, deep, and surface., Methods: Patients rated the average pain intensity and pain quality using the PQAS at baseline; average pain intensity was assessed again after 40 days of treatment with pregabalin. Associations between pretreatment PQAS scores and treatment response were estimated using Pearson's r. Logistic regression was used to identify pretitration PQAS scores contributing unique variance to predicting treatment response., Results: Fifty participants provided baseline PQAS scores and received pregabalin for the entire length of the study. Nine of 23 PQAS baseline scales and items were significantly associated with treatment response to pregabalin: the paroxysmal and deep scales, and the items assessing the following pain domains and qualities: intensity, electric, tingling, cramping, radiating, throbbing, and deep (P values range, 0.002-0.045; rs range, 0.28-0.43). The PQAS items assessing sharp, hot, and unpleasant pain items demonstrated nonsignificant trends (P < 0.10) to be associated with treatment response. In the logistic regression analysis, pretitration PQAS scores had 77% sensitivity and 83% specificity to correctly identify pregabalin responders. Significantly correlated PQAS items had a sensitivity of 85% and specificity of 76%., Conclusion: Pretitration PQAS scores reliably predicted pregabalin responders in patients with NP., (Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Introduction: We aimed to investigate the sensitivity and reliability of two-dimensional ultrasonographic endpoints at the metacarpophalageal joints (MCPJs) and their potential to provide an early and objective indication of a therapeutic response to treatment intervention in rheumatoid arthritis (RA)., Methods: A randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, two-center, placebo-controlled trial investigated the effect on ultrasonographic measures of synovitis of repeat dose oral prednisone, 15 mg or 7.5 mg, each compared to placebo, in consecutive two-week studies; there were 18 subjects in a 1:1 ratio and 27 subjects in a 2:1 ratio, respectively. All subjects met the 1987 American College of Rheumatology criteria for the diagnosis of RA, were ≥18 years-old with RA disease duration ≥6 months, and had a Disease Activity Score 28 based on C-reactive protein (DAS28(CRP)) ≥3.2. Subjects underwent high-frequency (gray-scale) and power Doppler ultrasonography at Days 1 (baseline), 2, 8 and 15 in the dorsal transverse and longitudinal planes of all 10 MCPJs to obtain summated scores of quantitative and semi-quantitative measures of synovial thickness as well as vascularity. The primary endpoint was the summated score of power Doppler area measured quantitatively in all 10 MCPJs in the transverse plane at Day 15. Clinical efficacy was assessed at the same time points by DAS28(CRP)., Results: All randomized subjects completed the trial. The comparison between daily 15 mg prednisone and placebo at Day 15 yielded a statistically significant treatment effect (effect size = 1.17, P = 0.013) in change from baseline in the primary endpoint, but borderline for prednisone 7.5 mg daily versus placebo (effect size = 0.61, P = 0.071). A significant treatment effect for DAS28(CRP) was only observed at Day 15 in the prednisone 15 mg group (effect size = 0.95, P = 0.032). However, significant treatment effects at all time points for a variety of ultrasound (US) endpoints were detected with both prednisone doses; the largest observed effect size = 2.33. Combining US endpoints with DAS28(CRP) improved the registration of significant treatment effects. The parallel scan inter-reader reliability of summated 10 MCPJ scores were good to excellent (ICC values >0.61) for the majority of US measures., Conclusions: Ultrasonography of MCPJs is an early, reliable indicator of therapeutic response in RA with potential to reduce patient numbers and length of trials designed to give preliminary indications of efficacy., Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00746512.

Background: The development of antihypertensives requires efficient and accurate tools for identifying pedal edema. Methodologies used to gauge the potential of an agent to induce pedal edema in short-term (<4-week) clinical trials have not been reported in the literature., Objective: The purpose of this study was to identify a robust and practical method for measuring drug-induced pedal edema for use in the clinical development of antihypertensives. The efficacy of segmental bioimpedance in the detection of increased pedal edema was compared with that of clinical pitting assessment, ankle circumference, and water displacement volumetry., Methods: The study population consisted of male and female healthy subjects and patients with stage 1 or 2 hypertension who were otherwise healthy. Participants were randomly assigned to receive amlodipine 10 mg or placebo once daily in this 6-week, double-blind, parallel-group study. Amlodipine was used as a means of inducing ankle edema, and not for the treatment of hypertension. Patients with hypertension were required to undergo a washout of antihypertensive therapies. Edema was evaluated using segmental bioimpedance at 10 kHz, clinical pitting assessment, ankle circumference, and water displacement at weeks 2, 4, and 6. The ANOVA model used included treatment and baseline values as covariates, with treatment pairs compared via t tests derived from the model., Results: A total of 47 individuals were randomized (49% male; 29 [62%] with hypertension; mean [SD] age, 59 [5.9] years; baseline body mass index, 28.6 kg/m(2) [2.8]; blood pressure 146.6 [10.7]/93.5 [6.5] and 139.3 [8.3]/89.5 [4.5] in individuals with and without hypertension, respectively; amlodipine 10 mg, n = 24; placebo, n = 23). At weeks 2, 4, and 6, statistically significant treatment differences in changes from baseline were detected using water displacement (mean [90% CI] treatment differences, +39.0 g [+17.9 to +60.1], +61.9 g [+36.1 to +87.6], and +72.2 g [+42.3 to +102.1], respectively; all, P ≤ 0.001), ankle circumference (+4.74 mm [+2.38 to +7.11; P < 0.001], +2.92 mm [+0.33 to +5.49; P = 0.032], and +5.16 mm [+2.21 to +8.11; P = 0.002]), and bioimpedance (-11.7 Ω [-18.1 to -5.4], -18.3 Ω [-26.2 to -10.4], and -20.9 Ω [-29.7 to -12.0]; all, P≤0.001), but no significant differences were detected using clinical assessment of pitting., Conclusion: In this population of healthy subjects and patients with hypertension, segmental bioimpedance was comparable to water displacement and ankle circumference and outperformed clinical assessment of pitting for the detection of ankle edema, supporting the use of segmental bioimpedance as a drug-development tool to objectively quantify amlodipine-induced pedal edema., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier HS Journals, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Traditional assays of the coagulation status of patients, bleeding time assessment (BT) and light transmission aggregometry (LTA), are useful in clinical drug development. However, these assays are both labor intensive and expensive. BT results can be operator dependent and by its nature can inhibit subject enrollment in a clinical trial. The preparation of platelet-rich plasma necessary for LTA requires specialized training and laboratory support. Alternatives to these methods are desirable. The goal of this study was identification of a quantitative, easy-to-use, point-of-care device with minimal technical variables that could facilitate assessment of platelet aggregation in clinical drug development. This was a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, three-period cross-over study in healthy volunteers designed to compare the abilities of BT, LTA, and three point-of-care devices, Multiplate®, Platelet Function Analyzer-100®, and VerifyNow® to quantitate the effects on platelet function of 3 days of treatment with aspirin, clopidogrel, or placebo. The effect size (difference in treatment means divided by the pooled standard deviations [SD]) of the three point-of-care devices was greater than or similar to BT and LTA for all treatment comparisons examined. VerifyNow® had the highest effect size comparing ASA to placebo. Multiplate® had the highest effect size comparing clopidogrel to placebo. From this study, we conclude that any one of the three simple-to-use point-of-care devices can reliably assess the treatment effect of ASA and CLP on platelet function in comparison with BT or LTA at the study population level

Objectives: A prospective, multicenter (18)fluorine-fluorodeoxyglucose ((18)F-FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) imaging study was performed to estimate the correlations among arterial FDG uptake and atherosclerotic plaque biomarkers in patients with peripheral artery disease., Background: Inflammation within atherosclerotic plaques is associated with instability of the plaque and future cardiovascular events. Previous studies have shown that (18)F-FDG-PET/CT is able to quantify inflammation within carotid artery atherosclerotic plaques, but no studies to date have investigated this correlation in peripheral arteries with immunohistochemical confirmation., Methods: Thirty patients across 5 study sites underwent (18)F-FDG-PET/CT imaging before SilverHawk atherectomy (FoxHollow Technologies, Redwood City, California) for symptomatic common or superficial femoral arterial disease. Vascular FDG uptake (expressed as target-to-background ratio) was measured in the carotid arteries and aorta and femoral arteries, including the region of atherectomy. Immunohistochemistry was performed on the excised atherosclerotic plaque extracts, and cluster of differentiation 68 (CD68) level as a measure of macrophage content was determined. Correlations between target-to-background ratio of excised lesions, as well as entire arterial regions, and CD68 levels were determined. Imaging was performed during the 2 weeks before surgery in all cases., Results: Twenty-one patients had adequate-quality (18)F-FDG-PET/CT peripheral artery images, and 34 plaque specimens were obtained. No significant correlation between lesion target-to-background ratio and CD68 level was observed., Conclusions: There were no significant correlations between CD68 level (as a measure of macrophage content) and FDG uptake in the peripheral arteries in this multicenter study. Differences in lesion extraction technique, lesion size, the degree of inflammation, and imaging coregistration techniques may have been responsible for the failure to observe the strong correlations with vascular FDG uptake observed in previous studies of the carotid artery and in several animal models of atherosclerosis., (Copyright © 2012 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Antihypertensive drugs can have different effects on central and brachial blood pressures, which may affect outcomes. Nitric oxide donors have acute effects on central blood pressure but have not been assessed with renin-angiotensin system blockade. Thirteen patients with prehypertensive/Stage 1 hypertension were randomized to five single-dose treatments separated by ≤4 days using a double-blind, crossover study design: angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) losartan 100 mg, isosorbide mononitrate (ISMN) 60 mg, losartan 100 mg + ISMN 15 mg, losartan 100 mg + ISMN 60 mg, and placebo. Central and brachial blood pressures were measured throughout 10 hours. Mean placebo-subtracted decrease from baseline in augmentation index (AIx) approximately 1% for losartan 100 mg, 26% for ISMN 60 mg, 19% for losartan 100 mg + ISMN 15 mg, and 24% for losartan 100 mg + ISMN 60 mg. Administered with losartan 100 mg or alone, ISMN lowered AIx, demonstrating that acute effects of a nitrate donor are much larger than those of an ARB even when administered with an ARB. Differences from placebo were statistically significant except for losartan 100 mg. AIx is a good biomarker of acute hemodynamic effects of nitric oxide in prehypertensive/Stage 1 hypertension., (2010 American Society of Hypertension. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To assess a walking model utilizing a set of standardized treadmill walks to measure acute analgesic response in osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee., Design: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multiple dose, three-period crossover study. Patients > or =45 years of age (N=22) with symptomatic knee OA were randomized to naproxen 500 mg bid, tramadol/acetaminophen 37.5 mg/325 mg in forced titration, or placebo in each of three periods. Patients performed multiple 20-minute treadmill walks on Day 1 and Day 3 at a consistent self-selected pace predetermined at screening. Pain intensity (PI) during the walks was assessed on an 11-point numerical rating scale at 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, and 20 min. The primary endpoint was the time-weighted average (TWA) change from baseline PI on Day 3 for the two self-paced walks for the active treatments vs placebo. Time to moderate pain (TTMP) was a key secondary endpoint., Results: Compared with placebo, the TWA change from baseline PI on Day 3 was significantly better with tramadol/acetaminophen (P=0.043) but not with naproxen (P=0.089). TWA change from baseline on Day 1 was also significantly better with both tramadol/acetaminophen (P=0.001) and naproxen (P=0.048) compared with placebo. TTMP was significantly better for tramadol/acetaminophen and naproxen than placebo (P<0.001 to P=0.015) for walks on Day 1 after a single dose and on Day 3., Conclusions: This novel OA pain model was able to discriminate both tramadol/acetaminophen and naproxen from placebo after single and multiple doses. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00772967., (Copyright 2010 Osteoarthritis Research Society International. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The aim of the investigation was to evaluate alternatives to standard first-in-human (FIH) designs in order to optimize the information gained from such studies by employing novel agile trial designs. Agile designs combine adaptive and flexible elements to enable optimized use of prior information either before and/or during conduct of the study to seamlessly update the study design. A comparison of the traditional 6 + 2 (active + placebo) subjects per cohort design with alternative, reduced sample size, agile designs was performed by using discrete event simulation. Agile designs were evaluated for specific adverse event models and rates as well as dose-proportional, saturated, and steep-accumulation pharmacokinetic profiles. Alternative, reduced sample size (hereafter referred to as agile) designs are proposed for cases where prior knowledge about pharmacokinetics and/or adverse event relationships are available or appropriately assumed. Additionally, preferred alternatives are proposed for a general case when prior knowledge is limited or unavailable. Within the tested conditions and stated assumptions, some agile designs were found to be as efficient as traditional designs. Thus, simulations demonstrated that the agile design is a robust and feasible approach to FIH clinical trials, with no meaningful loss of relevant information, as it relates to PK and AE assumptions. In some circumstances, applying agile designs may decrease the duration and resources required for Phase I studies, increasing the efficiency of early clinical development. We highlight the value and importance of useful prior information when specifying key assumptions related to safety, tolerability, and PK.

The goals of phase II dose-response studies are to prove that the treatment is effective and to choose the dose for further development. Randomized designs with equal allocation to either a high dose and placebo or to each of several doses and placebo are typically used. However, in trials where response is observed relatively quickly, adaptive designs might offer an advantage over equal allocation. We propose an adaptive design for dose-response trials that concentrates the allocation of subjects in one or more areas of interest, for example, near a minimum clinically important effect level, or near some maximal effect level, and also allows for the possibility to stop the trial early if needed. The proposed adaptive design yields higher power to detect a dose-response relationship, higher power in comparison with placebo, and selects the correct dose more frequently compared with a corresponding randomized design with equal allocation to doses.

Background: A pooled analysis of randomized clinical trials data was performed to compare the rate of thrombotic cardiovascular events (thrombotic events) in patients taking the COX-2 selective inhibitor (coxib) etoricoxib, a traditional NSAID, or placebo., Methods: Data collected during all phase IIb/III etoricoxib clinical trials > or = 4 weeks in duration were evaluated. The pooled data set includes clinical information from approximately 6500 patient-years (PYs) of drug exposure in patients diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), osteoarthritis (OA), ankylosing spondylitis (AS), or chronic low back pain (CLBP). Patients were treated with either etoricoxib (> or = 60 mg/day), the traditional NSAIDs naproxen (1000 mg/day), ibuprofen (2400 mg/day), diclofenac (150 mg/day), or placebo. The Relative risks (RRs) based on time to first occurrence of a thrombotic event in the etoricoxib group versus the comparator traditional NSAIDs or versus placebo were determined using patient-level data., Results: In the pooled dataset, a total of 74 thrombotic events occurred in 69 patients. The RRs for thrombotic events were 1.11 (95%CI: 0.32, 3.81) for etoricoxib (N = 2818) versus placebo (N = 1767); 0.83 (95%CI: 0.26, 2.64) for etoricoxib (N = 1266) versus the combined non-naproxen traditional NSAID group (ibuprofen and diclofenac; N = 718); and 1.70 (95%CI: 0.91, 3.18) for etoricoxib (N = 1960) versus naproxen (N = 1497)., Conclusions: There was no discernible difference in the incidence of thrombotic events in patients treated with etoricoxib versus non-naproxen traditional NSAIDs in this limited dataset. A trend toward more events with etoricoxib versus naproxen was observed. Despite the limited dataset available for this pooled analysis, these results are consistent with findings for other coxibs.

Background & Aims: In human and animal studies, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs have been associated with a reduced risk of colorectal neoplasia. Although the underlying mechanisms are unknown, inhibition of cyclooxygenase (COX), particularly COX-2, is thought to play a role. We conducted a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial to assess whether use of the selective COX-2 inhibitor rofecoxib would reduce the risk of colorectal adenomas., Methods: We randomized 2587 subjects with a recent history of histologically confirmed adenomas to receive daily placebo or 25 mg rofecoxib. Randomization was stratified by baseline use of cardioprotective aspirin. Colonoscopic follow-up evaluation was planned for 1 and 3 years after randomization. The primary end point was all adenomas diagnosed during 3 years' treatment. In a modified intent-to-treat analysis, we computed the relative risk of any adenoma after randomization, using Mantel-Haenszel statistics stratified by low-dose aspirin use at baseline., Results: Adenoma recurrence was less frequent for rofecoxib subjects than for those randomized to placebo (41% vs 55%; P < .0001; relative risk [RR], 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69-0.83). Rofecoxib also conferred a reduction in risk of advanced adenomas (P < .01). The chemopreventive effect was more pronounced in the first year (RR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.57-0.73) than in the subsequent 2 years (RR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.71-0.93). As reported previously, rofecoxib was associated with increased risks of significant upper gastrointestinal events and serious thrombotic cardiovascular events., Conclusions: In this randomized trial, rofecoxib significantly reduced the risk of colorectal adenomas, but also had serious toxicity.

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are frequently needed for the treatment of patients with arthritis. However, long-term use of such drugs that are cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) selective inhibitors has been reported to increase cardiovascular risk as compared with placebo, whereas long-term, randomized controlled trials assessing the risk of traditional NSAIDs versus placebo are lacking. The MEDAL program is designed to provide a precise estimate of the relative cardiovascular event rates with the COX-2 selective inhibitor etoricoxib in comparison to the traditional NSAID diclofenac in patients with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis. The MEDAL program consists of 3 multinational, randomized, double-blind trials in patients with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis comparing etoricoxib (60 or 90 mg daily) to diclofenac (150 mg daily). All investigator-reported thrombotic cardiovascular events will be adjudicated by an independent panel of experts blinded to treatment assignment. The primary analysis is a noninferiority comparison of etoricoxib versus diclofenac for confirmed thrombotic cardiovascular events, defined as an upper bound of the 95% CI for a hazard ratio of < 1.30. With the planned 635 observed events from approximately 40,000 patient-years of exposure, using an estimated annual event rate of 1.30% in the control arm, the maximum annual event rate for etoricoxib that would meet the noninferiority criteria would be approximately 1.46%, yielding a hazard ratio of 1.12. A total of 34,701 patients have been enrolled in the MEDAL program. Roughly 13,000 and 10,000 patients will, respectively, have had > or = 18 or > or = 24 months of exposure, with maximum exposure of approximately 40 months. The MEDAL program will help to better define the risk-to-benefit ratio of 2 NSAIDs, that differ in their selectivity for COX-2, notably diclofenac and etoricoxib.

Objective: To compare the safety and efficacy of rofecoxib* to naproxen for the treatment of juvenile rheumatoid arthritis (JRA)., Methods: This was a 12-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, active comparator-controlled, non-inferiority study with a prespecified 52-week open-label active comparator-controlled extension. Children (ages 2-11 yrs) and adolescents (ages 12-17 yrs) received lower-dose (LD)-rofecoxib [0.3 mg/kg/day up to 12.5 mg/day (base study only)]; or higher-dose (HD)-rofecoxib (0.6 mg/kg/day up to 25 mg/day) or naproxen 15 mg/kg/day as oral suspensions. Adolescents received daily rofecoxib (LD) 12.5 (base study only) or (HD) 25 mg, or naproxen 15 mg/kg/day (maximum 1,000 mg/day) as tablets. The primary endpoint was the time-weighted average proportion of patients meeting the American College of Rheumatology Pediatric-30 (ACR Pedi 30) response criteria. A prespecified bound for the 95% confidence interval for the ratio of the percentage of ACR Pedi 30 responders was used to assess non-inferiority of treatment response between groups. Safety was assessed throughout the study., Results: A total of 310 patients ages 2-17 years (181 (3/4) age 11) were randomized to receive LD-rofecoxib (N=109), HD-rofecoxib (N=100), or naproxen (N=101). The ACR Pedi 30 response rates following 12 weeks of treatment were 46.2%, 54.5%, and 55.1%, respectively. The relative rates of response compared to naproxen were 0.81 (95% CI 0.61, 1.07) and 0.98 (95% CI 0.76, 1.26) for LD- and HD-rofecoxib, respectively. Both rofecoxib doses were not inferior to naproxen. Patients (N=227) entering the extension received HD-rofecoxib or naproxen with efficacy maintained during the extension. All treatments were generally well tolerated throughout the study., Conclusion: Daily treatment of JRA patients with rofecoxib up to 12.5 or 25 mg was well tolerated, providing sustained clinical effectiveness comparable to naproxen 15 mg/kg. *On September 30, 2004, Merck & Co., Inc. announced the voluntary worldwide withdrawal of rofecoxib from the market.

Objective: In spite of numerous studies demonstrating the serious gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity associated with non-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), many patients at high GI risk continue to receive prescriptions for these drugs, often without gastroprotective agents. Etoricoxib, a COX-2 specific inhibitor, was developed to provide similar efficacy and less GI toxicity than non-selective NSAIDs. We compared the incidence of upper GI Perforations, symptomatic gastroduodenal Ulcers, and upper GI Bleeding (PUBs) in a combined analysis of all randomized, double-blind, clinical trials of chronic treatment with etoricoxib versus NSAIDs completed by June 2003., Research Design and Methods: Data for 5441 individual subjects with osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, or ankylosing spondylitis were pooled from all 10 multinational etoricoxib trials completed by June 2003. Information on suspected PUBs was prospectively collected in all protocols, and all investigator-reported PUBs were judged by a blinded, external adjudication committee using pre-specified criteria. PUBs were analyzed using COX proportional hazards models using terms for treatment and known PUB risk factors., Main Outcome Measure: The incidence of confirmed PUBs among patients treated with etoricoxib 60 mg, 90 mg, or 120 mg (combined N=3226) was compared to that among patients treated with ibuprofen, diclofenac, or naproxen (combined N=2215)., Results: The incidence of PUBs over 44.3 months was significantly lower with etoricoxib vs. NSAIDs [cumulative incidence 1.24% vs. 2.48%, p < 0.001; rate/100 patient-years 1.00 vs. 2.47; relative risk 0.48, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.32, 0.73]. Results of analysis of events occurring during the first year of treatment and subgroup analyses were consistent with the primary result., Conclusions: Treatment with etoricoxib was associated with a significantly lower incidence of PUBs than was treatment with non-selective NSAIDs. The difference was consistent in subgroups of patients defined by a variety of known risk factors.

Background: Most nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are non-selective cyclooxygenase-1 (COX-1) and COX-2 inhibitors and are associated with upper gastrointestinal (GI) dyspeptic symptoms often resulting in GI co-medication usage or treatment discontinuation., Objective: To compare the rates of new use of gastroprotective agents and discontinuations due to dyspepsia with the COX-2 selective inhibitor etoricoxib compared with non-selective NSAIDs., Research Design and Methods: This pre-specified combined analysis used data from nine randomized, double-blind, controlled, clinical trials with etoricoxib in patients with osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, chronic low back pain, or ankylosing spondylitis. The cumulative incidences of (1) new use (new prescription or increased dose) of gastroprotective agents (GPA) and (2) discontinuation due to dyspeptic symptoms were compared among patients treated with etoricoxib (60 mg, 90 mg, or 120 mg daily) vs. non-selective NSAIDs (diclofenac 50 mg. t.i.d. or naproxen 500 mg. b.i.d.)., Results: The overall rates/100 patient-years for new use of GPAs were 9.1 and 13.0 for etoricoxib and NSAIDs, respectively (RR = 0.75; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.64, 0.89; p < 0.001). A benefit with etoricoxib was seen in the first 6 months when most new GPA usage occurred; after 6 months new use of GPAs was similar between etoricoxib and NSAIDs. The rates/100 patient-years of treatment discontinuation due to dyspeptic symptoms with etoricoxib and NSAIDs were 1.5 and 2.7, respectively (RR = 0.60; 95% CI 0.41, 0.87; p = 0.007). Analyses of placebo-controlled treatment periods showed significantly more new GPA use and more discontinuations due to dyspeptic symptoms with NSAIDs vs. placebo, but not with etoricoxib vs. placebo., Conclusion: In this combined analysis of clinical trials of patients with OA, RA, chronic low back pain, or AS, new use of gastroprotective agents was significantly lower with etoricoxib than with the comparator non-selective NSAIDs during the initial 6 months of treatment and similar thereafter. There were significantly fewer discontinuations for dyspeptic symptoms with etoricoxib than with NSAIDs over the entire follow-up period.

Background: Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are nonspecific cyclo-oxygenase (COX-1/COX-2) inhibitors and are associated with gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity attributable to COX-1 inhibition. Rofecoxib, a COX-2 specific inhibitor, was developed to provide similar efficacy and less GI toxicity than NSAIDs., Objective: To update the results of a previously performed analysis of the incidence of upper GI perforations, symptomatic gastroduodenal ulcers, and upper GI bleeding (PUBs) with rofecoxib compared with non-selective NSAIDs., Research Design and Methods: We compared the incidence of PUBs in a combined analysis of 20 randomized, double-blind, clinical trials of rofecoxib versus NSAIDs. Men and women (N = 17,072) from multinational trial sites with osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis were studied. There was no upper age limit in any of the trials. Investigator-reported PUBs were reviewed by a blinded, external adjudication committee using pre-specified criteria. The incidence of confirmed PUBs, the main outcome measure, among patients treated with rofecoxib 12.5 mg, 25 mg, or 50 mg (combined, N = 10 026) was compared to that among patients treated with ibuprofen, diclofenac, nabumetone, or naproxen (combined, N = 7046)., Results: The incidence of PUBs over 24.8 months was significantly lower with rofecoxib vs. NSAIDs (cumulative incidence 1.6% vs. 3.1%, p < 0.001; rate/100 patient-years 0.74 vs. 1.87; relative risk 0.36, 95% CI 0.24, 0.54). Results of subgroup analyses and comparisons of rofecoxib with individual NSAID comparators were consistent with the primary result, as was an analysis in patients with no PUB risk factors., Discussion: The analysis demonstrated a consistently lower incidence of confirmed PUBs with rofecoxib than with NSAIDs over 24.8 months. These results confirm those of a previous smaller combined analysis of clinical trials with rofecoxib vs. non-selective NSAIDs in OA patients only, in which the risk reduction for confirmed PUBs was approximately 50%. In addition, this analysis demonstrated risk reductions with rofecoxib vs. NSAIDs in risk subgroups and in patients who did not have any known risk factors for PUBs consistent with the primary result. Some of the studies in this analysis required scheduled endoscopies. Asymptomatic upper GI ulcers or bleeding diagnosed during scheduled procedures were not included in the primary endpoint, which may have caused a bias against rofecoxib., Conclusions: Treatment with rofecoxib was associated with a statistically significantly (p < 0.001) lower incidence of PUBs than was treatment with NSAIDs. The difference was maintained in subgroups of patients with risk factors, as well as in those with no risk factors, for PUBs.

Objective: Isolated studies have suggested that continuous measures of response may be better than predefined, dichotomous definitions (e.g., the American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement criteria [ACR20]) for discriminating between rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treatments. Our goal was to determine the statistical power of predefined dichotomous outcome measures (termed "a priori"), compared with that of continuous measures derived from trial data in which there was no predefined response threshold (termed "data driven"), and to evaluate the sensitivity to change of these measures in the context of different treatments and early versus later-stage disease. In order to generalize beyond results from a single trial, we performed simulation studies., Methods: We obtained summary data from trials comparing disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and from comparative coxib-placebo trials to test the power of 2 a priori outcomes, the ACR20 and improvement of the Disease Activity Score (DDAS), as well as 2 data-driven outcomes. We studied patients with early RA and those with later-stage RA (duration of <4 years and 4-9 years, respectively). We performed simulation studies, using the interrelationship of ACR core set measures in the trials to generate multiple trial data sets consistent with the original data., Results: The data-driven outcomes had greater power than did the a priori measures. The DMARD comparison was more powerful in early disease than in later-stage disease (the sample sizes needed to achieve 80% power for the most powerful test were 64 for early disease versus 100 for later disease), but the coxib-versus-placebo comparison was less powerful in early disease than in later disease (the sample sizes needed to achieve 80% power were 200 and 100, respectively). When the effects of treatment on core set items were small and/or inconsistent, power was reduced, particularly for a less broadly based outcome (e.g., DDAS) compared with the ACR20., Conclusion: The simulation studies demonstrate that data-driven outcome definitions can provide better sensitivity to change than does the ACR20 or DDAS. Using such methods would improve power, but at the expense of trial standardization. The studies also show how patient population and treatment characteristics affect the power of specific outcome measures in RA clinical trials, and provide quantification of those effects.

Objective/background: Efficacy in osteoarthritis (OA) is principally measured using subjective visual analogue (VAS) and/or Likert scale responses. The relationship between these two scales and their relative precision in discriminating active from placebo treatment in OA patients was determined., Design/methods: Patient overall pain assessment, and patient and investigator global assessments were each measured on a 100mm VAS and on a 0 to 4 point Likert scale in a 6-week OA study of rofecoxib vs placebo. The relationship between the VAS and Likert responses was examined graphically and via summary statistics. Analysis of variance was used to assess consistency of the VAS/Likert relationship over time and across the different endpoints. Precision was compared using effect size, and normality of VAS scale of measurement was assessed using the Shapiro-Wilk test., Results: Mean VAS scores and changes from baseline at individual time points were generally highly correlated with corresponding Likert responses (r-values generally approximately 0.7-0.8). The magnitude of VAS values and changes varied depending on endpoint, on the associated magnitude of increment of Likert score, and on the Likert baseline value (i.e., where on the Likert scale the change was occurring). Precision of VAS and Likert responses to detect difference between treatments was generally similar with effect sizes approximately 1. Normality and homogeneity of variance of VAS scores was most closely approximated by actual changes in comparison to percent change or log-transformed measures., Conclusions: VAS and Likert responses are highly correlated and yield similar precision for discriminating treatments in OA patients. Since Likert responses are easier to administer and interpret, they may be preferable to measure OA response.

Background: Non-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) inhibit both cyclo-oxygenase (COX) isoenzymes, i.e. COX-1 and COX-2. Rofecoxib, an agent that selectively inhibits COX-2, has been shown to provide equivalent anti-inflammatory and analgesic efficacy to comparator non-selective NSAIDs in osteoarthritis (OA) and other pain models with a significant improvement in gastrointestinal (GI) safety and tolerability. Based on renal physiology studies, it was predicted that rofecoxib would have renovascular effects similar to those observed with non-selective NSAIDs--specifically edema, blood pressure elevation, attenuation of the effects of ACE inhibitors, and (in rare circumstances), acute renal failure might be manifest in a small percentage of patients., Objective: To assess the renovascular safety profile of rofecoxib in OA patients compared to that of non-selective NSAID comparators., Methods: Renovascular adverse experiences (AEs) in over 5,000 participants in Phase IIb/III OA clinical trials were reviewed and compared between rofecoxib and non-selective NSAID comparators (ibuprofen 800mg tid, diclofenac 50 mg tid, nabumetone 1,500 mg qd)., Results: The incidence of lower extremity edema (LEE) AEs was generally similar between rofecoxib 12.5 mg/day, rofecoxib 25 mg/day, and non-selective comparator NSAIDs. Treatment discontinuations due to LEE AEs and clinically significant weight gain (> or = 2 kg) associated with LEE AEs were infrequent and generally similar in all active treatment groups. Congestive heart failure (CHF) was rare in all treatment groups. The incidence of hypertension AEs was low in all active treatment groups. Discontinuations due to hypertension AEs and hypertension AEs requiring a change or adjustment in blood pressure medications were similar and uncommon in all treatment groups. There was only a single report of acute renal failure (in the ibuprofen treatment group)., Conclusions: In the rofecoxib phase IIb/III OA database, the renal safety profile for rofecoxib, a selective inhibitor of COX-2, was generally similar to that of the comparator, non-selective NSAIDs which were studied.

Objective: Osteoarthritis (OA) clinical studies generally employ various endpoints to evaluate a spectrum of disease manifestations. Compared with individual endpoints, a composite measure might (1) provide a uniform outcome measure of OA efficacy with greater face validity, (2) address multiplicity, and (3) enhance precision. Combinations of endpoints were analyzed to investigate precision of composite measures of OA efficacy., Methods: We reanalyzed three 6 week, placebo controlled, double blind, parallel group studies (2 by the same protocol) of the cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) specific inhibitor rofecoxib. The average change from baseline at study weeks 2, 4, and 6 was assessed for 10 individual response variables, including patient and investigator global assessments, WOMAC 3.0V OA Index pain, stiffness and physical function subscales, graded study joint tenderness, and rescue analgesic use. Relationships among variables were evaluated using pairwise correlations and principal components analysis. The precision of variables to differentiate rofecoxib from placebo was evaluated using effect size (i.e., mean difference between rofecoxib versus placebo divided by pooled SD)., Results: Correlations among all pairs of response variables ranged from 0.5 to 0.9, except those with tenderness (0.4 to 0.6) and those with analgesic use (0.2 to 0.4). The first principal component explained about 70% of the total variability, with weights generally similar (0.17 for rescue analgesic use, 0.25 for tenderness, and 0.30 to 0.37 for the others). These results indicate that nearly all measures are closely related. Based on these results, various linear combinations of the 9 endpoints were formed and their precision to discriminate active treatment from placebo was compared to that of the individual endpoints. Effect sizes of the individual endpoints ranged from 0.6 to 1.1; those of the composites from 0.7 to 0.9. The results were very consistent between study protocols., Conclusion: In comparison to individual endpoints, composite analyses of OA clinical endpoints do not increase precision to discriminate active treatment from placebo.

Context: Patients treated with nonselective cyclooxygenase inhibitors (nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs [NSAIDs]) often experience dyspepsia and upper gastrointestinal (GI) adverse effects, and frequently require GI comedications and diagnostic procedures., Objective: This study combined existing data to test the hypothesis that GI comedications and GI diagnostic procedures occur less frequently in osteoarthritis (OA) patients treated with rofecoxib compared with nonselective NSAIDs., Design: Combined analysis of 8 randomized controlled clinical trials., Setting: Rheumatology and general practice clinics., Patients: Men and women aged 40 years and older with OA., Interventions: Random assignment to placebo (n = 514), rofecoxib (n = 3357; 12.5, 25, or 50 mg daily combined; average 24.7 mg), or NSAIDs (n = 1564; ibuprofen 800 mg thrice daily, diclofenac 50 mg thrice daily, or nabumetone 1500 mg daily, combined)., Main Outcome Measures: The cumulative incidence of patients using GI comedications (antacids, antispasmodics, antiflatulents, antiregurgitants, H2 antagonists, proton pump inhibitors, sucralfate, prostaglandins, other antiulcer therapy) and needing GI procedures (upper GI barium studies, upper or lower GI endoscopies) over 12 months., Results: Compared with those treated with NSAIDs, patients treated with rofecoxib had a significantly lower incidence of GI comedication use (17.5% vs 27.0%, P <.001) and GI procedures (3.3% vs 5.3%, P =.02) over 12 months. Similar results were seen in analyses of protocols with placebo; in these studies, rates of GI comedications and procedures were highest with NSAIDs, while those with rofecoxib and placebo were similar to each other., Conclusions: OA patients treated with rofecoxib for up to 12 months required significantly less GI comedication and significantly fewer GI procedures than those treated with NSAIDs.

Background: Highly selective inhibitors of the inducible cyclooxygenase-2 enzyme (coxibs) have been associated with less gastrotoxicity than nonselective NSAIDs in clinical studies., Aim: To evaluate the influence of risk factors for NSAID-induced gastrotoxicity on endoscopic and clinical ulcers in patients taking rofecoxib or ibuprofen., Methods: We analysed pooled data from two identical double-blind, randomized, 12-week endoscopy studies which compared the gastroduodenal toxicity of placebo (n=371), rofecoxib 25 mg (n=390), rofecoxib 50 mg (n=379), and ibuprofen 2400 mg daily (n=376) in patients with osteoarthritis. The potential risk factors evaluated were: age (< 65, > or = 65 years), sex, race (white, nonwhite), Helicobacter pylori status, presence of gastroduodenal erosions at baseline, a history of upper gastrointestinal disease, prior NSAID use within 30 days of study entry, and smoking. We also evaluated these factors for possible association with the development of clinically-evident gastrointestinal perforations, ulcers or bleeds over 12 weeks., Results: Across all treatment groups, the likelihood of detecting endoscopic ulcers, or of clinical presentation with a bleed, over 12 weeks was increased approximately 4-5-fold in patients with previous upper gastrointestinal disease (relative risk [95% confidence interval] of 4.2 [2.5, 7.1] for endoscopic ulcers; 3.8 [1.4, 10.6] for bleeds), or those with gastroduodenal erosions at baseline endoscopy (relative risk of 4.4 [2.6, 7.5] for endoscopic ulcers; 5.0 [1.9, 13.5] for bleeds). H. pylori infection did not increase the risk of endoscopic ulcers or bleeds (relative risk of 1.1 [0.8, 1.6] for endoscopic ulcers; 0.3 [0.1, 0.9] for bleeds). The risk factor sub-group effects were constant across all treatment groups, and the significantly higher incidence of ulcers with ibuprofen as compared to rofecoxib and placebo was maintained in all risk factor subgroups., Conclusions: Gastroduodenal erosions at baseline and a clinical history of upper gastrointestinal disease, but not H. pylori colonization, increased the risk for endoscopically-detected ulcers and clinical bleeds. Rofecoxib did not magnify the risk in any of the patient subgroups studied.

Background: Bodily pain and physical disability can negatively impact health-related quality of life (HRQL) in patients with osteoarthritis (OA)., Objective: To assess the effects of treatment with a new agent, rofecoxib, on HRQL in patients with OA., Study Design: Randomized, double-blind, 6-week clinical trial comparing treatment with rofecoxib, 5 to 50 mg, with placebo in 672 patients with OA of the hip or knee., Main Outcome Measure: Patient HRQL was assessed at baseline and at the end of treatment using the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36)., Results: At 6 weeks, mean change from baseline in all SF-36 mental and physical health domain scores demonstrated significant improvement with rofecoxib use (P < .05 for all doses for all SF-36 domains), with evidence of a dose-response relation. Improvements in mental and physical HRQL domains with rofecoxib treatment were significantly greater than those with placebo treatment (P < .05 for each dose of rofecoxib vs placebo for all domains except general health) and highly correlated with improvements observed using disease-specific OA outcome measures such as the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index-visual Analog 3.0 OA index pain and physical function subscales. The effect of rofecoxib vs placebo treatment on mental health largely disappeared after adjustment for improvement in OA disease-specific measures., Conclusions: Rofecoxib treatment increased physical and mental HRQL domain scores on the SF-36. Improvements in mental health with rofecoxib use primarily resulted from effective treatment of OA (i.e., reduction in pain and improvement in physical function).

Objective: To determine the minimal perceptible clinical improvement (MPCI) in patients with osteoarthritis (OA) with the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) questionnaire, and patient and investigator global assessment of disease status in randomized clinical trials for treatment of OA., Methods: Subjects with OA of the knee or hip were randomized to receive either rofecoxib 12.5 or 25 mg once daily, ibuprofen 800 mg 3 times daily, or placebo for 6 weeks. The WOMAC and global assessments were completed at baseline and Weeks 2, 4, and 6. A patient global assessment of response to therapy (0 to 4 scale) was used to "anchor" the WOMAC scores. MPCI was defined as the difference in mean change from baseline in WOMAC (100 mm normalized visual analog scale, VAS) between patients with 0 = "None" global response to therapy and patients with 1 = "Poor" global response to therapy., Results: MPCI was determined to be 9.7, 9.3, and 10.0 mm for the WOMAC pain, physical function and stiffness subscales, respectively, and 11.1 mm for WOMAC question 1: Pain walking on a flat surface. The MPCI for the investigator was 0.4 with investigator assessment of disease status reported on a 0 to 4 Likert scale. Of note, the estimated MPCI for the WOMAC and investigator globals were similar irrespective of treatment, sex, age, or geographic region., Conclusion: In this analysis, mean changes of roughly 9 to 12 mm (100 mm normalized VAS) on WOMAC scales were perceptible changes to patients with hip and knee OA. A mean decrease of 0.4 in global disease status (0 to 4 Likert scale) as assessed by the investigator corresponded to the patients' MPCI. Understanding the minimal perceptible differences may permit a better assessment of the clinical relevance of therapeutic interventions in OA.

Background: Most nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are nonselective cyclooxygenase (COX-1 and COX-2) inhibitors and are associated with a variety of upper gastrointestinal (GI) tract symptoms. The roles of COX-1 and COX-2 in the pathogenesis of these symptoms are unclear. To test whether COX-2 inhibition with rofecoxib would have greater GI tolerability than nonselective COX-1 and COX-2 inhibition, we compared the incidences of (1) treatment discontinuations for GI adverse events (AEs) and (2) prespecified dyspeptic-type GI AEs among patients with osteoarthritis treated with rofecoxib vs NSAIDs., Methods: A prespecified, combined analysis of investigator-reported GI AEs in all 8 double-blind, randomized, phase 2b/3 osteoarthritis trials of rofecoxib was conducted. Patients included men and women with osteoarthritis (N = 5435); there was no upper age limit for entry. Treatments tested included rofecoxib, 12.5, 25, or 50 mg (combined), vs ibuprofen, diclofenac, or nabumetone (combined). Primary outcomes were the time (by survival analysis) to (1) treatment discontinuation due to GI AEs and (2) first reported dyspeptic-type GI AE. Between-treatment comparisons were made by log-rank test., Results: The number of treatment discontinuations caused by GI AEs during 12 months was significantly lower (P=.02) with rofecoxib vs NSAIDs (8.2 vs 12.0 per 100 patient-years; relative risk, 0.70; 95% confidence interval, 0.52-0.94). The incidence of prespecified dyspeptic-type GI AEs during the first 6 months was significantly lower (P=.02) with rofecoxib vs NSAIDs (69.3 vs 85.2 per 100 patient-years; relative risk, 0.85; 95% confidence interval, 0.74-0.97). However, the difference between treatments in dyspeptic-type GI AEs was attenuated after 6 months., Conclusion: Rofecoxib was associated with a lower incidence of treatment discontinuations due to GI AEs over 12 months and a lower incidence of dyspeptic-type GI AEs over 6 months than treatment with nonselective COX inhibitors, or NSAIDs. Arch Intern Med. 2000;160:2998-3003

Purpose: Gastrointestinal microbleeding, as assessed by the measurement of (51)chromium-labeled red blood cells, is a marker of the mucosal injury associated with the use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. This study tested the hypotheses that cyclooxygenase-2 specific inhibition with rofecoxib would cause less fecal blood loss than a therapeutic dose of ibuprofen and would be equivalent to placebo., Subjects and Methods: In this randomized, double-blind group study, gastrointestinal blood loss was assessed by measurement of fecal (51)chromium radioactivity during a 1-week placebo baseline period and during 4 weeks of treatment with rofecoxib (25 mg or 50 mg once daily), ibuprofen (800 mg three times daily), or placebo in 67 healthy subjects. Gastrointestinal blood loss during treatment weeks 2 to 4 (versus the baseline period) was expressed as the geometric mean ratio of fecal radioactivity in weeks 2 to 4 compared with baseline., Results: Ibuprofen caused significantly (P <0.001) greater gastrointestinal blood loss (geometric mean ratio of 5.2, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.2 to 6.3) than the 25-mg dose of rofecoxib (2.6, 95% CI: 2.2 to 3.1), the 50-mg dose of rofecoxib (2.6, 95% CI: 2.2 to 3.0), or placebo (2.1, 95% CI: 1.8 to 2.5). In contrast, gastrointestinal blood loss with both doses of rofecoxib were equivalent to placebo by a predetermined clinical similarity bound., Conclusions: In healthy subjects, treatment with rofecoxib, at 2 to 4 times the doses that are currently recommended for the treatment of patients with osteoarthritis, produced significantly less fecal blood loss than a therapeutic dose of ibuprofen and was equivalent to placebo.

Context: Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-induced gastrointestinal (GI) toxic effects, such as upper GI tract perforations, symptomatic gastroduodenal ulcers, and upper GI tract bleeding (PUBs), are thought to be attributable to cyclooxygenase 1 (COX-1) inhibition. Rofecoxib specifically inhibits COX-2 and has demonstrated a low potential for causing upper GI injury., Objective: To compare the incidence of PUBs in patients with osteoarthritis treated with rofecoxib vs NSAIDs., Design: Prespecified analysis of all 8 double-blind, randomized phase 2b/3 rofecoxib osteoarthritis trials conducted from December 1996 through March 1998, including one 6-week dose-ranging study, two 6-week efficacy studies vs ibuprofen and placebo, two 1-year efficacy studies vs diclofenac, two 6-month endoscopy studies vs ibuprofen and placebo, and one 6-week efficacy study vs nabumetone and placebo., Setting: Multinational sites. Participants Osteoarthritis patients (N = 5435; mean age, 63 years [range, 38-94 years]; 72.9% women)., Interventions: Rofecoxib, 12.5, 25, or 50 mg/d (n = 1209, 1603, and 545, respectively, combined) vs ibuprofen, 800 mg 3 times per day (n = 847), diclofenac, 50 mg 3 times per day (n = 590); or nabumetone, 1500 mg/d (n = 127) (combined)., Main Outcome Measure: Cumulative incidence of PUBs for rofecoxib vs NSAIDs, based on survival analysis of time to first PUB diagnosis, using PUBs that met pre-specified criteria judged by a blinded, external adjudication committee., Results: The incidence of PUBs over 12 months was significantly lower with rofecoxib vs NSAIDs (12-month cumulative incidence, 1.3% vs 1.8%; P = .046; rate per 100 patient-years, 1.33 vs 2.60; relative risk, 0.51; 95% confidence interval, 0.26-1.00). The cumulative incidence of dyspeptic GI adverse experiences was also lower with rofecoxib vs NSAIDS over 6 months (23.5% vs 25.5%; P = .02), after which the incidence rates converged., Conclusion: In a combined analysis of 8 trials of patients with osteoarthritis, treatment with rofecoxib was associated with a significantly lower incidence of PUBs than treatment with NSAIDs.

Background: Compared with currently available NSAIDs (which inhibit COX-1 and COX-2 isoforms of cyclooxygenase), MK-0966 (a specific COX-2 inhibitor) is expected to cause less gastrointestinal toxicity., Aim: To compare the effect on the upper gastrointestinal mucosae of a high dose of MK-0966 with that of conventional doses of ibuprofen and aspirin., Methods: Healthy subjects (n = 170; age range 18-54 years) with endoscopically normal gastric and duodenal mucosa were randomized to either MK-0966 250 mg q.d. (n = 51), ibuprofen 800 mg t.d.s. (n = 51), aspirin 650 mg q.d.s. (n = 17), or placebo (n = 51) in this 7-day, double-blind, parallel-group study. The mucosae were evaluated by endoscopy using a predefined scale; scores could range from 0 to 4. The primary end-point was the percentage of subjects who developed a mucosal score >/= 2 (i.e. the development of one or more erosions). To evaluate COX-1 activity, serum thromboxane B2 levels were determined in a subset of the population., Results: The percentage of subjects who developed a mucosal score >/= 2 in the MK-0966 group (12%) was significantly lower (P < 0.001) than that in the ibuprofen (71%) and aspirin (94%) groups, and was similar to that in the placebo group (8%). Only ibuprofen and aspirin significantly (P < 0.0001) reduced baseline thromboxane B2 levels. All treatments were generally well tolerated., Conclusions: In this acute short-term endoscopic study, MK-0966 250 mg q.d. (a dose at least 10 times higher than that demonstrated to reduce the signs and symptoms of osteoarthritis) produced significantly less gastrointestinal mucosal damage than either ibuprofen 800 mg t.d.s. or aspirin 650 mg q.d.s. and was comparable to placebo in this regard.

Previous studies have indicated the existence of common mechanisms regulating sleep and somatotropic activity. In the present study, we investigated the effects of prolonged treatment with a novel, orally active, growth hormone secretagogue (MK-677) on sleep quality in healthy young and older adults. Eight young subjects (18-30 years) followed a double-blind, placebo-controlled, three-period crossover design. Each subject participated in three 7-day treatment periods (with bedtime drug administration), presented in random (Latin square) order, and separated by at least 14 days. Doses were 5 and 25 mg MK-677 and matching placebo. Six older subjects, ages 65-71 years, each participated in two 14-day treatment periods (with bedtime drug administration) separated by a 14-day washout. Doses were 2 and 25 mg MK-677 during the first and second periods, respectively. Baseline sleep and hormonal data were obtained on the 2 days preceding the beginning of the first 14-day treatment period. In young subjects, high-dose MK-677 treatment resulted in an approximately 50% increase in the duration of stage IV and in a more than 20% increase in REM sleep as compared to placebo (p < 0.05). The frequency of deviations from normal sleep decreased from 42% under placebo to 8% under high-dose MK-677 (p < 0.03). In older adults, treatment with MK-677 was associated with a nearly 50% increase in REM sleep (p < 0.05) and a decrease in REM latency (p < 0.02). The frequency of deviations from normal sleep also decreased (p < 0.02). The present findings suggest that MK-677 may simultaneously improve sleep quality and correct the relative hyposomatotropism of senescence.

The effects of urinary symptoms on health-related quality of life (HRQL) are important in therapeutic decision making. Few have evaluated the treatment effects on HRQL in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), even though increased urinary symptoms are associated with greater worry, bother, and interference with living activities. We report on patient assessments of such disease-specific measures as well as general HRQL measures from two placebo-controlled clinical trials of finasteride in the treatment of symptomatic BPH. Patients treated with finasteride appeared to have greater improvement than placebo-treated patients in disease-specific measures and in patient global assessment. The treated group appeared to have a greater mean increase in sexual domain scores. As expected, general measures (health rating, life satisfaction, ladder of life) changed little. Thus, treatment with finasteride appears to reduce bother, worry, and activity interference due to symptoms but in a small percentage of men may lead to slightly reduced sexual function.

To assess the effects of prolonged administration of a novel analog of GH-releasing peptide (MK-677), nine healthy young men participated in a randomized, double blind, three-period cross-over comparison of orally administered placebo and 5- and 25-mg doses of MK-677. Each period involved bedtime administration of the drug for 7 consecutive days. At the end of each period, plasma levels of insulin-like growth factor I (IGF-I) and IGF-binding protein-3 (IGFBP-3) were measured at 0745 h, and 24-h profiles of plasma GH and cortisol were obtained at 15-min intervals together with the 24-h urinary excretion of free cortisol. Profiles of plasma free cortisol were calculated at hourly intervals. The amounts of GH secreted were similar in all three conditions, but GH pulse frequency was increased with both dosages of the drug, primarily because of an increase in the number of low amplitude pulses. Plasma IGF-I levels were increased in a dose-dependent manner, whereas IGFBP-3 levels were increased only with the highest dosage. There was a positive relationship between GH pulse frequency and IGF-I increase. Except for an advance in the nocturnal nadir and in the morning elevation, MK-677 had no effect on cortisol profiles. In particular, 24-h mean levels of plasma total and free cortisol and urinary excretion of free cortisol were similar under all conditions. The present data suggest that the use of MK-677 for the treatment of relative somatotropic deficiency, particularly in older adults compromised by such deficiency, deserves further investigation.

Combinatorial chemistry is gaining wide appeal as a technique for generating molecular diversity. Among the many combinatorial protocols, the split/recombine method is quite popular and particularly efficient at generating large libraries of compounds. In this process, polymer beads are equally divided into a series of pools and each pool is treated with a unique fragment; then the beads are recombined, mixed to uniformity, and redivided equally into a new series of pools for the subsequent couplings. The deviation from the ideal equimolar distribution of the final products is assessed by a special overall relative error, which is shown to be related to the Pearson statistic. Although the split/recombine sampling scheme is quite different from those used in analysis of categorical data, the Pearson statistic is shown to still follow a chi2 distribution. This result allows us to derive the required number of beads such that, with 99% confidence, the overall relative error is controlled to be less than a pregiven tolerable limit L1. In this paper, we also discuss another criterion, which determines the required number of beads so that, with 99% confidence, all individual relative errors are controlled to be less than a pregiven tolerable limit L2 (0 < L2 < 1).

We developed a questionnaire to assess the effect of finasteride on symptoms of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) by modifying that of Boyarsky (1977). To validate the questionnaire, a cohort study was conducted in 2 groups of patients with BPH and 3 control groups without BPH. The BPH groups were: (1) 34 patients before TURP (transurethral resection of the prostate), average age 68 years; (2) 65 patients after TURP, average age 68 years; (3) 40 patients after other nonserious nonurological surgery, average age 50 years; (4) 14 healthy non-BPH volunteers, average age 58 years; and (5) 73 healthy non-BPH volunteers, average age 37 years. The questionnaire was administered once to all subjects, and a subset responded to a second administration. Mean total symptoms scores (TSS) from the initial questioning were 6.4, 3.2, 2.9, 2.6, and 1.6 for the 5 groups, respectively (pooled SD = 3.3); mean total troublesome symptoms scores (TTSS) were 4.8, 2.1, 1.4, 1.1, and 0.6, respectively (pooled SD = 2.2). All other groups were significantly less symptomatic and troubled than the pre-TURP group, and all surgical groups were significantly more so than the younger volunteer group. These data demonstrate the discriminant validity of the questionnaire. Corroborating prior data [Gregg et al., 1990], responsiveness was shown by the 3.7-point mean TSS improvement in response to TURP, which was significantly different from the near-zero changes in the other groups. Reproducibility was shown by kappa statistics being nearly all greater than 0.75 and an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.64; construct validity and reliability were demonstrated by correlation (r = 0.7) with a general urination problems question; and internal consistency was documented by Cronbach's alpha values of approximately 0.6. We conclude that this questionnaire is a useful and validated tool for assessing BPH symptoms.

A prodrug of methyldopa, the pivaloyloxyethyl (POE) ester, was administered orally to healthy human volunteers at doses equivalent to 500 and 1000 mg of methyldopa and was compared to oral and intravenous doses of methyldopa. The time courses of availability of methyldopa to the general circulation were compared and contrasted with the model-independent estimates of total systemic availability. The POE ester of methyldopa is completely hydrolyzed on the first pass; delivery of methyldopa to the general circulation was faster, more uniform, and more extensive compared to orally administered methyldopa. The systemic availability of methyldopa averaged 64% of the dose with a coefficient of variation (CV) of 15% for the prodrug treatments compared to 27% of the dose with a CV of 63% for methyldopa. First-pass metabolism of drug to the mono-O-sulfate conjugate of methyldopa was lower for the POE ester than for methyldopa.

A 4-week, double-blind, controlled multi-centre study was carried out in 235 patients with active rheumatoid arthritis to compare the efficacy and tolerance of 500 mg or 1000 mg diflunisal per day administered once daily, in the evening, or in divided, twice daily dosage. The results showed that diflunisal given once daily was at least as effective as diflunisal given twice daily. Day pain, morning stiffness, average grip strength and erythrocyte sedimentation rate improved similarly in both groups. Significant differences favouring the once-daily regimen were observed for improvement in night pain, Ritchie index and overall assessments by patient and investigator. Adverse experiences were slightly more common in patients taking diflunisal once daily (24% vs 19%) but this difference was not significant. It is concluded, therefore, that diflunisal once-a-day is an alternative regimen for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. It is at least as effective as the twice-daily regimen and may provide additional convenience to the patient and potential enhancement of compliance.

Enalapril, the ethyl ester of a potent angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor, enalaprilat, was administered to healthy volunteers as a capsule containing 10 mg of the maleate salt, every 24h for eight doses. Serum profiles show little accumulation of enalaprilat following eight daily doses of enalapril maleate. An average effective half-life for accumulation of approximately 11h was calculated from urine data. Comparison of observed 24-h urinary recoveries of enalaprilat to predicted steady-state recovery indicates that an 'average' steady state for enalaprilat is attained by the third or fourth dose of enalapril maleate. Statistical comparison of daily urinary recoveries, as well as Cmin values for enalaprilat, confirm this. Observed fluctuations in serum and urine data during apparent steady state suggest some day-to-day variability in the absorption of enalapril maleate and/or its hydrolysis to enalaprilat. An accumulation ratio of 1.3 for enalaprilat was calculated from the predicted steady-state urinary recovery and observed urinary recovery for dose one.

Following hemodynamic evaluation using invasive and noninvasive methods, 73 patients were treated in an open, uncontrolled, multicenter study with single oral doses of enalapril maleate 1.25 to 40 mg until the optimal dose for each patient (based upon hemodynamic response) was achieved. Diuretics were withheld and reinstituted only if necessary. Hemodynamic measurements were made at 0 (predrug), 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12 and 24 hours postdrug. Patients were discharged on their optimal dose, treated 1 to 4 months and then rehospitalized for repeat hemodynamic measurements. The optimal enalapril single dose was associated with the following mean peak responses: increased cardiac index 42% (SE = 6) and decreased pulmonary capillary wedge pressure 40% (SE = 3), systemic vascular resistance 39% (SE = 2), and mean arterial pressure 23% (SE = 1.5). These changes persisted during chronic therapy. Chronic treatment with enalapril also improved exercise capacity 40% (P less than 0.01), ejection fraction 18% (P less than 0.05) and clinical status (N.Y.H.A. functional class, P less than 0.01). Ten and 20 mg/day, taken as once- or twice-daily regimens, were the most commonly effective doses.