Primary studies included in this broad synthesis

loading
46 articles (44 Referencias) Revertir Estudificar

Estudio primario

No clasificado

Autores Essex MN , O'Connell MA , Behar R , Bao W
Revista International journal of rheumatic diseases
Año 2016
Cargando información sobre las referencias
AIM: To compare the efficacy, tolerability and safety of celecoxib, naproxen and placebo in Asian patients with osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee. METHOD: Patients of Asian descent with knee OA, aged ≥ 45 years, in a flare state with a functional capacity classification of I-III, received celecoxib 200 mg once daily, naproxen 500 mg twice daily or placebo, for 6 weeks. The change in Patient's Assessment of Arthritis Pain (week 6 vs. baseline) was the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints, including Patient's and Physician's Global Assessments of Arthritis, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities OA Index (WOMAC), use of complementary and alternative medicines, incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and measurements of upper gastrointestinal tolerability, were also assessed. RESULTS: Three hundred and sixty-seven patients were randomized: 145 to celecoxib, 144 to naproxen and 78 to placebo. Celecoxib was as effective as naproxen in reducing OA pain (least squares mean change from baseline in visual analogue scale score [standard error] -37.1 [2.0] for celecoxib and -37.5 [2.0] for naproxen). Patient's and Physician's Global Assessment of Arthritis, WOMAC scores, Pain Satisfaction Scale and Patient Health Questionnaire-9 showed statistically significant improvement in active treatment groups versus placebo, with the exception of naproxen WOMAC scores. Treatment-related TEAEs occurred in 19 (13%), 34 (24%) and six (8%) patients in the celecoxib, naproxen and placebo groups, respectively. CONCLUSION: Celecoxib and naproxen were comparable in their effects to reduce the signs and symptoms of knee OA in Asian patients. Celecoxib was shown to be safe and well tolerated in this patient population.

Hilo de publicación

Este hilo de publicación incluye 2 referencias

Estudio primario

No clasificado

Revista International Journal of Rheumatic Diseases
Año 2014
Cargando información sobre las referencias

Hilo de publicación

Este hilo de publicación incluye 2 referencias

Hilo de publicación

Este hilo de publicación incluye 2 referencias

Estudio primario

No clasificado

Autores Pareek A , Chandurkar N
Revista Current medical research and opinion
Año 2013
Cargando información sobre las referencias
Abstract OBJECTIVE: To compare the gastrointestinal (GI) tolerability and efficacy of aceclofenac with diclofenac in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, multicentric, comparative study, post 7 day placebo washout, patients were randomly allocated to receive either aceclofenac 100 mg b.i.d. or diclofenac 50 mg t.i.d. and were followed up for the next 6 weeks. The GI tolerability was evaluated based on the incidence and severity of predefined GI adverse events (AEs), number of gastroprotective agents (GPAs) consumed by patients, and discontinuation from the study due to GI AEs. The secondary outcome included assessment of pain intensity using a visual analogue scale (VAS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) score, pain relief score, and investigators' and patients' overall assessments of response to study drugs. RESULTS: A total of 591 (aceclofenac group: 297; diclofenac group: 294) patients were enrolled. The cumulative incidence of GI AEs for dyspepsia (28.1% versus 37.9%; p = 0.014), abdominal pain (19% versus 26.3%; p = 0.037), overall incidence of predefined GI AEs (57.3% versus 73.6%; p < 0.001) and number of patients reporting GI AEs (28.9% versus 36.5%; p = 0.053) were significantly less in the aceclofenac group compared to the diclofenac group throughout the study. All the AEs were mild to moderate in intensity. Fewer patients from the aceclofenac group required GPAs compared to the diclofenac group (28.17% versus 33.68%; p = 0.155). During first 7 days of therapy, >90% of patients from aceclofenac group did not require GPAs. There were no differences between the study groups in the various pain assessment scales when measured during the study period. CONCLUSION: Aceclofenac was better tolerated in terms of incidence and severity of GI AEs and GPA requirement and was as efficacious as diclofenac. The need for GPAs increased with the increase in duration of treatment with NSAIDs. Hence, it could be concluded that usual practice of co-prescription of GPAs with aceclofenac could be avoided to improve patient compliance and reduce cost of treatment. However, long term trials with endoscopic evaluation in the wider population are required to assess the GI tolerability of aceclofenac and diclofenac in detail.

Estudio primario

No clasificado

Revista The Journal of international medical research
Año 2012
Cargando información sobre las referencias
OBJECTIVE: This 6-week, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study compared the analgesic efficacy, tolerability and safety of celecoxib, naproxen and placebo in African Americans with osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee. METHODS: A total of 322 patients aged ≥ 45 years with OA of the knee in a flare state received 200 mg celecoxib orally once daily, 500 mg naproxen orally twice daily or placebo for 6 weeks. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in the Patient's Assessment of Arthritis Pain. RESULTS: Celecoxib was as effective as naproxen in reducing OA pain. Similar efficacy was observed in many of the secondary outcome measures. Celecoxib was well tolerated and demonstrated favorable upper gastro - intestinal tolerability. Improvements in outcome measures were numerically greater in the active treatment groups compared with the placebo group, but did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: Celecoxib was as effective as naproxen in relieving OA pain in African Americans and was well tolerated. Few significant differences were observed between active treatments and placebo, possibly because of a strong placebo effect. © SAGE Publications Ltd 2012.

Estudio primario

No clasificado

Autores Essex MN , Bhadra P , Sands GH
Revista The Journal of international medical research
Año 2012
Cargando información sobre las referencias
OBJETIVO: Evaluar la eficacia y la tolerabilidad de celecoxib frente a naproxeno en pacientes con osteoartritis (OA) de rodilla. MÉTODOS: 6 meses, aleatorizado, doble ciego, doble simulación se llevó a cabo en 47 centros en los EE.UU.. Los pacientes con artrosis de rodilla fueron asignados al azar para recibir 200 mg de celecoxib oral una vez al día o 500 mg de naproxeno por vía oral dos veces al día. La variable principal se definió como una mejora del 20% desde el inicio hasta 6 meses en Western Ontario y McMaster Universidades puntuación total (WOMAC) OA. RESULTADOS: Un total de 586 de cada 589 pacientes asignados al azar recibieron al menos una dosis de celecoxib (n = 294) o el naproxeno (n = 292). El criterio principal de valoración (tasa de respuesta de 6 meses) se logró un 52,7% y el 49,7% de los pacientes en los grupos de tratamiento con celecoxib y naproxeno, respectivamente. Significativamente menos interrupciones debido a eventos adversos gastrointestinales ocurrieron en pacientes que recibieron celecoxib que en los que recibieron naproxeno (4,1% frente a 15,1%, respectivamente). Conclusiones: Durante el período de estudio 6 meses, celecoxib proporcionado mejoras similares en los síntomas de OA a naproxeno. Además, celecoxib proporciona una mejor tolerabilidad gastrointestinal superior que el naproxeno.

Estudio primario

No clasificado

Autores Park KS , Choi JJ , Kim WU , Min JK , Park SH , Cho CS
Revista Clinical rheumatology
Año 2012
Cargando información sobre las referencias
The purpose of this study is to compare the efficacy of tramadol 37.5 mg/acetaminophen 325 mg combination tablets (tramadol/APAP) with that of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) as maintenance therapy following tramadol/APAP and NSAID combination therapy in knee osteoarthritis (OA) pain which was inadequately controlled by NSAIDs. Subjects with knee OA for over 1 year and moderate pain (numerical rating scale [NRS] ≥5) despite at least 4 weeks' NSAID therapy (meloxicam 7.5 mg or 15 mg qd or aceclofenac 100 mg bid) received tramadol/APAP add-on (combination with NSAID) for 4 weeks. Thereafter, subjects with significant pain improvement (NRS <4) were randomized to receive either tramadol/APAP or NSAID for 8 weeks. On days 29 and 57, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) OA index score was measured. Secondary measures included pain intensity (NRS), pain relief score, and subjects' and investigators' overall medication assessments. Of 143 subjects enrolled, 112 completed the 4-week tramadol/APAP and NSAID combination phase and 97 (67.8%) experienced significant pain improvement. Of the 97 subjects randomized, 36 in tramadol/APAP group and 47 in NSAID group completed the 8-week comparator study. On days 29 and 57, WOMAC scores and pain intensities did not increase in both groups compared to measurements immediately after the combination therapy. At these two time points, there were no significant differences in WOMAC scores, pain intensities, and other secondary measures between the two groups. Overall adverse event rates were similar in both groups. Tramadol/APAP add-on significantly improved knee OA pain which had been inadequately controlled by NSAIDs. In those subjects who showed favorable response to tramadol/APAP and NSAID combination therapy, both tramadol/APAP and NSAIDs were effective at maintaining the pain-reduced state and there was no significant difference in efficacy between tramadol/APAP and NSAIDs.

Hilo de publicación

Este hilo de publicación incluye 2 referencias