Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21830840›Full record

ArticleDrug safety2011

Randomized controlled trials of COX-2 inhibitors: an analysis of doses used and trends over time to investigate implications for comparative safety.

Gudrun Stefansdottir, Marie L De Bruin, Mirjam J Knol, Diederick E Grobbee, Hubert G M Leufkens

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Drug safety, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Gudrun StefansdottirJulius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Marie L De Bruin
Mirjam J Knol
Diederick E Grobbee
Hubert G M Leufkens
University Medical Center Utrecht · NLPharmo Institute · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNaproxen, ibuprofen and diclofenac are frequently used as comparators in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the safety and efficacy of cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 inhibitors. Different comparator doses may influence the results of RCTs. It has been hypothesized that RCTs of COX-2 inhibitors where different doses were administered resulted in different conclusions about the cardiovascular safety of COX-2 inhibitors. High comparator doses may let COX-2 inhibitors look better in terms of safety, while low comparator doses may result in the opposite.

objectiveThe aim of the study was to compare doses of COX-2 inhibitors and comparator drugs used in RCTs, and to investigate dose changes over time. STUDY DESIGN AND

methodsWe searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, The Cochrane Library for published Cochrane reviews, Clinicaltrials.gov and PubMed, for RCTs between 1995 and 2009 in which celecoxib or rofecoxib were compared with naproxen, ibuprofen or diclofenac. All articles labelled as RCTs mentioning rofecoxib or celecoxib and one or more of the comparator drugs in the title and/or abstract were included. We extracted information on doses of both non-selective NSAIDs and selective COX-2 inhibitors used in the RCTs, and study year. The Mann-Whitney test was used to compare the difference in median dose in rofecoxib and celecoxib RCTs. Linear regression was performed to evaluate trends in dosage over time. For comparisons between COX-2-inhibitors, celecoxib trials after the 2004 market withdrawal of rofecoxib were excluded.

resultsMedian defined daily dose (DDD) of celecoxib (2.00) was higher than the median DDD of rofecoxib (1.00; p < 0.001), whereas non-selective NSAID doses were comparable in rofecoxib (2.00) and celecoxib (2.00; p = 0.988) studies. In both groups, the non-selective NSAID doses decreased over time (B [regression coefficient] = -0.07; p = 0.28, and B = -0.054; p = 0.09, respectively). In contrast, the DDDs of rofecoxib increased slightly over time (B = 0.037; p = 0.28), whereas the celecoxib DDDs decreased over time (B = -0.081; p = 0.09). In due course, the contrasts between DDDs of COX-2 inhibitors and non-selective NSAIDs converged, both in rofecoxib and celecoxib RCTs; therefore, doses have become more comparable in recent years because of differences in steepness of two decreasing dose trends in the case of celecoxib, and opposing dose trends in the case of rofecoxib.

conclusionsAlthough the dose trends over time differed for RCTs comparing rofecoxib and celecoxib with diclofenac, ibuprofen or naproxen, the results of our study do not support the hypothesis that dose trends influenced the decision to continue marketing celecoxib after the withdrawal of rofecoxib because the overall median DDD of celecoxib was substantially higher than the median DDD of rofecoxib, while non-selective NSAID DDDs were comparable.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedArthritis, RheumatoidCyclooxygenase 2 InhibitorsGastrointestinal DiseasesHumansMiddle AgedOsteoarthritisRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicStatistics as TopicYoung AdultCyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID21830840
OpenAlexW2328023341

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.