Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26768273›Full record

ArticleZeitschrift fur Rheumatologie2016

Relative efficacy and tolerability of etoricoxib, celecoxib, and naproxen in the treatment of osteoarthritis : A Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials based on patient withdrawal.

Gwan Gyu Song, Young Ho Seo, Jae-Hoon Kim, Sung Jae Choi, Jong Dae Ji, Young Ho Lee

Abstract readNetwork Meta-Analysis
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Zeitschrift fur Rheumatologie, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Gwan Gyu SongDivision of Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University Anam Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, 73, Inchon-ro, Seongbuk-gu, 136-705, Seoul, Korea.
Young Ho SeoDivision of Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University Anam Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, 73, Inchon-ro, Seongbuk-gu, 136-705, Seoul, Korea.
Jae-Hoon KimDivision of Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University Anam Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, 73, Inchon-ro, Seongbuk-gu, 136-705, Seoul, Korea.
Sung Jae ChoiDivision of Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University Anam Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, 73, Inchon-ro, Seongbuk-gu, 136-705, Seoul, Korea.
Jong Dae JiDivision of Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University Anam Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, 73, Inchon-ro, Seongbuk-gu, 136-705, Seoul, Korea.
Young Ho LeeDivision of Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University Anam Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, 73, Inchon-ro, Seongbuk-gu, 136-705, Seoul, Korea. lyhcgh@korea.ac.kr.
Korea University · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsThis study aimed to assess the relative efficacy and tolerability of etoricoxib, celecoxib, and naproxen at recommended dosages in patients with osteoarthritis (OA).

methodsRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining the efficacy and tolerability of etoricoxib 30-60 mg, celecoxib 200-400 mg, and naproxen 1000 mg, based on the number of patient withdrawals among those with OA, were included in this network meta-analysis. We performed a Bayesian random-effects network meta-analysis to combine direct and indirect evidence from the RCTs.

resultsEight RCTs, including 5,942 patients, met the inclusion criteria. The proportion of patient withdrawals due to lack of efficacy was significantly lower in the etoricoxib 30-60 mg (OR 0.21, 95 % CrI 0.12-0.38), celecoxib 200-400 mg (OR 0.29, 95 % CrI 0.18-0.47), and naproxen 1000 mg (OR 0.31, 95 % CrI 0.18-0.51) groups than in the placebo group. The number of patient withdrawals due to lack of efficacy tended to be lower in the etoricoxib 30-60 mg group than in the naproxen 1000 mg and celecoxib 200-400 mg groups, although they did not reach statistical significance (OR 0.68, 95 % CrI 0.36-1.33 and OR 0.70, 95 % CrI 0.38-1.37, respectively). Ranking probabilities based on the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) indicated that etoricoxib 30-60 mg had the highest probability of being the best treatment based on the number of withdrawals due to lack of efficacy (SUCRA = 0.9168) followed by celecoxib 200-400 mg (SUCRA = 0.5659), naproxen 1000 mg (SUCRA = 0.5171), and placebo (SUCRA = 0.000189). With respect to tolerability, the number of withdrawals due to adverse events was not significantly different among etoricoxib, celecoxib, naproxen, and placebo, although it tended to be lower with etoricoxib and placebo.

conclusionsEtoricoxib 30-60 mg, celecoxib 200-400 mg, and naproxen 1000 mg were more efficacious than placebo. However, there was no significant difference in efficacy and tolerability between the medications.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overAnti-Inflammatory AgentsBayes TheoremCelecoxibDose-Response Relationship, DrugDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsEtoricoxibFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNaproxenOsteoarthritisOutcome Assessment, Health CareProportional Hazards ModelsAnti-Inflammatory AgentsCelecoxibEtoricoxibNaproxenPyridinesSulfonesCelecoxibEtoricoxibMeta-analysisNaproxenOsteoarthritis

Identifiers

PMID26768273
OpenAlexW2232966743

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.