SynthesisDrugs2026
Safety Profile of the Non-steroidal Anti-inflammatory Drug Celecoxib in the Short-Term Management of Acute Non-cancer Pain: A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials.
Synthesis in Drugs, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo summarise the literature regarding the safety of short-term use of the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) celecoxib. STUDY
designSystematic review with meta-analysis of randomised trials. Participants comprised individuals of all ages with acute non-cancer pain. Interventions included celecoxib at 200-400 mg/day for up to 10 days. The comparators were placebo, other NSAIDs (including cyclooxygenase-2 [COX-2] inhibitors and non-selective NSAIDS [nsNSAIDS]), or opioids. DATA SOURCES: Five databases were searched from inception to April 2025: Embase, Web of Science, MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Scopus. Additionally, a registry was searched: ClinicalTrials.gov. DATA SYNTHESIS: Meta-analyses using Mantel-Haenszel and random-effects model were used to calculate risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for severe cardiovascular, respiratory, and gastrointestinal adverse events and secondary outcomes. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for randomised trials (RoB-2) was used to assess bias risk. The Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) was conducted to assess the certainty of evidence of each reported outcome.
resultsTitle/abstract and full text screening comprised 3976 and 273 studies, respectively. Fifty studies were included with 10,693 participants. The RRs for adverse events were no different between celecoxib and placebo for severe events (3 studies) (RR 0.44 [95% CI 0.10-2.03]), cardiovascular (3 studies) (RR 0.84 [95% CI 0.24-2.92]), respiratory (4 studies) (RR 1.23 [95% CI 0.29-5.26]), and gastrointestinal events (33 studies) (RR 0.96 [95% CI 0.64-1.43]). There was no difference between celecoxib and NSAIDS for gastrointestinal adverse events, RR 0.89 (95% CI 0.68-1.17). Celecoxib had a lower risk compared to opioids for gastrointestinal events, RR 0.34 (95% CI 0.14-0.86), and showed a lower risk of nausea compared with placebo, RR 0.75 (95% CI 0.60-0.93), and nsNSAIDS, RR 0.80 (95% CI 0.64-0.99). Most studies had some risk of bias concerns, and the overall certainty of evidence for most outcomes was very low. Celecoxib appears to be safe for acute non-cancer pain when compared to placebo, NSAIDS, and opioids. It had a lower risk compared to opioids for gastrointestinal adverse events in general, nausea and vomiting, as well as a lower risk for nausea adverse events when compared to placebo and nsNSAIDS. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO-CRD42025642152.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.