Suppr超能文献

用于治疗炎症性肠病风湿性表现的选择性环氧化酶2抑制剂的耐受性

Tolerability of selective cyclooxygenase 2 inhibitors used for the treatment of rheumatological manifestations of inflammatory bowel disease.

作者信息

Miao Xin-Pu, Li Jian-Sheng, Ouyang Qin, Hu Ren-Wei, Zhang Yan, Li Hui-Yan

机构信息

Department of Gastroenterology, Hai Nan Provincial People's Hospital, 19 Xiu Hua Road, Xiu Ying District, Hai Kou City, Han Nan Province, China, 570311.

出版信息

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Oct 23;2014(10):CD007744. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007744.pub2.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are used to reduce inflammatory pain and swelling in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients with rheumatological manifestations. While these drugs effectively reduce musculoskeletal pain and stiffness, long-term use is limited by gastrointestinal (GI) adverse effects (AEs) and disease exacerbation. As an alternative to NSAIDs, selective cyclooxygenase 2 (COX-2) inhibitors were developed to improve GI safety and tolerability. COX-2 inhibitors include drugs such as celecoxib, rofecoxib, valdecoxib, etoricoxib, and lumiracoxib. Rofecoxib and valdecoxib have been withdrawn from the market worldwide due to safety concerns (most importantly for cardiovascular adverse events) and lumiracoxib has been withdrawn in many countries due to liver toxicity. However, celecoxib and etoricoxib continue to be available for use in many countries. Several studies have examined whether COX-2 inhibitors can be safely used for the treatment of rheumatological manifestations of IBD with inconsistent results. Some investigators report acceptable safety profiles associated with these drugs while others found that COX-2 inhibitors are associated with high rates of disease exacerbation.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the tolerability and safety of COX-2 inhibitors used for the treatment of rheumatological manifestations of IBD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases from inception to 19 September 2013: PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE and CENTRAL. The search was not limited by language. Additional trials were identified by manually searching the reference lists of relevant papers and conference proceedings and through correspondence with experts and pharmaceutical companies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared COX-2 inhibitors to placebo were considered for inclusion. Participants were adult patients with IBD presenting with rheumatological manifestations of at least two weeks duration.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trial eligibility and extracted data. Methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. The primary outcome measure was the proportion of patients with disease exacerbation as defined by the included studies. Secondary outcomes included GI adverse effects, renal toxicity, cardiovascular and thrombotic events. Data were analysed on an intention-to-treat basis where patients with missing final outcomes were assumed to have had an exacerbation of IBD. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and corresponding 95% confidence interval (95% CI) for dichotomous outcomes. The overall quality of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

There were no RCTs that assessed the tolerability or safety of the withdrawn COX-2 inhibitors rofecoxib, valdecoxib, or lumiracoxib. Two RCTs (n = 381 IBD patients with rheumatological manifestations) were included in the review. One study (n = 159) compared etoricoxib (60 to 120 mg/day) to placebo in IBD patients with quiescent or active ulcerative colitis or Crohn's disease. The other study (n = 222) compared celecoxib (200 mg twice daily) to placebo in patients with quiescent ulcerative colitis. Both studies were judged to be at low risk of bias. The two included studies were not pooled for meta-analysis due to differences in patient populations and treatment duration. There was no statistically significant difference in exacerbation of IBD between etoricoxib and placebo. After 12 weeks of treatment the IBD exacerbation rate was 17% (14/82) in the etoricoxib group compared to 19% (15/77) in the placebo group (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.69). A GRADE analysis indicated that the overall quality of the evidence supporting this outcome was low due to very sparse data (29 events). There was no statistically significant difference in exacerbation of ulcerative colitis between celecoxib and placebo. After two weeks of treatment 4% (5/112) of celecoxib patients experienced an exacerbation of ulcerative colitis compared to 6% (7/110) of patients in the placebo group (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.23 to 2.14). A GRADE analysis indicated that the overall quality of the evidence supporting this outcome was low due to very sparse data (12 events). The study comparing etoricoxib to placebo documented but did not report on AEs. The proportion of patients who experienced AEs was similar in the celecoxib and placebo groups (21% and 17%, respectively, P > 0.20). No patients in either group died or experienced serious adverse events. Eleven percent of patients in the celecoxib and placebo groups experienced GI AEs (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.46 to 2.07). A GRADE analysis indicated that the overall quality of the evidence supporting this outcome was low due to very sparse data (24 events). GI AEs led to premature withdrawal from the study in 3% of patients in celecoxib and placebo groups respectively. GI AEs included increased stool frequency, rectal bleeding, and inflamed mucosa. No patients experienced any cardiovascular adverse events. Renal toxicity or thrombotic AEs were not reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The results for disease exacerbation and AEs between the COX-2 inhibitors celecoxib and etoricoxib and placebo were uncertain. Thus no definitive conclusions regarding the tolerability and safety of the short term use of celecoxib and etoricoxib in patients with IBD can be drawn. The two included studies suggest that celecoxib and etoricoxib do not exacerbate IBD symptoms. However, it should be noted that both studies had relatively small sample sizes and short follow-up durations. Clinicians need to continue to weigh the risks and benefits of these drugs when treating patients IBD patients with rheumatological manifestations in order to avoid disease exacerbation and other adverse effects. Further RCTs are needed to determine the tolerability and safety of celecoxib and etoricoxib in these patients.

摘要

背景

非甾体抗炎药(NSAIDs)用于减轻有风湿性表现的炎症性肠病(IBD)患者的炎性疼痛和肿胀。虽然这些药物能有效减轻肌肉骨骼疼痛和僵硬,但长期使用受到胃肠道(GI)不良反应(AEs)和疾病加重的限制。作为NSAIDs的替代药物,选择性环氧化酶2(COX-2)抑制剂被研发出来以提高胃肠道安全性和耐受性。COX-2抑制剂包括塞来昔布、罗非昔布、伐地昔布、依托考昔和卢米昔布等药物。由于安全问题(最重要的是心血管不良事件),罗非昔布和伐地昔布已在全球范围内退市,并且卢米昔布也因肝毒性在许多国家退市。然而,塞来昔布和依托考昔在许多国家仍可使用。多项研究探讨了COX-2抑制剂能否安全用于治疗IBD的风湿性表现,结果并不一致。一些研究者报告这些药物具有可接受的安全性,而另一些则发现COX-2抑制剂与疾病高复发率相关。

目的

本系统评价的目的是评估COX-2抑制剂用于治疗IBD风湿性表现的耐受性和安全性。

检索方法

我们检索了以下数据库,检索时间从建库至2013年9月19日:PubMed、EMBASE、MEDLINE和CENTRAL。检索不受语言限制。通过手动检索相关论文的参考文献列表和会议论文集,并与专家及制药公司通信,识别出其他试验。

选择标准

纳入比较COX-2抑制剂与安慰剂的随机对照试验(RCTs)。参与者为患有风湿性表现且病程至少两周的成年IBD患者。

数据收集与分析

两位作者独立评估试验的合格性并提取数据。使用Cochrane偏倚风险工具评估方法学质量。主要结局指标是纳入研究定义的疾病加重患者比例。次要结局包括胃肠道不良反应、肾毒性、心血管和血栓形成事件。数据按意向性分析原则进行分析,缺失最终结局的患者假定为IBD病情加重。对于二分结局,我们计算风险比(RR)及相应的95%置信区间(95%CI)。使用GRADE标准评估证据的总体质量。

主要结果

没有RCT评估已退市的COX-2抑制剂罗非昔布、伐地昔布或卢米昔布的耐受性或安全性。本评价纳入了两项RCT(n = 381例有风湿性表现的IBD患者)。一项研究(n = 159)在静止期或活动期溃疡性结肠炎或克罗恩病的IBD患者中比较了依托考昔(60至120 mg/天)与安慰剂。另一项研究(n = 222)在静止期溃疡性结肠炎患者中比较了塞来昔布(每日2次,每次200 mg)与安慰剂。两项研究均被判定为偏倚风险低。由于患者人群和治疗持续时间的差异,未对纳入的两项研究进行荟萃分析。依托考昔与安慰剂在IBD病情加重方面无统计学显著差异。治疗12周后,依托考昔组的IBD病情加重率为17%(14/82),而安慰剂组为19%(15/77)(RR 0.88,95%CI 0.45至1.69)。GRADE分析表明,由于数据非常稀疏(29个事件),支持该结局的证据总体质量低。塞来昔布与安慰剂在溃疡性结肠炎病情加重方面无统计学显著差异。治疗两周后,塞来昔布组4%(5/112)的患者出现溃疡性结肠炎病情加重,而安慰剂组为6%(7/110)(RR 0.70,95%CI 0.23至2.14)。GRADE分析表明,由于数据非常稀疏(12个事件),支持该结局的证据总体质量低。比较依托考昔与安慰剂的研究记录了但未报告不良反应。塞来昔布组和安慰剂组发生不良反应的患者比例相似(分别为21%和17%,P>0.20)。两组均无患者死亡或发生严重不良事件。塞来昔布组和安慰剂组分别有11%的患者出现胃肠道不良反应(RR 0.97,95%CI 0.46至2.07)。GRADE分析表明,由于数据非常稀疏(24个事件),支持该结局的证据总体质量低。胃肠道不良反应分别导致塞来昔布组和安慰剂组3%的患者提前退出研究。胃肠道不良反应包括排便次数增加、直肠出血和黏膜炎症。无患者发生任何心血管不良事件。未报告肾毒性或血栓形成不良反应。

作者结论

COX-2抑制剂塞来昔布和依托考昔与安慰剂相比,在疾病加重和不良反应方面的结果尚不确定。因此,关于塞来昔布和依托考昔在IBD患者中短期使用的耐受性和安全性,无法得出明确结论。纳入的两项研究表明,塞来昔布和依托考昔不会加重IBD症状。然而,应注意的是,两项研究的样本量相对较小且随访时间较短。临床医生在治疗有风湿性表现的IBD患者时,需要继续权衡这些药物的风险和益处,以避免疾病加重和其他不良反应。需要进一步的RCT来确定塞来昔布和依托考昔在这些患者中的耐受性和安全性。

相似文献

3
Oral budesonide for induction of remission in ulcerative colitis.口服布地奈德诱导溃疡性结肠炎缓解
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Oct 26;2015(10):CD007698. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007698.pub3.
4
Budesonide for maintenance of remission in Crohn's disease.布地奈德用于维持克罗恩病的缓解状态。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Aug 21;2014(8):CD002913. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002913.pub3.

引用本文的文献

4
Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the perioperative period.围手术期的非甾体类抗炎药
BJA Educ. 2023 Nov;23(11):440-447. doi: 10.1016/j.bjae.2023.08.001. Epub 2023 Sep 9.
5
Korean treatment recommendations for patients with axial spondyloarthritis.韩国治疗中轴型脊柱关节炎患者的建议。
Korean J Intern Med. 2023 Sep;38(5):620-640. doi: 10.3904/kjim.2023.194. Epub 2023 Jul 24.
8
Macroalgal Proteins: A Review.大型海藻蛋白:综述
Foods. 2022 Feb 16;11(4):571. doi: 10.3390/foods11040571.
9
IBD considerations in spondyloarthritis.脊柱关节炎中炎症性肠病的相关考量
Ther Adv Musculoskelet Dis. 2020 Jul 9;12:1759720X20939410. doi: 10.1177/1759720X20939410. eCollection 2020.

本文引用的文献

3
Valdecoxib : the rise and fall of a COX-2 inhibitor.伐地考昔:COX-2 抑制剂的兴衰。
Expert Opin Pharmacother. 2013 Jun;14(8):1077-86. doi: 10.1517/14656566.2013.783568. Epub 2013 Mar 22.
4
Severe acute liver injury associated with lumiracoxib.与鲁米昔布相关的严重急性肝损伤。
J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2012 Jun;27(6):1102-5. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1746.2011.07036.x.
8
NSAIDs, coxibs, and the intestine.非甾体抗炎药、环氧化酶-2抑制剂与肠道
J Cardiovasc Pharmacol. 2006;47 Suppl 1:S72-5. doi: 10.1097/00005344-200605001-00013.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验