Dataset Information

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) related inhibition of aldosterone glucuronidation and arterial dysfunction in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a cross-sectional clinical study.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are at increased risk of cardiovascular (CV) disease and are also commonly prescribed non-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (ns-NSAIDs). New in vitro evidence suggests that this increased CV risk may be mediated through aldosterone glucuronidation inhibition (AGI), which differs between NSAIDs (diclofenac>naproxen>indomethacin>ibuprofen). Our aim was to explore the association between ns-NSAID-related AGI and arterial dysfunction.

Methods

The extent (augmentation index, AIX%) and timing (reflected wave transit time, RWT, ms) of aortic wave reflection (measured using radial applanation pulse wave analysis, PWA, SphygmoCor device) were assessed on a single occasion in 114 consecutive RA patients without overt CV disease aged 40-65 years. A higher AIX% and lower RWT indicate arterial dysfunction. Assessment included a fasting blood sample, patient questionnaire and medical record review. Multivariate analysis was used to adjust for age, sex, mean blood pressure, smoking, cumulative erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR-years) and Stanford disability score.

Results

We identified 60 patients taking ns-NSAIDs and 25 non-users. Using a ns-NSAID with the highest AGI was associated with a higher AIX% (and lower RWT) versus treatment with a ns-NSAID with the lowest AGI (diclofenac AIX% 32.3, RWT 132.7 ms vs ibuprofen AIX% 23.8, RWT 150.9 ms): adjusted mean differences AIX% 6.5 (95% CI 1.0 to 11.9; p=0.02); RWT -14.2 ms (95% CI -22.2 to -6.3; p=0.001). Indomethacin demonstrated an intermediate level of arterial dysfunction. In relation to arterial dysfunction, both indomethacin and naproxen were more similar to diclofenac than to ibuprofen.

Conclusions

ns-NSAID-related AGI is associated with arterial dysfunction in patients with RA. These findings provide a potentially novel insight into the CV toxicity of commonly used ns-NSAIDs. However, the findings are limited by the small number of patients involved and require further replication in a much larger study.

SUBMITTER: Crilly MA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3191420 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundTreatment with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) is a common component of treatment regimens for rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Etoricoxib is a COX-2 selective NSAID that has demonstrated efficacy in the treatment of RA at a dose of 90 mg. The current study further evaluated the efficacy of etoricoxib 60 mg and 90 mg in RA patients with active disease.MethodsThis was a 2-part, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in RA (NCT01208181). Patients were required to have a diagnosis of RA (according to ARA 1987 revised classification criteria) and were to demonstrate symptom flare upon discontinuation of previous NSAID treatment prior to randomization. Part I was a 6-week, placebo-controlled period to assess the efficacy of etoricoxib 90 mg and etoricoxib 60 mg, each compared to placebo, as well as to each other. Part II was a 6-week period to evaluate the potential benefit of dose escalation from etoricoxib 60 mg to etoricoxib 90 mg after 6 weeks exposure to etoricoxib 60 mg in Part I compared to maintaining a steady dose of etoricoxib 60 mg throughout Parts I and II. Primary endpoints were Disease Activity Score evaluating 28 joints and C reactive protein level (DAS28-CRP) index and Patient Global Assessment of Pain (Pain) score (0-100 mm VAS) after 6 weeks of treatment in Part I. Adverse events were monitored throughout the study.ResultsIn total, 1404 patients were randomized in a 2:7:7:8 ratio; 1228 patients completed Part I and 713 patients continued to Part II. Both etoricoxib doses were superior to placebo on both primary efficacy endpoints (p = 0.004 for 60 mg and p = 0.034 for 90 mg for DAS28-CRP; p < 0.001 for both doses for PGAP) in Part I. Further in Part I, etoricoxib 90 mg was not significantly different from 60 mg for DAS28-CRP, but did demonstrate a small, but statistically significant decrease in baseline PGAP score vs. 60 mg (p = 0.019). In Part II, there was no significant decrease in PGAP score after increasing to 90 mg in subjects with inadequate pain relief on 60 mg as compared to subjects who stayed on 60 mg. The incidence of AEs and SAEs were similar between etoricoxib 60 mg and 90 mg in both Part I and II.ConclusionBoth etoricoxib 90 mg and 60 mg are superior to placebo in relieving the symptoms of RA. Etoricoxib 90 mg vs 60 mg resulted in a statistically significant, though small, improvement in PGAP score, but not DAS28-CRP. Dose escalation from 60 mg to 90 mg in pain inadequate responders did not significantly improve efficacy. These results confirm the efficacy and tolerability of etoricoxib 90mg in patients with RA. In addition, this study demonstrated that etoricoxib 60 mg is also efficacious and well-tolerated in RA.Clinical trial registrationNCT01208181 (registered September 22, 2010).

Project description:IntroductionDespite the widespread use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and Doppler ultrasound for the detection of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) disease activity, little is known regarding the association of imaging-detected activity and synovial pathology. The purpose of this study was to compare site-specific release of inflammatory mediators and evaluate the corresponding anatomical sites by examining colour Doppler ultrasound (CDUS) and MRI scans.MethodsRA patients were evaluated on the basis of CDUS and 3-T MRI scans and subsequently underwent synovectomy using a needle arthroscopic procedure of the hand joints. The synovial tissue specimens were incubated for 72 hours, and spontaneous release of monocyte chemoattractant protein 1 (MCP-1), interleukin 6 (IL-6), macrophage inflammatory protein 1? (MIP-1?) and IL-8 was measured by performing multiplex immunoassays. Bone marrow oedema (BME), synovitis and erosion scores were estimated on the basis of the rheumatoid arthritis magnetic resonance imaging score (RAMRIS). Mixed models were used for the statistical analyses. Parsimony was achieved by omitting covariates with P > 0.1 from the statistical model.ResultsTissue samples from 58 synovial sites were obtained from 25 patients. MCP-1 was associated with CDUS activity (P = 0.009, approximate Spearman's ? = 0.41), RAMRIS BME score (P = 0.01, approximate Spearman's ? = 0.42) and RAMRIS erosion score (P = 0.03, approximate Spearman's ? = 0.31). IL-6 was associated with RAMRIS synovitis score (P = 0.04, approximate Spearman's ? = 0.50), BME score (P = 0.04, approximate Spearman's ? = 0.31) and RAMRIS erosion score (P = 0.03, approximate Spearman's ? = 0.35). MIP-1? was associated with CDUS activity (P = 0.02, approximate Spearman's ? = 0.38) and RAMRIS synovitis scores (P = 0.02, approximate Spearman's ? = 0.63). IL-8 associations with imaging outcome measures did not reach statistical significance.ConclusionsThe association between imaging activity and synovial inflammatory mediators underscores the high sensitivity of CDUS and MRI in the evaluation of RA disease activity. The associations found in our present study have different implications for synovial mediator releases and corresponding imaging signs. For example, MCP-1 and IL-6 were associated with both general inflammation and bone destruction, in contrast to MIP-1?, which was involved solely in general synovitis. The lack of association of IL-8 with synovitis was likely underestimated because of a large proportion of samples above assay detection limits among the patients with the highest synovitis scores.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To summarize the current literature on non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug and corticosteroid use during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, recognizing that these are commonly used treatments in the field of headache medicine. BACKGROUND:The use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and corticosteroids in patients during the COVID-19 pandemic has been a controversial topic within the medical community and international and national health organizations. Lay press and social media outlets have circulated opinions on this topic despite the fact that the evidence for or against the use of these medications is sparse. In the field of headache medicine, these medications are used commonly and both patients and clinicians may have questions or hesitations pertaining to their use during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS:A detailed search of the scientific and popular literature was performed. RESULTS:There is limited literature pertaining to the safety of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and corticosteroids during the COVID-19 pandemic. To date, there are no clear scientific data that preclude the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the general population who may acquire COVID-19 or in those acutely infected with the virus. Several health organizations have concluded that treatment with corticosteroids during active infection should be avoided due to concerns of prolonged viral shedding in the respiratory tract and the lack of survival benefit based on the data from past coronaviruses and influenza virus; specific exceptions exist including treatment for underlying asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, septic shock, and acute respiratory distress syndrome. CONCLUSION:Scientific information regarding the COVID-19 pandemic is constantly evolving, and limited or contradictory information can lead to confusion for both patients and clinicians. It is recommended that prior to prescribing non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and steroids for the treatment of headache, clinicians have open discussions with their patients about the potential risks and benefits of using these medications during the COVID-19 pandemic. This manuscript summarizes the currently available evidence and understanding about these risks and benefits to help clinicians navigate such discussions.