The relative efficacy of topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and capsaicin in osteoarthritis: a network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objective
To compare the efficacy of topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) with topical capsaicin for pain relief in osteoarthritis (OA).Design
A systematic literature search was conducted for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) examining any topical NSAID or capsaicin in OA. Pain relief at or nearest to 4 weeks was pooled using a random-effects network meta-analysis (NMA) in a Frequentist and Bayesian setting. Analysis was conducted for all trials and for trials using drugs listed as licensed for OA in the British National Formulary (BNF).Results
The trial network comprised 28 RCTs (7372 participants), of which 17 RCTs (3174 participants) were included in the as licensed analyses. No RCTs directly compared topical NSAIDs with capsaicin. Placebo was the only common comparator for topical NSAIDs and capsaicin. Frequentist and Bayesian effect size (ES) estimates were in agreement. Topical NSAIDs were statistically superior to placebo overall (ES 0.30, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.19 to 0.41) and as licensed (ES 0.32, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.39). However, capsaicin was only statistically superior to placebo when used at licensed doses (ES 0.41, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.64). No significant differences were observed in pain relief between topical NSAIDs and capsaicin (overall: ES 0.04, 95% CI -0.26 to 0.33; as licensed: ES-0.09, 95% CI -0.34 to 0.16).Conclusions
Current evidence indicates that topical NSAIDs and capsaicin in licensed doses may be equally effective for pain relief in OA. Whether the equivalence varies between individuals remains unknown.
SUBMITTER: Persson MSM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6267943 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectivesTo identify predictors of the specific (difference between treatment and placebo) and overall (change from baseline in treatment arm) treatment effects of topical NSAIDs in OA.MethodsRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) of topical NSAIDs in OA were identified through systematic literature searching and inquiry to pharmaceutical companies. The raw, de-identified data were analysed in one-stage individual patient data meta-analysis (IPD-MA). Negative values for treatment effects (0-100 scale) indicate pain reduction.ResultsOf 63 eligible RCTs, 15 provided IPD (n = 1951 on topical NSAID), including 11 placebo-controlled RCTs (n = 1587 on topical NSAIDs, 1553 on placebo). Seven potential predictors of response were examined. Topical NSAIDs were superior to placebo [-6 (95% CI -9, -4)], with a small, but statistically significant greater effect in women than men [difference -4 (95% CI -8, -1)]. The overall treatment effect was 4-fold larger than the specific effect [-25 (95% CI -31, -19)] and increased with greater baseline pain severity (P < 0.001). No differences in efficacy were observed for age, BMI, features of inflammation, duration of complaints or radiographic OA severity.ConclusionTopical NSAIDs are effective for OA pain relief. Greater overall pain relief in individuals with more baseline pain might be due to contextual and non-specific effects, including regression to the mean. Additional factors that have been linked either mechanistically or through empirical evidence to outcomes should be selected for inclusion across future RCTs in order to facilitate the identification of response predictors through IPD-MA.
| S-EPMC7449808 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveWe aimed to assess the safety of topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in the management of osteoarthritis (OA) in a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, placebo-controlled trials.MethodsA comprehensive literature search was undertaken in the MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Scopus electronic databases. Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trials that assessed adverse events (AEs) with topical NSAIDs in patients with OA were eligible for inclusion. Authors and/or study sponsors were contacted to obtain the full report of AEs. The primary outcomes were overall severe and serious AEs, as well as the following MedDRA System Organ Class (SOC)-related AEs: gastrointestinal, vascular, cardiac, nervous system, skin and subcutaneous tissue, musculoskeletal and connective tissue.ResultsThe search strategy identified 1209 records, from which 25 papers were included in the qualitative synthesis and 19 were included in the meta-analysis, after exclusions. Overall, more total AEs (odds ratio [OR] 1.16, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04-1.29; I2 = 0.0%) and more withdrawals due to AEs (OR 1.49, 95% CI 1.15-1.92; I2 = 0.0%) were observed with topical NSAIDs compared with placebo. The same results were achieved with topical diclofenac, largely driven by an increase in skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders (OR 1.73, 95% CI 0.96-3.10), although the difference was not statistically significant compared with placebo. No significant difference in the odds for gastrointestinal disorders was observed between topical NSAIDs and placebo (OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.73-1.27).ConclusionsTopical NSAIDs may be considered safe in the management of OA, especially with regard to low gastrointestinal toxicity. The use of topical NSAIDs in OA should be considered, taking into account their risk: benefit profile in comparison with other anti-OA treatments.
| S-EPMC6509095 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThis meta-analysis assessed the efficacy of duloxetine versus other oral treatments used after failure of acetaminophen for management of patients with osteoarthritis.MethodsA systematic literature review of English language articles was performed in PUBMED, EMBASE, MedLine In-Process, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov between January 1985 and March 2013. Randomized controlled trials of duloxetine and all oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and opioids were included if treatment was ?12 weeks and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Index (WOMAC) total score was available. Studies were assessed for quality using the assessment tool from the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence guidelines for single technology appraisal submissions.WOMAC baseline and change from baseline total scores were extracted and standardized. A frequentist meta-analysis, meta-regression, and indirect comparison were performed using the DerSimonian-Laird and Bucher methods. Bayesian analyses with and without adjustment for study-level covariates were performed using noninformative priors.ResultsThirty-two publications reported 34 trials (2 publications each reported 2 trials) that met inclusion criteria. The analyses found all treatments except oxycodone (frequentist) and hydromorphone (frequentist and Bayesian) to be more effective than placebo. Indirect comparisons to duloxetine found no significant differences for most of the compounds. Some analyses showed evidence of a difference with duloxetine for etoricoxib (better), tramadol and oxycodone (worse), but without consistent results between analyses. Forest plots revealed positive trends in overall efficacy improvement with baseline scores. Adjusting for baseline, the probability duloxetine is superior to other treatments ranges between 15% to 100%.Limitations of this study include the low number of studies included in the analyses, the inclusion of only English language publications, and possible ecological fallacy associated with patient level characteristics.ConclusionsThis analysis suggests no difference between duloxetine and other post-first line oral treatments for osteoarthritis (OA) in total WOMAC score after approximately 12 weeks of treatment. Significant results for 3 compounds (1 better and 2 worse) were not consistent across performed analyses.
| S-EPMC4007556 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe vascular and gastrointestinal effects of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), including selective COX-2 inhibitors (coxibs) and traditional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (tNSAIDs), are not well characterised, particularly in patients at increased risk of vascular disease. We aimed to provide such information through meta-analyses of randomised trials.MethodsWe undertook meta-analyses of 280 trials of NSAIDs versus placebo (124,513 participants, 68,342 person-years) and 474 trials of one NSAID versus another NSAID (229,296 participants, 165,456 person-years). The main outcomes were major vascular events (non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, or vascular death); major coronary events (non-fatal myocardial infarction or coronary death); stroke; mortality; heart failure; and upper gastrointestinal complications (perforation, obstruction, or bleed).FindingsMajor vascular events were increased by about a third by a coxib (rate ratio [RR] 1·37, 95% CI 1·14-1·66; p=0·0009) or diclofenac (1·41, 1·12-1·78; p=0·0036), chiefly due to an increase in major coronary events (coxibs 1·76, 1·31-2·37; p=0·0001; diclofenac 1·70, 1·19-2·41; p=0·0032). Ibuprofen also significantly increased major coronary events (2·22, 1·10-4·48; p=0·0253), but not major vascular events (1·44, 0·89-2·33). Compared with placebo, of 1000 patients allocated to a coxib or diclofenac for a year, three more had major vascular events, one of which was fatal. Naproxen did not significantly increase major vascular events (0·93, 0·69-1·27). Vascular death was increased significantly by coxibs (1·58, 99% CI 1·00-2·49; p=0·0103) and diclofenac (1·65, 0·95-2·85, p=0·0187), non-significantly by ibuprofen (1·90, 0·56-6·41; p=0·17), but not by naproxen (1·08, 0·48-2·47, p=0·80). The proportional effects on major vascular events were independent of baseline characteristics, including vascular risk. Heart failure risk was roughly doubled by all NSAIDs. All NSAID regimens increased upper gastrointestinal complications (coxibs 1·81, 1·17-2·81, p=0·0070; diclofenac 1·89, 1·16-3·09, p=0·0106; ibuprofen 3·97, 2·22-7·10, p<0·0001; and naproxen 4·22, 2·71-6·56, p<0·0001).InterpretationThe vascular risks of high-dose diclofenac, and possibly ibuprofen, are comparable to coxibs, whereas high-dose naproxen is associated with less vascular risk than other NSAIDs. Although NSAIDs increase vascular and gastrointestinal risks, the size of these risks can be predicted, which could help guide clinical decision making.FundingUK Medical Research Council and British Heart Foundation.
| S-EPMC3778977 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo estimate the analgesic efficacy of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), including selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors (coxibs), in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis of randomised placebo controlled trials.Studies reviewed23 trials including 10 845 patients, median age of 62.5 years. 7807 patients received adequate doses of NSAIDs and 3038 received placebo. The mean weighted baseline pain score was 64.2 mm on 100 mm visual analogue scale (VAS), and average duration of symptoms was 8.2 years.Main outcome measureChange in overall intensity of pain.ResultsMethodological quality of trials was acceptable, but 13 trials excluded patients before randomisation if they did not respond to NSAIDs. One trial provided long term data for pain that showed no significant effect of NSAIDs compared with placebo at one to four years. The pooled difference for pain on visual analogue scale in all included trials was 10.1 mm (95% confidence interval 7.4 to 12.8) or 15.6% better than placebo after 2-13 weeks. The results were heterogeneous, and the effect size for pain reduction was 0.32 (0.24 to 0.39) in a random effects model. In 10 trials that did not exclude non-responders to NSAID treatment the results were homogeneous, with an effect size for pain reduction of 0.23 (0.15 to 0.31).ConclusionNSAIDs can reduce short term pain in osteoarthritis of the knee slightly better than placebo, but the current analysis does not support long term use of NSAIDs for this condition. As serious adverse effects are associated with oral NSAIDs, only limited use can be recommended.
| S-EPMC534841 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundKnee osteoarthritis (KOA) is a common musculoskeletal condition affecting millions of people worldwide and posing a significant challenge to clinicians and researchers. Emerging evidence suggests that the multifaceted symptomatology of KOA may be alleviated by diacerein. With this in mind, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of diacerein in patients with KOA.MethodsWe systematically searched Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), Wanfang Database (WanFang), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and China Science and Technology Journal Database (VIP) from their inception to August 2022 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of diacerein intervention on patients with KOA. Two reviewers independently performed the selection of eligible studies and the extraction of relevant data. The meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4 and R 4.1.3 software tools. Depending on the type of outcome indicator selected, summary measures were expressed as mean differences (MD), standardized mean differences (SMD), or odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).ResultsTwelve RCTs with 1732 patients were included. The results revealed that diacerein had comparable efficacy to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in reducing pain indicators such as Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) (SMD = 0.09, 95% CI [-0.10, 0.28], P = 0.34) and visual analogue scale (VAS) (SMD = -0.19, 95% CI [-0.65, 0.27], P = 0.42). However, diacerein outperformed NSAIDs in terms of global efficacy assessment by both patients and investigators (patients: 1.97, 95% CI [1.18, 3.29], P = 0.01; investigator: 2.18, 95% CI [0.99, 4.81], P = 0.05) at the end of treatment and sustained effectiveness in reducing WOMAC score and VAS score at four weeks after treatment. Moreover, there was no significant difference in adverse events incidence between the diacerein and NSAID groups. However, the GRADE evaluation indicated that the majority of the evidence quality was low.ConclusionsThe results of this study suggest that diacerein could potentially be considered as a pharmacological agent with significant efficacy for the treatment of patients suffering from KOA, offering a potential alternative treatment strategy for those patients contraindicated to NSAIDs. However, further high-quality studies with longer follow-up are needed to make more informed decisions about its efficacy in the treatment of KOA.
| S-EPMC10114432 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo assess the effects of selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 (COX 2) inhibitors and traditional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) on the risk of vascular events.DesignMeta-analysis of published and unpublished tabular data from randomised trials, with indirect estimation of the effects of traditional NSAIDs.Data sourcesMedline and Embase (January 1966 to April 2005); Food and Drug Administration records; and data on file from Novartis, Pfizer, and Merck.Review methodsEligible studies were randomised trials that included a comparison of a selective COX 2 inhibitor versus placebo or a selective COX 2 inhibitor versus a traditional NSAID, of at least four weeks' duration, with information on serious vascular events (defined as myocardial infarction, stroke, or vascular death). Individual investigators and manufacturers provided information on the number of patients randomised, numbers of vascular events, and the person time of follow-up for each randomised group.ResultsIn placebo comparisons, allocation to a selective COX 2 inhibitor was associated with a 42% relative increase in the incidence of serious vascular events (1.2%/year v 0.9%/year; rate ratio 1.42, 95% confidence interval 1.13 to 1.78; P = 0.003), with no significant heterogeneity among the different selective COX 2 inhibitors. This was chiefly attributable to an increased risk of myocardial infarction (0.6%/year v 0.3%/year; 1.86, 1.33 to 2.59; P = 0.0003), with little apparent difference in other vascular outcomes. Among trials of at least one year's duration (mean 2.7 years), the rate ratio for vascular events was 1.45 (1.12 to 1.89; P = 0.005). Overall, the incidence of serious vascular events was similar between a selective COX 2 inhibitor and any traditional NSAID (1.0%/year v 0.9%/year; 1.16, 0.97 to 1.38; P = 0.1). However, statistical heterogeneity (P = 0.001) was found between trials of a selective COX 2 inhibitor versus naproxen (1.57, 1.21 to 2.03) and of a selective COX 2 inhibitor versus non-naproxen NSAIDs (0.88, 0.69 to 1.12). The summary rate ratio for vascular events, compared with placebo, was 0.92 (0.67 to 1.26) for naproxen, 1.51 (0.96 to 2.37) for ibuprofen, and 1.63 (1.12 to 2.37) for diclofenac.ConclusionsSelective COX 2 inhibitors are associated with a moderate increase in the risk of vascular events, as are high dose regimens of ibuprofen and diclofenac, but high dose naproxen is not associated with such an excess.
| S-EPMC1473048 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: The selection strategy of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for migraine is hard to judge whether it is effective, leading to unnecessary exposure to insufficient or lengthy treatment trials. The goal of the study was to investigate potential predictors of NSAIDs efficacy in migraine therapy and to explore their influence on efficacy. Methods: 610 migraine patients were recruited and assigned into responders and non-responders. Potential predictors among demographic and clinical characteristics for NSAIDs efficacy were extracted using multivariable logistic regression (LR) analysis, and were applied to construct prediction models via machine learning (ML) algorithms. Finally, Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel tests were used to examine the impact of each predictor on drug efficacy. Results: Multivariate LR analysis revealed migraine-related (disease duration, headache intensity and frequency) and psychiatric (anxiety, depression and sleep disorder) characteristics were predictive of NSAIDs efficacy. The accuracies of ML models using support vector machine, decision tree and multilayer perceptron were 0.712, 0.741, and 0.715, respectively. Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test showed that, for variables with homogeneity of odds ratio, disease duration, frequency, anxiety, and depression and sleep disorder were associated with decreased likelihood of response to all NSAIDs. However, the variabilities in the efficacy of acetaminophen and celecoxib between patients with mild and severe headache intensity were not confirmed. Conclusion: Migraine-related and psychiatric parameters play a critical role in predicting the outcomes of acute migraine treatment. These models based on predictors could optimize drug selection and improve benefits from the start of treatment.
| S-EPMC9754055 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND: Most ulcers are caused, one can deduce, by Helicobacter pylori or by use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Whether both together are worse than one alone is something that is quite unknown. AIM: To study both factors in order to see wither they interact together positively. METHOD: A case control study of ulcer bleeding in elderly patients chosen without weeding. RESULTS: NSAID usage increased risk substantially. So did H pylori infection (but relative risk less than three). Neither seemed to interact. Their actions were discretely intact. CONCLUSION: H pylori effects ulcer bleeding in an adverse manner but does not make the risk of NSAIDs worse.
| S-EPMC1891536 | biostudies-other
Project description:PurposeThis study aimed to review previous articles and evaluate the influence of topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) on intraocular pressure (IOP) in glaucoma patients who were treated with prostaglandin analogues (PGs).MethodThe presenting study was designed as a meta-analysis of previous research. Databases include PubMed, Web of science, Cochrane library, and Embase were searched with keywords of "intraocular pressure, prostaglandin analogues, NSAIDs, latanoprost, travoprost, bimatoprost, tafluprost, unoprostone, latanoprostene bunod, ketorolac, diclofenac, nepafenac, bromfenac, flurbiprofen". Inclusion criteria were: 1. Study population were glaucoma patients; 2. Comparison between PGs monotherapy and PGs in combination with topical NSAIDs; 3. Changes of IOP as final outcomes. Studies with non-randomized design, treatments combining other anti-glaucomatous drugs, or unavailable absolute IOP were excluded from the analysis. Estimated difference in IOP were calculated using STATA 14.0.ResultSeven studies were retrieved for this meta-analysis. Since there is a significant heterogeneity (I2 = 94%) in these studies, random-effect model was used to calculate pooled standardized mean differences (SMD). Our results showed a significantly favorable IOP lowering effect in glaucoma patients treated with combination of topical NSAIDs and PGEs (SMD: 1.3 and -0.03, 95% CI: 0.29 to 2.38 and -0.32 to 0.26, Z = 2.50 and 0.23, p = 0.013 and 0.820, respectively).ConclusionResults of our meta-analysis suggested that topical NSAIDs may enhance the IOP lowering effect of topical PGs in glaucoma patients.
| S-EPMC7489511 | biostudies-literature