Efficacy of topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the treatment of osteoarthritis: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Objective To assess the efficacy of topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in the treatment of osteoarthritis.Data sources Medline, Embase, Scientific Citation Index, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, and abstracts from conferences.Review methods Inclusion criterion was randomised controlled trials comparing topical NSAIDs with placebo or oral NSAIDs in osteoarthritis. Effect size was calculated for pain, function, and stiffness. Rate ratio was calculated for dichotomous data such as clinical response rate and adverse event rate. Number needed to treat to obtain the clinical response was estimated. Quality of trial was assessed, and sensitivity analyses were undertaken.Results Topical NSAIDs were superior to placebo in relieving pain due to osteoarthritis only in the first two weeks of treatment. Effect sizes for weeks 1 and 2 were 0.41 (95% confidence interval, 0.16 to 0.66) and 0.40 (0.15 to 0.65), respectively. No benefit was observed over placebo in weeks 3 and 4. A similar pattern was observed for function, stiffness, and clinical response rate ratio and number needed to treat. Topical NSAIDs were inferior to oral NSAIDs in the first week of treatment and associated with more local side effects such as rash, itch, or burning (rate ratio 5.29, 1.14 to 24.51).Conclusion Randomised controlled trials of short duration only (less than four weeks) have assessed the efficacy of topical NSAIDs in osteoarthritis. After two weeks there was no evidence of efficacy superior to placebo. No trial data support the long term use of topical NSAIDs in osteoarthritis.     

Single-dose oral naproxen for acute postoperative pain: a quantitative systematic review

BACKGROUND: Naproxen and naproxen sodium are non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs used in a variety of painful conditions, including the treatment of postoperative pain. This review aims to assess the efficacy, safety and duration of action of a single oral dose of naproxen/naproxen sodium for moderate to severe acute postoperative pain in adults, compared with placebo. METHODS: The Cochrane Library (issue 4 2002), EMBASE, PubMed, MEDLINE and an in-house database were searched for randomised, double blind, placebo controlled trials of a single dose of orally administered naproxen or naproxen sodium in adults with acute postoperative pain. Pain relief or pain intensity data were extracted and converted into dichotomous information to give the number of patients with at least 50% pain relief over 4 to 6 hours. Relative benefit and number-needed-to-treat were then calculated. The percentage of patients with any adverse event, number-needed-to-harm, and time to remedication were also calculated. RESULTS: Ten trials with 996 patients in met the inclusion criteria. Six trials compared naproxen sodium 550 mg (252 patients) with placebo (248 patients); the NNT for at least 50% pain relief over six hours was 2.6 (95% confidence interval 2.2 to 3.2). There was no significant difference between the number of patients experiencing any adverse event on treatment compared with placebo. Weighted mean time to remedication was 7.6 hours for naproxen sodium 550 mg (206 patients) and 2.6 hours for placebo (205 patients). Four other trials used lower doses. CONCLUSION: A single oral dose of naproxen sodium 550 mg is an effective analgesic in the treatment of acute postoperative pain. A low incidence of adverse events was found, although these were not reported consistently.     

Anticonvulsant drugs for management of pain: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE--To determine effectiveness and adverse effects of anticonvulsant drugs in management of pain. DESIGN--Systematic review of randomised controlled trials of anticonvulsants for acute, chronic, or cancer pain identified by using Medline, by hand searching, by searching reference lists, and by contacting investigators. SUBJECTS--Between 1966 and February 1994, 37 reports were found; 20 reports, of four anticonvulsants, were eligible. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES--Numbers needed to treat were calculated for effectiveness, adverse effects, and drug related withdrawal from study. RESULTS--The only placebo controlled study in acute pain found no analgesic effect of sodium valproate. For treating trigeminal neuralgia, carbamazepine had a combined number needed to treat of 2.6 for effectiveness, 3.4 for adverse effects, and 24 for severe effects (withdrawal from study). For treating diabetic neuropathy, anticonvulsants had a combined number needed to treat of 2.5 for effectiveness, 3.1 for adverse effects, and 20 for severe effects. For migraine prophylaxis, anticonvulsants had a combined number needed to treat of 1.6 for effectiveness, 2.4 for adverse effects, and 39 for severe effects. Phenytoin had no effect on the irritable bowel syndrome, and carbamazepine had little effect on pain after stroke. Clonazepam was effective in one study for temporomandibular joint dysfunction. No study compared one anticonvulsant with another. CONCLUSIONS--Anticonvulsants were effective for trigeminal neuralgia and diabetic neuropathy and for migraine prophylaxis. Minor adverse effects occurred as often as benefit.     

Systematic review of dexketoprofen in acute and chronic pain

Background

Dexketoprofen, an NSAID used in the management of acute and chronic pains, is licensed in several countries but has not previously been the subjected of a systematic review. We used published and unpublished information from randomised clinical trials (RCTs) of dexketoprofen in painful conditions to assess evidence on efficacy and harm.

Methods

PubMed and Cochrane Central were searched for RCTs of dexketoprofen for pain of any aetiology. Reference lists of retrieved articles and reviews were also searched. Menarini Group produced copies of published and unpublished studies (clinical trial reports). Data were abstracted into a standard form. For studies reporting results of single dose administration, the number of patients with at least 50% pain relief was derived and used to calculate the relative benefit (RB) and number-needed-to-treat (NNT) for one patient to achieve at least 50% pain relief compared with placebo.

Results

Thirty-five trials were found in acute pain and chronic pain; 6,380 patients were included, 3,381 receiving dexketoprofen. Information from 16 trials (almost half the total patients) was obtained from clinical trial reports from previously unpublished trials or abstracts. Almost all of the trials were of short duration in acute conditions or recent onset pain. All 12 randomised trials that compared dexketoprofen (any dose) with placebo found dexketoprofen to be statistically superior. Five trials in postoperative pain yielded NNTs for 12.5 mg dexketoprofen of 3.5 (2.7 to 4.9), 25 mg dexketoprofen of 3.0 (2.4 to 3.9), and 50 mg dexketoprofen of 2.1 (1.5 to 3.5). In 29/30 active comparator trials, dexketoprofen at the dose used was at least equivalent in efficacy to comparator drugs. Adverse event withdrawal rates were low in postoperative pain and somewhat higher in trials of longer duration; no serious adverse events were reported.

Conclusion

Dexketoprofen was at least as effective as other NSAIDs and paracetamol/opioid combinations. While adverse event withdrawal was not different between dexketoprofen and comparator analgesics, the different conditions and comparators studies precluded any formal analysis. Exposure was limited, and no conclusions could be drawn about safety in terms of serious adverse events like gastrointestinal bleeding or cardiovascular events.     

n of 1 trials comparing a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug with paracetamol in osteoarthritis.

OBJECTIVE--To evaluate the efficacy of paracetamol and a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug for symptom relief in osteoarthritis. DESIGN--Double blind, randomised, controlled trials in individual patients (n of 1 trials). Three treatment cycles with two weeks'' each of paracetamol (1 g twice daily) and diclofenac (50 mg twice daily) prepared in identical gelatin capsules. SETTING--General practices in metropolitan Sydney, Australia. SUBJECTS--25 patients (median age 64 years) with pain of osteoarthritis (median duration of disease eight years) considered by their general practitioners to require regular treatment. 20 were already taking non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES--Diary of pain and stiffness, function, and side effects. RESULTS--15 patients completed the study, five withdrew early but had made a therapeutic decision, and five dropped out very early. Results from 20 patients were analysed. Several patterns of response evolved. Eight of the 20 patients found no clear difference, symptoms being adequately controlled by paracetamol; five indicated a clear preference for the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug; two showed control of symptoms after their initial two weeks of the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug which continued throughout subsequent treatment changes; in five the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug may have been better but neither agent gave satisfactory control. After three months nine of the 20 patients had adequate symptom control with paracetamol alone. CONCLUSIONS--Of 1 studies--that is, randomised trials in individual patients--are clinically useful in deciding treatment in heterogeneous conditions which require long term symptomatic relief. In osteoarthritis many patients currently receiving or being considered for non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs may achieve adequate control with paracetamol.     

Oral mucolytic drugs for exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: systematic review

ObjectiveTo assess the effects of oral mucolytics in adults with stable chronic bronchitis and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.DesignSystematic review of randomised controlled trials that compared at least two months of regular oral mucolytic drugs with placebo.StudiesTwenty three randomised controlled trials in outpatients in Europe and United States.ResultsCompared with placebo, the number of exacerbations was significantly reduced in subjects taking oral mucolytics (weighted mean difference −0.07 per month, 95% confidence interval −0.08 to −0.05, P<0.0001). Based on the annualised rate of exacerbations in the control subjects of 2.7 a year, this is a 29% reduction. The number needed to treat for one subject to have no exacerbation in the study period would be 6. Days of illness also fell (weighted mean difference −0.56, −0.77 to −0.35, P<0.0001). The number of subjects who had no exacerbations in the study period was greater in the mucolytic group (odds ratio 2.22, 95% confidence interval 1.93 to 2.54, P<0.0001). There was no difference in lung function or in adverse events reported between treatments.ConclusionsIn chronic bronchitis and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, treatment with mucolytics is associated with a reduction in acute exacerbations and days of illness. As these drugs have to be taken long term, they could be most useful in patients who have repeated, prolonged, or severe exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

What is already know on this topic

Mucolytic drugs have properties that may be beneficial in chronic obstructive pulmonary diseaseThese drugs are not prescribed in the United Kingdom and Australasia, although they are widely used in many other countriesDrugs that reduce exacerbations may reduce the morbidity and healthcare costs associated with progressively severe disease

What this study adds

Regular use of mucolytic drugs for at least two months significantly reduces exacerbations and days of illness compared with placebo in patients with chronic bronchitis and chronic obstructive pulmonary diseaseExacerbations that do occur may not be as severe, and the benefit may be greater in those with more severe diseaseReductions are modest and treatment may not be cost effective     

Duloxetine for painful diabetic neuropathy and fibromyalgia pain: systematic review of randomised trials

Background

Duloxetine hydrochloride is a reuptake inhibitor of 5-hydroxytryptamine and norepinephrine used to treat depression, generalized anxiety disorder, neuropathic pain, and stress incontinence in women. We investigated the efficacy of duloxetine in painful diabetic neuropathy and fibromyalgia to allow comparison with other antidepressants.

Methods

We searched PubMed, EMBASE (via Ovid), and Cochrane CENTRAL up to June 2008 for randomised controlled trials using duloxetine to treat neuropathic pain.

Results

We identified six trials with 1,696 patients: 1,510 were treated with duloxetine and 706 with placebo. All patients had established baseline pain of at least moderate severity. Trial duration was 12 to 13 weeks. Three trials enrolled patients with painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN) and three enrolled patients with fibromyalgia. The number needed to treat (NNT) for at least 50% pain relief at 12 to 13 weeks with duloxetine 60 mg versus placebo (1,211 patients in the total comparison) was 5.8 (95% CI 4.5 to 8.4), and for duloxetine 120 mg (1,410 patients) was 5.7 (4.5 to 5.7). There was no difference in NNTs between PDN and fibromyalgia. With all doses of duloxetine combined (20/60/120 mg) there were fewer withdrawals for lack of efficacy than with placebo (number needed to treat to prevent one withdrawal 20 (13 to 42)), but more withdrawals due to adverse events (number needed to harm (NNH) 15 (11 to 25)). Nausea, somnolence, constipation, and reduced appetite were all more common with duloxetine than placebo (NNH values 6.3, 11, 11, and 18 respectively). The results for duloxetine are compared with published data for other antidepressants in neuropathic pain.

Conclusion

Duloxetine is equally effective for the treatment of PDN and fibromyalgia, judged by the outcome of at least 50% pain relief over 12 weeks, and is well tolerated. The NNT of 6 for 50% pain relief suggests that this is likely to be a useful drug in these difficult-to-treat conditions, where typically only a minority of patients respond. Comparing duloxetine with antidepressants for pain relief in DPN shows inadequacies in the evidence for efficacy of antidepressants, which are currently recommended in PDN care pathways.

     

Parenteral dexamethasone for acute severe migraine headache: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials for preventing recurrence

Objective To examine the effectiveness of parenteral corticosteroids for the relief of acute severe migraine headache and prevention of recurrent headaches.Design Meta-analysis.Data sources Electronic databases (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Medline, Embase, LILACS, and CINAHL), conference proceedings, clinical practice guidelines, contacts with industry, and correspondence with authors.Selection criteria Randomised controlled trials in which corticosteroids (alone or combined with standard abortive therapy) were compared with placebo or any other standard treatment for acute migraine in adults.Review methods Two reviewers independently assessed relevance, inclusion, and study quality. Weighted mean differences and relative risks were calculated and are reported with 95% confidence intervals.Results From 666 potentially relevant abstracts, seven studies met the inclusion criteria. All included trials used standard abortive therapy and subsequently compared single dose parenteral dexamethasone with placebo, examining pain relief and recurrence of headache within 72 hours. Dexamethasone and placebo provided similar acute pain reduction (weighted mean difference 0.37, 95% confidence interval −0.20 to 0.94). Dexamethasone was, however, more effective than placebo in reducing recurrence rates (relative risk 0.74, 95% confidence interval 0.60 to 0.90). Side effect profiles between dexamethasone and placebo groups were similar.Conclusion When added to standard abortive therapy for migraine headache, single dose parenteral dexamethasone is associated with a 26% relative reduction in headache recurrence (number needed to treat=9) within 72 hours.     

Systematic review of the relative efficacy of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and opioids in the treatment of acute renal colic

Objective To examine the relative benefits and disadvantages of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and opioids for the management of acute renal colic.Data sources Cochrane Renal Group''s specialised register, Cochrane central register of controlled trials, Medline, Embase, and reference lists of retrieved articles.Review methods Randomised controlled trials comparing any opioid with any NSAID in acute renal colic if they reported any of the following outcomes: patient rated pain, time to pain relief, need for rescue analgesia, rate of recurrence of pain, and adverse events.Results 20 trials totalling 1613 participants were identified. Both NSAIDs and opioids led to clinically important reductions in patient reported pain scores. Pooled analysis of six trials showed a greater reduction in pain scores for patients treated with NSAIDs than with opioids. Patients treated with NSAIDs were significantly less likely to require rescue analgesia (relative risk 0.75, 95% confidence interval 0.61 to 0.93). Most trials showed a higher incidence of adverse events in patients treated with opioids. Compared with patients treated with opioids, those treated with NSAIDs had significantly less vomiting (0.35, 0.23 to 0.53). Pethidine was associated with a higher rate of vomiting.Conclusions Patients receiving NSAIDs achieve greater reductions in pain scores and are less likely to require further analgesia in the short term than those receiving opioids. Opioids, particularly pethidine, are associated with a higher rate of vomiting.     

Advice to use topical or oral ibuprofen for chronic knee pain in older people: randomised controlled trial and patient preference study

Objective To determine whether older patients with chronic knee pain should be advised to use topical or oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs).Design Randomised controlled trial and patient preference study.Setting 26 general practices.Participants People aged ≥50 with knee pain: 282 in randomised trial and 303 in preference study. Interventions Advice to use topical or oral ibuprofen.Primary outcome measures WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities) osteoarthritis index, major and minor adverse effects.Results Changes in global WOMAC scores at 12 months were equivalent. In the randomised trial the difference (topical minus oral) was two points (95% confidence interval −2 to 6); in the preference study, it was one point (−4 to 6). There were no differences in major adverse effects in the trial or study. The only significant differences in secondary outcomes were in the randomised trial. The oral group had more respiratory adverse effects (17% v 7%,95% confidence interval for difference −17% to −2%), the change in serum creatinine was 3.7 mmol/l less favourable (0.9 µmol/l to 6.5 µmol/l); and more participants changed treatments because of adverse effects (16% v 1%, −16% to −5%). In the topical group more participants had chronic pain grade III or IV at three months, and more participants changed treatment because of ineffectiveness.Conclusions Advice to use oral or topical preparations has an equivalent effect on knee pain over one year, and there are more minor side effects with oral NSAIDs. Topical NSAIDs may be a useful alternative to oral NSAIDs.Trial registration ISRCTN 79353052.     

Systematic review of comparative efficacy and tolerability of calcipotriol in treating chronic plaque psoriasis

ObjectivesTo evaluate the comparative efficacy and tolerability of topical calcipotriol in the treatment of mild to moderate chronic plaque psoriasis.DesignQuantitative systematic review of randomised controlled trials.Subjects6038 patients with plaque psoriasis reported in 37 trials.ResultsCalcipotriol was at least as effective as potent topical corticosteroids, calcitriol, short contact dithranol, tacalcitol, coal tar, and combined coal tar 5%, allantoin 2%, and hydrocortisone 0.5%. Calcipotriol caused significantly more skin irritation than potent topical corticosteroids (number needed to treat to harm for irritation 10, 95% confidence interval 6 to 34). Calcipotriol monotherapy also caused more irritation than calcipotriol combined with a potent topical corticosteroid (6, 4 to 8). However, the number needed to treat for dithranol to produce lesional or perilesional irritation was 4 (3 to 5). On average, treating 23 patients with short contact dithranol led to one more patient dropping out of treatment owing to adverse effects than if they were treated with calcipotriol.ConclusionsCalcipotriol is an effective treatment for mild to moderate chronic plaque psoriasis, more so than calcitriol, tacalcitol, coal tar, and short contact dithranol. Only potent topical corticosteroids seem to have comparable efficacy at eight weeks. Although calcipotriol caused more skin irritation than topical corticosteroids this has to be balanced against the potential long term effects of corticosteroids. Skin irritation rarely led to withdrawal of calcipotriol treatment. Longer term comparative trials of calcipotriol versus dithranol and topical corticosteroids are needed to see whether these short term benefits are mirrored by long term outcomes such as duration of remission and improvement in quality of life.     

Are antibiotics indicated as initial treatment for children with acute otitis media? A meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of antibiotic treatment for acute otitis media in children. DESIGN: Systematic search of the medical literature to identify studies that used antibiotics in randomised controlled trials to treat acute otitis media. Studies were examined blind, and the results of those of satisfactory quality of methodology were pooled. SUBJECTS: Six studies of children aged 7 months to 15 years. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Pain, deafness, and other symptoms related to acute otitis media or antibiotic treatment. RESULTS: 60% of placebo treated children were pain free within 24 hours of presentation, and antibiotics did not influence this. However, at 2-7 days after presentation, by which time only 14% of children in control groups still had pain, early use of antibiotics reduced the risk of pain by 41% (95% confidence interval 14% to 60%). Antibiotics reduced contralateral acute otitis media by 43% (9% to 64%). They seemed to have no influence on subsequent attacks of otitis media or deafness at one month, although there was a trend for improvement of deafness at three months. Antibiotics were associated with a near doubling of the risk of vomiting, diarrhoea, or rashes (odds ratio 1.97 (1.19 to 3.25)). CONCLUSIONS: Early use of antibiotics provides only modest benefit for acute otitis media: to prevent one child from experiencing pain by 2-7 days after presentation, 17 children must be treated with antibiotics early.     

Synthesis and pharmacological evaluation of conjugates of prednisolone and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents

Esters of prednisolone with ibuprofen and indomethacin were prepared by coupling the 21-hydroxy moiety of the glucocorticoid to the carboxylic group of the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents. The local and systemic anti-inflammatory activities of the conjugates were evaluated using the cotton pellet granuloma bioassay and their topical activity evaluated by the croton oil-induced ear edema assay, in male Sprague-Dawley rats. The results indicate that these conjugates possess greater local and topical anti-inflammatory activity than prednisolone. In the subacute ear edema bioassay, the conjugates displayed no discernible untoward systemic effects, unlike prednisolone and prednisolone acetate, which elicited significant adverse systemic effects, at equipotent doses. These findings suggest that the chemical coupling of prednisolone and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents produced compounds with enhanced anti-inflammatory potencies and reduced systemic toxicities, particularly when administered topically.     

Influences on older people’s decision making regarding choice of topical or oral NSAIDs for knee pain: qualitative study

Objective To explore the factors that influence older people’s decision making regarding use of topical or oral ibuprofen for their knee pain.Design Qualitative interview study nested within a randomised controlled trial and a patient preference study that compared advice to use oral or topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for knee pain in older people.Setting 11 general practices.Participants 30 people aged ≥50 with knee pain. Results Participants’ decision making was influenced by their perceptions of the associated risk of adverse effects, presence of other illness, nature of their pain, advice received, and practicality. Although participants’ understanding of how the medications worked was sometimes poor their decision making about the use of NSAIDs seemed logical and appropriate. Participants’ model for treatment was to use topical NSAIDs for mild, local, and transient pain and oral NSAIDs for moderate to severe, generalised, and constant pain (in the absence of other more serious illness or risk of adverse effects). Participants showed marked tolerance and normalisation of adverse effects.Conclusion Participants had clear ideas about the appropriate use of oral and topical NSAIDs. Taking such views into account when prescribing may improve adherence, judgment of efficacy, and the doctor-patient relationship. Tolerance and normalisation of adverse effects in these patients indicate that closer monitoring of older people who use NSAIDs might be needed.     

Prevention of gastroduodenal damage induced by non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs: controlled trial of ranitidine.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the prophylactic effect of ranitidine 150 mg twice daily in patients requiring one of the following non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs: naproxen, piroxicam, diclofenac, and indomethacin. In addition, risk factors were studied in order to help in targeting of such treatment to specific groups of patients. DESIGN: Double blind, placebo controlled, randomised, parallel group with endoscopic assessments at 0, 4, and 8 weeks. SETTING: Multicentre outpatient study at secondary referral centres in five European countries. PATIENTS--297 patients with rheumatoid arthritis or osteoarthritis over the age of 18 without lesions in the stomach and duodenum at baseline endoscopy (after one week without taking non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs). Those taking other antirheumatic agents, concomitant ulcerogenic drugs, or treatment for peptic ulcers within the previous 30 days were excluded. Age, sex, arthritic disease, and type of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug used were comparable in the two treatment groups. In all, 263 patients completed the trial. INTERVENTIONS: Ranitidine 150 mg twice daily or placebo (plus the selected non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug) was prescribed within five days after the baseline endoscopy for two consecutive periods of four weeks. Paracetamol was permitted during the study, but not antacids. Patients were withdrawn if the most severe grade of damage (including ulceration) was found at the four week endoscopy or when indicated, or with lesser damage at the investigator''s discretion. END POINT: Frequency of gastric and duodenal ulceration or lesions, or both. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The cumulative incidence of peptic ulceration by eight weeks was 10.3% (27/263); 2 out of 135 (1.5%) developed duodenal ulceration in the ranitidine group, compared with 10 out of 126 (8%) taking placebo. The frequency of gastric ulceration was the same (6%) for the two groups at eight weeks. Though significantly fewer gastric lesions developed in the ranitidine group by eight weeks. The frequency of non-ulcerative lesions in the duodenum did not differ greatly for the two groups at either time point. Twelve out of 75 (16%) patients taking piroxicam developed peptic ulceration, of whom two thirds had duodenal ulceration. Patients with a history of peptic ulcer were particularly susceptible to recurrent ulceration, against which ranitidine offered some protection. CONCLUSIONS: Ranitidine 150 mg twice daily significantly reduced the incidence of duodenal ulceration but not gastric ulceration when prescribed concomitantly with one of four commonly used non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.     

What can chronic arthritis pain teach about developing new analgesic drugs?

Chronic pain remains an important public health need with greater impact on the US economy than most other chronic conditions. Current pain management is largely limited to opioids and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, indicating a gap in the translation of new knowledge to the development of improved pain treatments. Strategies suggested include the re-evaluation of current drug screening methods, a recognition that molecular-genetic events occurring acutely contribute to the development of pain chronicity, the validation of analgesic targets in the intended patient population, consideration of the unique genetic profile that varies between individuals, and the introduction of individual response measures to improve the capture of outcomes in clinical trials.     

Impact of covert duplicate publication on meta-analysis: a case study.

OBJECTIVE: To quantify the impact of duplicate data on estimates of efficacy. DESIGN: Systematic search for published full reports of randomised controlled trials investigating ondansetron''s effect on postoperative emesis. Abstracts were not considered. DATA SOURCES: Eighty four trials (11,980 patients receiving ondansetron) published between 1991 and September 1996. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Percentage of duplicated trials and patient data. Estimation of antiemetic efficacy (prevention of emesis) of the most duplicated ondansetron regimen. Comparison between the efficacy of non-duplicated and duplicated data. RESULTS: Data from nine trials had been published in 14 further reports, duplicating data from 3335 patients receiving ondansetron; none used a clear cross reference. Intravenous ondansetron 4 mg versus placebo was investigated in 16 reports not subject to duplicate publication, three reports subject to duplicate publication, and six duplicates of those three reports. The number needed to treat to prevent vomiting within 24 hours was 9.5 (95% confidence interval 6.9 to 15) in the 16 non-duplicated reports and 3.9 (3.3 to 4.8) in the three reports which were duplicated (P < 0.00001). When these 19 were combined the number needed to treat was 6.4 (5.3 to 7.9). When all original and duplicate reports were combined (n = 25) the apparent number needed to treat improved to 4.9 (4.4 to 5.6). CONCLUSIONS: By searching systematically we found 17% of published full reports of randomised trials and 28% of the patient data were duplicated. Trials reporting greater treatment effect were significantly more likely to be duplicated. Inclusion of duplicated data in meta-analysis led to a 23% overestimation of ondansetron''s antiemetic efficacy.     

Systematic review and meta-analysis of proton pump inhibitor therapy in peptic ulcer bleeding

Objectives To review randomised controlled trials of treatment with a proton pump inhibitor in patients with ulcer bleeding and determine the impact on mortality, rebleeding, and surgical intervention.Design Systematic review and meta-analysis.Data sources Cochrane Collaboration''s trials register, Medline, and Embase, handsearched abstracts, and pharmaceutical companies.Review methods Included randomised controlled trials compared proton pump inhibitor with placebo or H₂ receptor antagonist in endoscopically proved bleeding ulcer and reported at least one of mortality, rebleeding, or surgical intervention. Trials were graded for methodological quality. Two assessors independently reviewed each trial, and disagreements were resolved by consensus.Results We included 21 randomised controlled trials comprising 2915 patients. Proton pump inhibitor treatment had no significant effect on mortality (odds ratio 1.11, 95% confidence interval 0.79 to 1.57; number needed to treat (NNT) incalculable) but reduced rebleeding (0.46, 0.33 to 0.64; NNT 12) and surgery (0.59, 0.46 to 0.76; NNT 20). Results were similar when the meta-analysis was restricted to the 10 trials with the highest methodological quality: 0.96, 0.46 to 2.01, for mortality; 0.41, 0.25 to 0.68, NNT 10, for rebleeding; 0.62, 0.46 to 0.83, NNT 25, for surgery.Conclusions Treatment with a proton pump inhibitor reduces the risk of rebleeding and the requirement for surgery after ulcer bleeding but has no benefit on overall mortality.     

Prevention of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents induced acute gastric mucosal lesions by carbonic anhydrase inhibitors. An endoscopic study

The present paper studies the effect of acetazolamide, an inhibitor of carbonic anhydrase, on acute gastric mucosal damage induced by non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. The study was performed on healthy male subjects. The drugs tested were aspirin (1.5 g/day), indomethacin (75 mg/day), phenylbutazone (600 mg/day) and ibuprofen (600 mg/day) given for 7 days in 3 divided doses. Each drug was given to 5 cases in two separate periods, during which they were given acetazolamide 20 mg/kg/day or placebo in random order. Dyspeptic symptoms were evaluated. Endoscopy was performed before, and 3 and 7 days after NOSAC administration. Gastric mucosal lesions were evaluated according to the scale proposed by Lanza (J. Clin. Pharmacol., 24: 1984, 89) and the severity of the lesions was calculated. All drugs tested produced dyspeptic symptoms and acute mucosal damage of the gastric mucosa. Inhibition of gastric mucosa carbonic anhydrase by acetazolamide cessated promptly dyspeptic symptoms and reduced significantly the number and severity of drug-associated mucosal lesions.     

Systematic overview of co-proxamol to assess analgesic effects of addition of dextropropoxyphene to paracetamol.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the comparative efficacy and tolerability of paracetamol-dextropropoxyphene combination and paracetamol through a systematic overview of randomised controlled trials. DESIGN: Systematic retrieval of trials of paracetamol-dextropropoxyphene, paracetamol, and placebo to allow pooling of results from head to head comparison trials and single active placebo controlled trials. SUBJECTS: 2231 patients with postsurgical pain, arthritis, and musculoskeletal pain reported in 26 randomised controlled trials. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Sum of difference in pain intensity; response rate ratio and difference in response rate with response defined as moderate to excellent pain relief; and rate ratio and rate difference of side effects. RESULTS: The difference in pain intensity between paracetamol-dextropropoxyphene and paracetamol was 7.3% (95% confidence interval -0.2 to 14.9). The response rate ratio for the combination and paracetamol was 1.05 (0.8 to 1.3) on the basis of the head to head trials. Indirect comparisons produced quantitatively consistent results. Compared with placebo, the combination produced more dizziness (3.1; 1.1 to 8.9) whereas paracetamol resulted in more drowsiness (1.8; 1.1 to 2.9). CONCLUSION: On the basis of data on analgesic efficacy and acute safety in both head to head and indirect comparisons, there is little objective evidence to support prescribing a combination of paracetamol and dextropropoxyphene in preference to paracetamol alone in moderate pain such as that after surgery.