Gregory P Geba

Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois, United States

Are you Gregory P Geba?

Claim your profile

Publications (28)193.76 Total impact

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Rofecoxib and nabumetone were developed to provide gastrointestinal benefits over traditional nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). However, there is limited comparative information relating to these 2 drugs. The objective of this study was to compare rofecoxib and nabumetone, at their lower, recommended doses, in patients with osteoarthritis (OA). Nine hundred seventy-eight patients with knee OA and a positive history of NSAID response were randomized to 12.5 mg rofecoxib per day (N=390), nabumetone 500 mg twice a day (N=392), or placebo (N=196) for 6 weeks. The primary efficacy end point was percent of patients with a "good" or "excellent" Patient Global Assessment of Response to Therapy (PGART) at week 6; PGART was also evaluated over days 1 to 6. Additional end points included investigator assessment of response, pain walking over 6 days and 6 weeks, joint tenderness, discontinuation as a result of lack of efficacy, and quality of life. Adverse experiences (AEs) were collected. Significantly more rofecoxib (50.4%) than nabumetone (43.3%, P=0.043) or placebo (29.5%, P<0.001) patients had a good or excellent PGART at week 6. Median time to a good or excellent PGART was significantly shorter with rofecoxib (52 hours) than nabumetone (100 hours, P=0.001) or placebo (>124 hours, P<0.001). Results for rofecoxib and nabumetone were similar in all additional end points except pain in walking over 6 days and 6 weeks, in both of which the rofecoxib treatment group demonstrated better results. There were significantly (P<0.050) more overall and serious AEs and discontinuations resulting from AEs with rofecoxib than nabumetone. Five rofecoxib and one nabumetone patients had confirmed thrombotic cardiovascular events (P=0.123). Information on thrombotic cardiovascular events from this study was included in a published, prespecified pooled analysis and is included here for completeness. At their recommended starting doses for OA, both agents were more effective than placebo. Rofecoxib at a dosage of 12.5 mg demonstrated significantly better efficacy in PGART than 1000 mg nabumetone in these patients known to be NSAID responders. Significantly more AEs occurred with rofecoxib than nabumetone. Considering these data and other recent safety information regarding cyclooxygenase-2 selective and nonselective NSAIDS, physicians must make risk/benefit assessments for each individual patient when considering the use of these agents, as recommended by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
    JCR Journal of Clinical Rheumatology 02/2006; 12(1):17-25. · 1.25 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To compare efficacy among 1578 patients with osteoarthritis randomized to take acetaminophen 4000 mg (n=269), celecoxib 200 mg (n=523), rofecoxib 12.5 mg (n=259), or rofecoxib 25 mg (n=527) in a double blind trial [Vioxx, Acetaminophen, Celecoxib Trial (VACT2)]. Results were also pooled with the similarly designed VACT1 trial. Patients evaluated over Days 1 to 6 and 6 weeks with Patient Global Assessment of Response to Therapy (PGART) and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) Osteoarthritis Index. For VACT2, median time to good or excellent PGART response was 6, 5, 4, and 3 days for acetaminophen, celecoxib, rofecoxib 12.5 mg, and rofecoxib 25 mg (COX-2 inhibitors vs acetaminophen, p<or=0.035; rofecoxib 25 mg vs celecoxib, p=0.01). WOMAC response over the first 6 days was greater (p < 0.05) with both rofecoxib doses than acetaminophen and celecoxib. At Week 6, all COX-2 inhibitors provided significantly greater efficacy than acetaminophen. Good or excellent PGART was numerically, but not significantly, greater with rofecoxib 25 mg (55.4%) than celecoxib (50.6%) at Week 6; a significant difference was seen at Weeks 2 (6.9, p=0.022) and 4 (6.7, p=0.027) and over 6 weeks with analysis of all 5 PGART categories of response (p=0.035). Rofecoxib 25 mg provided greater response (p<0.05) than celecoxib on WOMAC subscales. Pooled analysis of VACT1/VACT2 demonstrated greater PGART (p=0.023) with rofecoxib 25 mg (56.1%) than celecoxib (49.8%) at 6 weeks and greater response to all other PGART and WOMAC endpoints, and confirmed superiority of COX-2 inhibitors to acetaminophen. Overall, tolerability of the study medications was generally good and similar. There was no significant difference between treatment groups in the percentage of patients who experienced a clinical adverse experience (AE). The incidence of discontinuations due to an AE was significantly lower with celecoxib (2.5%) compared to rofecoxib 25 mg (6.3%, p=0.004) or acetaminophen (7.8%, p< 0.001), and did not differ significantly from rofecoxib 12.5 mg (4.6%). Discontinuation rates due to edema and hypertension related AE were similar among all COX-2 inhibitors. Rofecoxib and celecoxib provided superior efficacy to acetaminophen. There was a more rapid and greater response with rofecoxib 25 mg than celecoxib 200 mg. Rofecoxib 12.5 mg demonstrated greater efficacy than celecoxib 200 mg over the first 6 days, and was similar over 6 weeks. All study medications were generally well tolerated.
    The Journal of Rheumatology 07/2005; 32(6):1093-105. · 3.17 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To determine the time to onset of analgesia of rofecoxib based on a patient-level meta-analysis of randomized, placebo-controlled, postoperative oral surgery pain studies. A search on MEDLINE and of Merck data on file was conducted to identify studies that met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis inclusion criteria required that patients were treated with a single oral dose of rofecoxib 50 mg when they experienced moderate or severe pain after surgical extraction of > or = 2 third molars; study design involved patient randomization, double-blinding, and matching placebo, and onset data from individual patients were available. The meta-analysis of time to onset also required that studies used the two-stopwatch method. Eleven studies fulfilled the onset criteria and included patients who received a single dose of rofecoxib 50 mg (N = 1220) or placebo (N = 483). These studies were analyzed to determine time to onset of analgesia, time to perceptible pain relief, percentage of patients achieving onset of analgesia, and duration of analgesia. Six of the 11 studies included a nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (N = 303) and were included in the onset meta-analysis for comparison. The meta-analysis of overall efficacy also required that data on total pain relief scores over 8 hours were available. Over-all effectiveness of analgesia was based on analysis of 13 studies involving 1330 rofecoxib patients and 570 placebo patients on the endpoints of total pain relief scores over 8 hours and patient global assessment of response to therapy at 24 hours. Eight of the 13 studies with a nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug comparator (N = 391) were included for the efficacy meta-analysis. Patient demographics and baseline characteristics were similar across treatment groups in each study. Median time to onset of analgesia for rofecoxib was 34 minutes (95% CI, 31-38 minutes), significantly faster than placebo, which did not achieve onset within the 4 hours the assessment was conducted (P < 0.001). Duration of analgesia for rofecoxib 50 mg was > 24 hours. Rofecoxib achieved a greater mean total pain relief score over 8 hours than placebo (17.4 versus 4.4; P < 0.001) and a greater patient response rate on patient global assessment of response to therapy at 24 hours than placebo (73% versus 16%; P < 0.001). Outcomes were similar between the rofecoxib group and the nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug group. In this meta-analysis of over 1200 rofecoxib-treated patients, a single dose of rofecoxib 50 mg demonstrated a rapid onset of analgesia in approximately half an hour combined with sustained effectiveness, supporting its use as a treatment of acute pain.
    Clinical Journal of Pain 04/2005; 21(3):241-50. · 2.70 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Both oral bisphosphonates and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs have the potential to irritate the upper gastrointestinal mucosa, and are frequently used by the same patient population. To determine the rate of upper gastrointestinal adverse events with once weekly alendronate 70 mg and concomitant non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug use. A post hoc analysis was performed on 222 patients who received both medications concomitantly during a 3-month placebo-controlled study. A total of 450 (224 alendronate; 226 placebo) postmenopausal women and men with osteoporosis were randomized. Concomitant non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug users were defined as patients who received > or =7 continuous days of any dose of a dual cyclo-oxygenase-1 and cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibiting non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug, a selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitor, or aspirin. A survival analysis was performed, and significance assessed. Logistic regression was used to assess consistency of treatment effect on rate of upper gastrointestinal adverse events across non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug subgroups. Similar percentages of alendronate (52.7%) and placebo (46.0%) patients used non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs regularly. Among concomitant non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug users, 11 alendronate and 11 placebo patients experienced upper gastrointestinal adverse events (9.3% and 10.8%, respectively, P = 0.744). Logistic regression revealed no significant interaction (P = 0.722) between alendronate and concomitant non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug use. Based on this subgroup analysis, once weekly alendronate 70 mg used concomitantly with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, did not increase upper gastrointestinal adverse events relative to placebo over 3-months.
    Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics 04/2005; 21(5):599-607. · 5.48 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We compared onset of efficacy (during days 1 to 6) of 2 coxibs (rofecoxib, celecoxib) with acetaminophen and nabumetone by using a prespecified approach to data from 4 similarly designed 6-week randomized osteoarthritis trials. In 2 trials, rofecoxib (12.5 mg and 25 mg once daily) was compared with celecoxib (200 mg once daily) and acetaminophen (4000 mg daily). In the other 2 trials, rofecoxib (12.5 mg) was compared with nabumetone (1000 mg once daily) and placebo. Efficacy end points included Patient Global Response to Therapy and Western Ontario and McMaster Osteoarthritis Index scores. Rofecoxib (12.5- and 25-mg doses) consistently demonstrated a faster onset of osteoarthritis (OA) efficacy than the comparator drugs during the first 6 days of therapy of OA patients experiencing "flare." Acetaminophen resulted in the slowest onset of efficacy. There was a strong correlation (0.7) between efficacy response during days 1 to 6 and that averaged over 6 weeks. Rates of discontinuation as a result of lack of efficacy were significantly lower (P < .02) for each of the coxib-treated groups compared with acetaminophen and for rofecoxib 12.5 mg (P = .01) compared with nabumetone. Rofecoxib treatment, with its faster onset of OA efficacy and lower rates of related discontinuations, might provide efficacy advantages in the treatment of OA pain. PERSPECTIVE: The efficacy of rofecoxib, celecoxib, nabumetone, and acetaminophen is established for the majority of OA patients within the first 6 days of therapy, and this predicts efficacy during the longer term. Rofecoxib provides significantly faster time to onset of efficacy and better improvement on multiple measures versus the comparators.
    Journal of Pain 12/2004; 5(9):511-20. · 4.22 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Our objective in this study was to compare the analgesic effects of etoricoxib and oxycodone/acetaminophen in a postoperative dental pain model. Patients experiencing moderate to severe pain after extraction of two or more third molars were randomized to single doses of etoricoxib 120 mg (n = 100), oxycodone/acetaminophen 10/650 mg (n = 100), or placebo (n = 25). The primary end-point was total pain relief over 6 h. Other end-points included patient global assessment of response to therapy; onset, peak, and duration of effect; and rescue opioid analgesic use. Active treatments were statistically significantly superior to placebo for all efficacy measures. Total pain relief over 6 h for etoricoxib was significantly more than for oxycodone/acetaminophen (P < 0.001). Patient global assessment of response to therapy at 6 and 24 h was superior for etoricoxib. Both drugs achieved rapid onset, although the time was faster for oxycodone/acetaminophen by 5 min. The peak effect was similar for both drugs. Compared with oxycodone/acetaminophen patients, etoricoxib patients experienced a longer analgesic duration, had a smaller percentage requiring rescue opioids during 6 and 24 h, and required less rescue analgesia during 6 and 24 h. Oxycodone/acetaminophen treatment resulted in more frequent adverse events (AEs), drug-related AEs, nausea, and vomiting compared with etoricoxib treatment. In conclusion, etoricoxib 120 mg provided superior overall efficacy compared with oxycodone/acetaminophen 10/650 mg and was associated with significantly fewer AEs.
    Anesthesia & Analgesia 09/2004; 99(3):807-15, table of contents. · 3.42 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To compare the efficacy of a single dose of rofecoxib 50 mg with a single dose of oxycodone/acetaminophen 10/650 mg over 6 h as well as with a multidose regimen of oxycodone/acetaminophen 10/650 mg followed by oxycodone/acetaminophen 5/325 mg over 24 h. Research design and methods: In this double-blind, randomized, two-phase study, patients with moderate to severe pain after surgical extraction of >or= 2 third molars, including one mandibular impaction, were treated with rofecoxib 50 mg, oxycodone/acetaminophen 10/650 mg (singledose phase) followed by 5/325 mg every 6h as needed (multidose phase), or placebo. Patients rated their pain relief and intensity at 18 time points over 24 h. Efficacy was measured over 6 and 24 h by total pain relief (TOPAR), sum of pain intensity difference (SPID), and patient global assessment of response to therapy (PGART). Primary endpoint for the single dose comparison was TOPAR over 6 h; SPID was the key 24-h endpoint. Onset of analgesic effect, peak analgesic single dose of oxycodone/acetaminophen. effect, and duration of analgesic effect were also evaluated. Adverse experiences were recorded. 271 patients were randomized to treatment with rofecoxib (n = 121), oxycodone/acetaminophen (n = 120), or placebo (n = 30). For the single dose comparison, rofecoxib-treated patients achieved pain relief at least as effective as oxycodone/acetaminophentreated patients as assessed by TOPAR6 (12.9 vs 11.3, 95% CI on difference = [-0.1, 3.2], p = 0.059). Patients also rated a single dose of rofecoxib as at least as effective as multidose oxycodone/acetaminophen over 24 h on SPID24 (21.9 vs 18.1, 95% CI on difference = [-1.0, 8.8], p = 0.122). Patients treated with oxycodone/ acetaminophen had a shorter time to onset of analgesia than patients treated with rofecoxib (24 vs 35 min, p < 0.05). Patients in the active treatment groups achieved similar peak effects during the single-dose phase. Individuals treated with rofecoxib demonstrated a longer duration of analgesic effect than those treated with a Patients on active treatment demonstrated better efficacy than patients on placebo on these prespecified endpoints (p < 0.001 for both comparisons). Fewer rofecoxib than oxycodone/acetaminophen patients experienced adverse events (47.9 vs 75.8%, p < 0.001), including nausea (19.0 vs 42.5%, p < 0.001), vomiting (9.9 vs 24.2%, p < 0.01), and dizziness (7.4 vs 31.7%, p < 0.001). Patients treated with a single dose of rofecoxib 50 mg achieved an overall analgesic effect at least as effective as patients treated with a single-dose of oxycodone/acetaminophen 10/650 mg over 6 h and multidose oxycodone/acetaminophen over 24 h, with fewer adverse experiences of nausea (p < 0.001), vomiting (p < 0.01), and dizziness (p < 0.001).
    Current Medical Research and Opinion 06/2004; 20(6):939-49. · 2.37 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To evaluate the use of starting doses of rofecoxib and nabumetone in patients with osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee. A 6-week, randomized, parallel-group, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. One hundred thirteen outpatient sites in the United States. A total of 1,042 male and female patients aged 40 and older with OA of the knee (>6 months). Rofecoxib 12.5 mg once a day (n=424), nabumetone 1,000 mg once a day (n=410), or placebo (n=208) for 6 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was patient global assessment of response to therapy (PGART) over 6 weeks, which was also specifically evaluated over the first 6 days. The main safety measure was adverse events during the 6 weeks of treatment. The percentage of patients with a good or excellent response to therapy as assessed using PGART at Week 6 was significantly higher with rofecoxib (55.4%) than nabumetone (47.5%; P=.018) or placebo (26.7%; P<.001 vs rofecoxib or nabumetone). Median time to first report of a good or excellent PGART response was significantly shorter in patients treated with rofecoxib (2 days) than with nabumetone (4 days, P=.002) and placebo (>5 days, P<.001) (nabumetone vs placebo; P=.007). The safety profiles of rofecoxib and nabumetone were generally similar, including gastrointestinal, hypertensive, and renal adverse events. Rofecoxib 12.5 mg daily demonstrated better efficacy over 6 weeks of treatment and quicker onset of OA efficacy over the first 6 days than nabumetone 1,000 mg daily. Both therapies were generally well tolerated.
    Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 05/2004; 52(5):666-74. · 4.22 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of etoricoxib and indomethacin in the treatment of patients with acute gout. A randomized, double-blind, active-comparator study was conducted at 42 sites. A total of 189 men and women (> or =18 years of age) who were experiencing an acute attack (< or =48 hours) of clinically diagnosed gout were treated for 8 days with etoricoxib, 120 mg/day (n = 103), or indomethacin, 50 mg 3 times a day (n = 86). The primary efficacy end point was the patient's assessment of pain in the study joint (0-4-point Likert scale) over days 2-5. Safety was assessed by adverse experiences (AEs) occurring during the trial. Etoricoxib demonstrated clinical efficacy comparable to that of indomethacin in terms of the patient's assessment of pain in the study joint. The difference in the mean change from baseline over days 2-5 was -0.08 (95% confidence interval -0.29, 0.13) (P = 0.46), which fell within the prespecified comparability bounds of -0.5 to 0.5. Secondary end points over the 8-day study, including the onset of efficacy, reduction in signs of inflammation, and patient's and investigator's global assessments of response to therapy, confirmed the comparable efficacy of the two treatments. The etoricoxib-treated patients had a numerically lower incidence of AEs (43.7%) than did the indomethacin-treated patients (57.0%) and a significantly lower incidence of drug-related AEs (16.5% versus 37.2%; P < 0.05). Etoricoxib at a dosage of 120 mg once daily was confirmed to be an effective treatment for acute gout. Etoricoxib was comparable in efficacy to indomethacin at a dosage of 50 mg 3 times daily, and it was generally safe and well tolerated.
    Arthritis & Rheumatology 03/2004; 50(2):598-606. · 7.87 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Chronic low back pain (LBP) is a growing health problem. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are used to treat this condition, but have not demonstrated efficacy beyond 2 weeks, and no studies have shown that NSAIDs produce durable improvements in disability. To evaluate the efficacy and durability of effect of etoricoxib for chronic LBP, a randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted at 46 centres. Three hundred and twenty-five patients with chronic LBP requiring treatment with an NSAID or paracetamol were randomized 1:1:1 to etoricoxib 60 mg (n=109), 90 mg (n=106), or placebo (n=110), daily for 3 months. Pre-specified endpoints over 3 months included LBP intensity scale (visual analog scale 0-100 mm) time-weighted average change from baseline, the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), the LBP bothersomeness scale, patient and investigator global assessments, and measures of quality of life. Both etoricoxib groups experienced significant reductions in LBP intensity at 4 weeks versus placebo [-15.15 mm and -13.03 mm for 60 and 90 mg, respectively, probability (p)<0.001 for each], which was maintained over 3 months. Treatment resulted in significant improvement from baseline compared to placebo in RMDQ scores (etoricoxib 60 mg, -2.82 and 90 mg, -2.38, p<0.001 for each) over 12 weeks and most other efficacy endpoints. There were no significant differences between treatments in incidence of adverse events (AEs) or discontinuations due to AEs. Etoricoxib provided significant relief of symptoms and disability associated with chronic LBP detected at 1 week, confirmed at 4 weeks, and maintained over 3 months. Reductions in chronic LBP severity corresponded to improvements in physical functioning and quality of life. All treatments were generally well tolerated.
    Scandinavian Journal of Rheumatology 01/2004; 33(4):257-66. · 2.61 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity mediated by dual cyclooxygenase (COX)-1 and COX-2 inhibition of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) can cause serious alterations of mucosal integrity or, more commonly, intolerable GI symptoms that may necessitate discontinuation of therapy. Unlike NSAIDs, rofecoxib targets only the COX-2 isoform. To assess the tolerability of rofecoxib compared with naproxen for treatment of osteoarthritis. Randomized, controlled trial. 600 office and clinical research sites. 5557 patients (mean age, 63 years) with a baseline diagnosis of osteoarthritis of the knee, hip, hand, or spine. Rofecoxib, 25 mg/d, or naproxen, 500 mg twice daily. Use of routine medications, including aspirin, was permitted. Discontinuation due to GI adverse events (primary end point) and use of concomitant medication to treat GI symptoms (secondary end point). Efficacy was determined by patient-reported global assessment of disease status and the Australian/Canadian Osteoarthritis Hand Index, as well as discontinuations due to lack of efficacy. Patients were evaluated at baseline and at weeks 6 and 12. Rates of cumulative discontinuation due to GI adverse events were statistically significantly lower in the rofecoxib group than in the naproxen group (5.9% vs. 8.1%; relative risk, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.60 to 0.92]; P = 0.005), as were rates of cumulative use of medication to treat GI symptoms (9.1% vs. 11.2%; relative risk, 0.79 [CI, 0.66 to 0.96]; P = 0.014]). Subgroup analysis of patients who used low-dose aspirin (13%) and those who previously discontinued using arthritis medication because of GI symptoms (15%) demonstrated a relative risk similar to the overall sample for discontinuation due to GI adverse events (relative risk, 0.56 [CI, 0.31 to 1.01] and 0.53 [CI, 0.34 to 0.84], respectively). No statistically significant difference was observed between treatments for efficacy in treating osteoarthritis or for occurrence of other adverse events. In patients with osteoarthritis treated for 12 weeks, rofecoxib, 25 mg/d, was as effective as naproxen, 500 mg twice daily, but had statistically significantly superior GI tolerability and led to less use of concomitant GI medications. Benefits of rofecoxib in subgroup analyses were consistent with findings in the overall sample.
    Annals of internal medicine 11/2003; 139(7):539-46. · 16.10 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We evaluated etoricoxib, a novel COX-2-specific inhibitor, in 319 patients with chronic low back pain (LBP) in this double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Patients were randomized to a 60 mg dose (n = 103) or 90 mg dose (n = 107) of etoricoxib, or placebo (n = 109), daily for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was low back pain intensity scale (Visual Analog Scale of 0- to 100-mm) time-weighted average change from baseline over 4 weeks. Other endpoints included evaluation over 3 months of low back pain intensity scale, Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), low back pain bothersomeness scale, patient- and investigator-global assessments, Patient Health Survey (MOS SF-12), rescue acetaminophen use, and discontinuation due to lack of efficacy. Etoricoxib provided significant improvement from baseline versus placebo in pain intensity (4 weeks: 12.9 mm and 10.3 mm for 60-mg and 90-mg doses, P <.001 for each; 12 weeks: 10.5 mm and 7.5 mm for 60-mg and 90-mg doses, P =.001 and.018, respectively). Etoricoxib at either dose led to significant improvement in other endpoints, including RMDQ scores, bothersomeness scores and global assessments. Etoricoxib given once daily provided significant relief of symptoms, and disability associated with chronic LBP that was observed 1 week after initiating therapy, was maximal at 4 weeks, and was maintained over 3 months.
    Journal of Pain 09/2003; 4(6):307-15. · 4.22 Impact Factor
  • Journal of the American College of Cardiology 03/2003; 41(6):310-310. · 15.34 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Inhibition of cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 may alter renal function in some patients due to effects on renal blood flow and tubular function. We evaluated hypertension adverse experiences (AEs) in patients treated with the COX-2 specific inhibitors, rofecoxib and celecoxib compared to acetaminophen. A total of 1960 patients (VACT 1, N=381 and VACT 2, N=1579) with osteoarthritis of the knee were enrolled in two randomized, double-blind, active comparator efficacy trials. The patients received treatment with rofecoxib 12.5 mg (N=355) or 25 mg (N=622), celecoxib 200 mg (N=620), or acetaminophen 4000 mg (N=363) daily for 6 weeks. Patient demographics were similar across treatment groups in both studies. The majority of patients were Caucasian (87%), women (68%), with a median age of 62 years. An exploratory analysis was performed to evaluate the percentage of patients with hypertension-related AEs and discontinuations due to hypertension-related AEs. Hypertension-related AEs were dominated by the term hypertension, but included all terms that implied hypertension. Overall, 38 (1.9%) patients experienced an hypertension-related AE. The percentage of patients by treatment group was rofecoxib 12.5 mg, 2.8% (10 patients); rofecoxib 25 mg, 1.3% (8 patients); celecoxib 200 mg, 1.8% (11 patients); and acetaminophen 4000 mg, 2.5% (9 patients). The percentage for all rofecoxib patients was 1.8%. Less than 1% of the patients in each treatment group discontinued the studies due to a hypertension-related AE. No clinically meaningful difference in mean change from baseline in blood pressure was observed when comparing rofecoxib at both doses to celecoxib or acetaminophen. The percentage of patients with hypertension-related AEs was small. Although not a prespecified analysis, we observed comparable incidence of hypertension-related AEs comparing rofecoxib and celecoxib. Patients treated with COX-2 inhibitors were at no greater risk to experience a hypertension-related AE than those treated with acetaminophen.
  • Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. 01/2003; 62:284-285.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Cyclooxygenase (Cox) is a key enzyme in the biosynthetic metabolism of prostaglandins. The inducible isoform of Cox-2 has been implicated in inflammation and its specific inhibition can be used to treat noninfectious inflammatory diseases, such as rheumatoid arthritis. Borrelia burgdorferi, the agent of Lyme disease, can induce joint inflammation. Here we show that B. burgdorferi induced the upregulation of cox-2 gene expression in murine joints at the onset of arthritis in infected mice. The level of mRNA expression correlated with the degree of inflammation. The specific inhibition of Cox-2 diminished the degree of joint inflammation, without affecting B. burgdorferi-specific antibody or cytokine responses. Cox-2 activity is therefore associated with the genesis of infectious arthritis caused by B. burgdorferi.
    FEMS Immunology & Medical Microbiology 12/2002; 34(3):187-91. · 2.55 Impact Factor
  • JAMA The Journal of the American Medical Association 04/2002; 287(14):1799-1800. · 29.98 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Rofecoxib is a selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor indicated for the treatment of acute pain, with similar analgesic efficacy to ibuprofen and naproxen sodium. Diclofenac sodium is the most commonly prescribed nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug worldwide; it is effective for the treatment of pain as well as the signs and symptoms associated with the painful conditions of osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis. The aim of this study was to compare the analgesic efficacy and tolerability of a single dose of rofecoxib 50 mg, 3 doses of enteric-coated diclofenac sodium 50 mg, and placebo over 8-hour and 24-hour periods in patients with moderate to severe pain after oral surgery. In this double-blind, placebo- and active comparator-controlled, parallel-group study, patients experiencing moderate to severe pain after the surgical extraction of > or = 2 third molars were randomized to receive a single dose of rofecoxib 50 mg, 3 doses of enteric-coated diclofenac sodium 50 mg (50 mg given every 8 hours), or placebo. Patients rated pain intensity, pain relief, and global assessments at prespecified times throughout the 24-hour period after initial dosing. Overall analgesic efficacy was determined by total pain relief over 8 hours (TOPAR8) and 24 hours (TOPAR24) and patient global assessments at 8 and 24 hours. Onset of analgesic effect was determined by using the 2-stopwatch method for confirmed perceptible pain relief. Peak analgesic effect was the maximum pain relief attained during the first 8 hours. The duration of analgesic effect was determined by median time to rescue analgesia use. A total of 305 patients were randomized to treatment: 121 received rofecoxib, 121 received diclofenac sodium, and 63 received placebo. The baseline demographics were similar among the groups. Overall, 61.3% experienced moderate pain and 38.7% experienced severe pain; 53.1% were female; and the mean age was 23.4 years. The overall analgesic efficacy, as assessed by TOPAR8, of a single dose of rofecoxib 50 mg was significantly greater than a single dose of enteric-coated diclofenac sodium 50 mg (20.5 vs 8.2) and placebo (20.5 vs 5.9). Patient global assessment at 8 hours was also significantly better for rofecoxib compared with enteric-coated diclofenac sodium and placebo. TOPAR24 was significantly greater for a single dose of rofecoxib 50 mg compared with 3 doses of enteric-coated diclofenac sodium 50 mg (64.1 vs 25.1) and placebo (64.1 vs 19.2). At 24 hours, the patient global assessment for rofecoxib was significantly better than that achieved with enteric-coated diclofenac sodium and placebo. The onset of analgesic effect was significantly more rapid for rofecoxib than for enteric-coated diclofenac sodium and placebo (median times: 31 minutes, >4 hours, and >4 hours, respectively). The peak analgesic effect was significantly greater for rofecoxib compared with enteric-coated diclofenac sodium (3.2 vs 1.5) and placebo (3.2 vs 1.1). The duration of analgesia was significantly longer for rofecoxib than enteric-coated diclofenac sodium (median times: >24 hours vs 1 hour and 37 minutes) and placebo (>24 hours vs 1 hour and 37 minutes). Enteric-coated diclofenac sodium was numerically greater than placebo for the key end points measuring overall efficacy (total pain relief and patient global assessment), but diclofenac sodium did not provide as much analgesic effect as expected for a drug effective for pain, osteoarthritis, and rheumatoid arthritis and did not differ significantly from placebo. Overall, both rofecoxib and enteric-coated diclofenac sodium were generally well tolerated, although the rofecoxib group had a significantly lower incidence of clinical and drug-related adverse events than the enteric-coated diclofenac sodium group. A single 50-mg dose of rofecoxib provided greater overall analgesic efficacy over 8 hours, more rapid onset of analgesia, greater maximum analgesic effect, and longer duration of effect than a single 50-mg dose of enteric-coated diclofenac sodium in patients with moderate to severe pain associated with oral surgery. Compared with 3 doses of enteric-coated diclofenac sodium 50 mg (50 mg every 8 hours), a single dose of rofecoxib 50 mg provided greater overall analgesic efficacy over 24 hours.
    Clinical Therapeutics 04/2002; 24(4):490-503. · 2.59 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Am J Hypertens (2002) 15, 223A–223A; doi:10.1016/S0895-7061(02)02878-9 P-527: Effect of rofecoxib vs. naproxen on hypertension and edema related events: a multivariate analysis involving 5557 patients from the advantage trial Gregory P. Geba1, Adam B. Polis1, Norman R. Bohidar1, Janet E. Rush1, Thomas W. Dobbins1 and William F. Keane11Merck & Co., Inc., West Point, PA, United States
    American Journal of Hypertension 03/2002; · 3.40 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Context Osteoarthritis (OA) is often treated with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), acetaminophen, or specific inhibitors of cyclooxygenase 2 (COX-2).Objective To assess the relative therapeutic efficacy of rofecoxib, celecoxib, and acetaminophen in adults with OA.Design and Setting Randomized, parallel-group, double-blind trial, conducted from June 1999 to February 2000, in 29 clinical centers in the United States.Patients Three hundred eighty-two patients aged at least 40 years who had OA of the knee that was previously treated with NSAIDs or acetaminophen.Interventions Patients were randomly assigned to receive rofecoxib, 12.5 mg/d (n = 96); rofecoxib, 25 mg/d (n = 95); celecoxib, 200 mg/d (n = 97); or acetaminophen, 4000 mg/d (n = 94) for 6 weeks.Main Outcome Measures Assessments over days 1 to 6 and over 6 weeks included pain on walking, night pain, pain at rest, and morning stiffness as measured on a Western Ontario McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (100-mm visual analog scale [VAS]) and global response to therapy compared among 4 treatment groups.Results 79% of patients completed the study. More patients treated with acetaminophen discontinued early due to lack of efficacy than patients treated with COX-2 inhibitors (31% vs 18%-19%). Efficacy assessed in the first 6 days of therapy showed greatest response to rofecoxib, 25 mg/d, followed by rofecoxib, 12.5 mg/d, celecoxib, and acetaminophen, respectively, in terms of relief of pain on walking (−32.2, − 29.0, − 26.4, and −20.6 mm change on the VAS; P≤.04 for all others vs acetaminophen; P = .05 for 25-mg rofecoxib vs celecoxib), rest pain (−21.8, − 18.6, − 15.5, and − 12.5 mm; P≤.02 for either dose of rofecoxib vs acetaminophen and P = .02 for rofecoxib, 25 mg/d, vs celecoxib), night pain (−25.2, − 22.0, − 18.7, and − 18.8 mm; P = .04 for rofecoxib, 25 mg/d, vs both acetaminophen and celecoxib), and morning stiffness (−30.4, − 28.4, − 25.7, and − 20.9 mm; P≤.02 for either dose of rofecoxib vs acetaminophen). Over 6 weeks, rofecoxib, 25 mg/d, provided greatest response for night pain (P<.002 vs celecoxib and P = .006 vs acetaminophen and P = .02 vs rofecoxib, 12.5 mg/d), composite pain subscale (P≤.03 vs all other treatments), stiffness subscale (P≤.04 vs celecoxib and acetaminophen), and physical function subscale (P = .001 vs acetaminophen). Global responses over 6 weeks showed a similar pattern (good or excellent response at week 6: 60%, 56%, 46%, and 39%, respectively; P≤.03 for rofecoxib, 25 mg/d, vs celecoxib and acetaminophen; P = .02 for rofecoxib, 12.5 mg/d, vs acetaminophen). All treatments were generally safe and well tolerated.Conclusion Rofecoxib, 25 mg/d, provided efficacy advantages over acetaminophen, 4000 mg/d, celecoxib, 200 mg/d, and rofecoxib, 12.5 mg, for symptomatic knee OA. Figures in this Article Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common joint disorder, accounting for significant disability and large health care expenditures.1- 3 Although nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) have long been used to treat the pain and stiffness associated with OA, the American College of Rheumatology guidelines published in 1995,4 and updated in 2000,5 recommended acetaminophen as first-line therapy for the systemic treatment of symptomatic OA. This decision was partly due to concerns about gastrointestinal tract and other adverse effects associated with NSAIDs and also due to lack of data confirming their superior efficacy over simple analgesics. However, the severity of pain often prompts treatment with NSAIDs, which remain commonly used and preferred medicines by many patients with symptomatic OA.1,6- 7 The mechanism of action of NSAIDs involves inhibition of prostaglandin synthesis. In humans, prostaglandin synthesis is catalyzed by at least 2 forms of cyclooxygenase, cyclooxygenase 1 (COX-1) and cyclooxygenase 2 (COX-2). COX-1, constitutively expressed in a variety of tissues, is responsible for the production of prostanoids that regulate physiological functions such as platelet aggregation and gastric mucosal protection. Although it is constitutively expressed in the brain, COX-2 is typically only induced in most other tissues by cytokines and other soluble mediators.8- 9 COX-2 has been detected in leukocytes and human rheumatoid synoviocytes, and it mediates synthesis of prostanoids generated in inflammation and pain.10- 13 Most NSAIDs are dual inhibitors of COX-1 and COX-2 and therefore can be associated with gastrointestinal tract toxicity (such as perforation, ulcer formation, and gastrointestinal tract bleeding) due to COX-1–mediated reduction in protective prostanoids.14 Selective COX-2 inhibitors may suppress pathological responses mediated by prostanoids (eg, pain and inflammation) without inducing toxicity associated with the inhibition of COX-1. Rofecoxib and celecoxib selectively inhibit COX-2. Administration of these agents has been shown to provide relief of symptoms of OA15- 18 with a reduced risk of gastrointestinal toxicity relative to dual COX inhibitors.19- 21 The objective of this study was to estimate the efficacy of rofecoxib, celecoxib,18 and acetaminophen4- 5 in adult patients with OA of the knee.
    JAMA The Journal of the American Medical Association 01/2002; 287(1):64-71. · 30.39 Impact Factor

Publication Stats

716 Citations
193.76 Total Impact Points


  • 2005
    • Northwestern University
      Evanston, Illinois, United States
  • 2004
    • University of North Texas HSC at Fort Worth
      Fort Worth, Texas, United States
    • Robert Wood Johnson University Hospital
      New Brunswick, New Jersey, United States
    • Altoona Center for Clinical Research
      Duncansville, Pennsylvania, United States
  • 2001–2004
    • Merck
      Whitehouse Station, New Jersey, United States
  • 2003
    • University of Massachusetts Medical School
      Worcester, Massachusetts, United States
    • The University of Arizona
      Tucson, Arizona, United States