Comparative efficacy of traditional non-selective NSAIDs and selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors in patients with acute gout: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective To assess the comparative efficacy of traditional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors in patients with acute gout.Design Systematic review and meta-analysis.Data sources Medline, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure a...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Xiaofeng Zeng, Mengtao Li, Chen Yu
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMJ Publishing Group 2020-09-01
Series:BMJ Open
Online Access:https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/10/9/e036748.full
id doaj-8d49aa5c34574d3caa77007e3e55b96e
record_format Article
spelling doaj-8d49aa5c34574d3caa77007e3e55b96e2021-07-21T16:04:04ZengBMJ Publishing GroupBMJ Open2044-60552020-09-0110910.1136/bmjopen-2019-036748Comparative efficacy of traditional non-selective NSAIDs and selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors in patients with acute gout: a systematic review and meta-analysisXiaofeng Zeng0Mengtao Li1Chen Yu21 Department of Rheumatology and Clinical Immunology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China 10 Department of Rheumatology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital (West Campus), Beijing, China 2 Critical Care Medicine, Tumor Hospital of Harbin Medical University, Harbin, China Objective To assess the comparative efficacy of traditional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors in patients with acute gout.Design Systematic review and meta-analysis.Data sources Medline, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure and Wanfang Data published as of 4 April 2020.Methods We performed meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of traditional non-selective NSAIDs versus cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors and RCTs of various cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors in patients with acute gout. The main outcome measures were mean change in pain Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score and 5-point Likert scale score on days 2–8.Results Twenty-four trials involving five drugs were evaluated. For pain Likert scale, etoricoxib was comparable to indomethacin (standardised mean difference (SMD): −0.09, 95% CI: −0.27 to 0.08) but better than diclofenac 50 mg three times a day (SMD: −0.53, 95% CI: −0.98 to 0.09). Regarding pain VAS score, etoricoxib was comparable to diclofenac 75 mg two times per day (SMD: −1.63, 95% CI: −4.60 to 1.34) and diclofenac 75 mg four times a day (SMD: −1.82, 95% CI: −5.18 to 1.53), while celecoxib was comparable to diclofenac 100 mg four times a day (SMD: −2.41, 95% CI: −5.91 to 1.09). Etoricoxib showed similar patients’ global assessment of response (SMD: −0.10, 95% CI: −0.27 to 0.07) and swollen joint count (SMD: −0.25, 95% CI: −0.74 to 0.24), but better investigator’s global assessment of response (SMD: −0.29, 95% CI: −0.46 to 0.11) compared with indomethacin. Etoricoxib showed more favourable pain VAS score than celecoxib (SMD: −2.36, 95% CI: −3.36 to 1.37), but was comparable to meloxicam (SMD: −4.02, 95% CI: −10.28 to 2.24). Etoricoxib showed more favourable pain Likert scale than meloxicam (SMD: −0.56, 95% CI: −1.10 to 0.02). Etoricoxib 120 mg four times a day was more likely to achieve clinical improvement than celecoxib 200 mg two times per day (OR: 4.84, 95% CI: 2.19 to 10.72).Conclusion Although cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors and traditional non-selective NSAIDs may be equally beneficial in terms of pain relief, cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors (especially etoricoxib) may confer a greater benefit.https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/10/9/e036748.full
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Xiaofeng Zeng
Mengtao Li
Chen Yu
spellingShingle Xiaofeng Zeng
Mengtao Li
Chen Yu
Comparative efficacy of traditional non-selective NSAIDs and selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors in patients with acute gout: a systematic review and meta-analysis
BMJ Open
author_facet Xiaofeng Zeng
Mengtao Li
Chen Yu
author_sort Xiaofeng Zeng
title Comparative efficacy of traditional non-selective NSAIDs and selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors in patients with acute gout: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Comparative efficacy of traditional non-selective NSAIDs and selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors in patients with acute gout: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Comparative efficacy of traditional non-selective NSAIDs and selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors in patients with acute gout: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Comparative efficacy of traditional non-selective NSAIDs and selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors in patients with acute gout: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Comparative efficacy of traditional non-selective NSAIDs and selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors in patients with acute gout: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort comparative efficacy of traditional non-selective nsaids and selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors in patients with acute gout: a systematic review and meta-analysis
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
series BMJ Open
issn 2044-6055
publishDate 2020-09-01
description Objective To assess the comparative efficacy of traditional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors in patients with acute gout.Design Systematic review and meta-analysis.Data sources Medline, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure and Wanfang Data published as of 4 April 2020.Methods We performed meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of traditional non-selective NSAIDs versus cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors and RCTs of various cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors in patients with acute gout. The main outcome measures were mean change in pain Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score and 5-point Likert scale score on days 2–8.Results Twenty-four trials involving five drugs were evaluated. For pain Likert scale, etoricoxib was comparable to indomethacin (standardised mean difference (SMD): −0.09, 95% CI: −0.27 to 0.08) but better than diclofenac 50 mg three times a day (SMD: −0.53, 95% CI: −0.98 to 0.09). Regarding pain VAS score, etoricoxib was comparable to diclofenac 75 mg two times per day (SMD: −1.63, 95% CI: −4.60 to 1.34) and diclofenac 75 mg four times a day (SMD: −1.82, 95% CI: −5.18 to 1.53), while celecoxib was comparable to diclofenac 100 mg four times a day (SMD: −2.41, 95% CI: −5.91 to 1.09). Etoricoxib showed similar patients’ global assessment of response (SMD: −0.10, 95% CI: −0.27 to 0.07) and swollen joint count (SMD: −0.25, 95% CI: −0.74 to 0.24), but better investigator’s global assessment of response (SMD: −0.29, 95% CI: −0.46 to 0.11) compared with indomethacin. Etoricoxib showed more favourable pain VAS score than celecoxib (SMD: −2.36, 95% CI: −3.36 to 1.37), but was comparable to meloxicam (SMD: −4.02, 95% CI: −10.28 to 2.24). Etoricoxib showed more favourable pain Likert scale than meloxicam (SMD: −0.56, 95% CI: −1.10 to 0.02). Etoricoxib 120 mg four times a day was more likely to achieve clinical improvement than celecoxib 200 mg two times per day (OR: 4.84, 95% CI: 2.19 to 10.72).Conclusion Although cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors and traditional non-selective NSAIDs may be equally beneficial in terms of pain relief, cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors (especially etoricoxib) may confer a greater benefit.
url https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/10/9/e036748.full
work_keys_str_mv AT xiaofengzeng comparativeefficacyoftraditionalnonselectivensaidsandselectivecyclooxygenase2inhibitorsinpatientswithacutegoutasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT mengtaoli comparativeefficacyoftraditionalnonselectivensaidsandselectivecyclooxygenase2inhibitorsinpatientswithacutegoutasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT chenyu comparativeefficacyoftraditionalnonselectivensaidsandselectivecyclooxygenase2inhibitorsinpatientswithacutegoutasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
_version_ 1721292529903599616