Risk of serious NSAID-related gastrointestinal events during long-term exposure: a systematic review

Objective: Exposure to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) is associated wit increased risk of serious gastrointestinal (GI) events compared with non-exposure. We investigated whether that risk is sustained over time. Data sources: Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (to 2002); MEDLINE, EMBASE, Derwent Drug File and Current Contents (1999-2002); manual searching of reviews (1999-2002). Study selection: From 479 search results reviewed and 221 articles retrieved, seven studies of patients exposed to prescription non-selective NSAIDs for more than 6 months and reporting time-dependent serious GI event rates were selected for quantitative data synthesis. These were stratified into two groups by study design. Data extraction: Incidence of GI events and number of patients at specific time points were extracted. Data synthesis: Meta-regression analyses were performed. Change in risk was evaluated by testing whether the slope of the regression line declined over time. Four randomised controlled trials (RCTs) provided evaluable data from five NSAID arms (aspirin, naproxen, two ibuprofen arms, and diclofenac). When the RCT data were combined, a small significant decline in annualised risk was seen: -0.005% (95% Cl, -0.008% to -0.001%) per month. Sensitivity analyses were conducted because there was disparity within the RCT data. The pooled estimate from three cohort studies showed no significant decline in annualised risk over periods up to 2 years: -0.003% (95% Cl, -0.008% to 0.003%) per month. Conclusions: Small decreases in risk over time were observed; these were of negligible clinical importance. For patients who need long-term (> 6 months) treatment, precautionary measures should be considered to reduce the net probability of serious GI events over the anticipated treatment duration. The effect of intermittent versus regular daily therapy on long-term risk needs further investigation.

Treatment of falciparum malaria in the age of drug-resistance

The growing problem of drug resistance has greatly complicated the treatment for falciparum malaria. Whereaschloroquine and sulfadoxine/ pyrimethamine could once cure most infections, this is no longer true and requiresexamination of alternative regimens. Not all treatment failures are drug resistant and other issues such asexpired antimalarials and patient compliance need to be considered. Continuation of a failing treatment policyafter drug resistance is established suppresses infections rather than curing them, leading to increasedtransmission of malaria, promotion of epidemics and loss of public confidence in malaria control programs.Antifolate drug resistance (i.e. pyrimethamine) means that new combinations are urgently needed particularlybecause addition of a single drug to an already failing regimen is rarely effective for very long. Atovaquone/proguanil and mefloquine have been used against multiple drug resistant falciparum malaria with resistance toeach having been documented soon after drug introduction. Drug combinations delay further transmission ofresistant parasites by increasing cure rates and inhibiting formation of gametocytes. Most currentlyrecommended drug combinations for falciparum malaria are variants of artemisinin combination therapy wherea rapidly acting artemisinin compound is combined with a longer half-life drug of a different class. Artemisininsused include dihydroartemisinin, artesunate, artemether and companion drugs include mefloquine, amodiaquine,sulfadoxine/ pyrimethamine, lumefantrine, piperaquine, pyronaridine, chlorproguanil/dapsone. The standard ofcare must be to cure malaria by killing the last parasite. Combination antimalarial treatment is vital not only tothe successful treatment of individual patients but also for public health control of malaria.

A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of macrolide in the treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis

Objectives: The antiinflammatory effect of macrolide antibiotics has been well-established, as has their role in the treatment of certain disorders of chronic airway inflammation. Several studies have suggested that long-term, low-dose macrolides may be efficacious in the treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis; however, these studies have lacked a control group. To date, this effect has not been tested in a randomized, placebo-controlled study. Method: The authors conducted a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial on 64 patients with chronic rhinosinusitis. Subjects received either 150 mg roxithromycin daily for 3 months or placebo. Outcome measures included the Sinonasal Outcome Test-20 (SNOT-20), measurements of peak nasal inspiratory flow, saccharine transit time, olfactory function, nasal endoscopic scoring, and nasal lavage assays for interleukin-8, fucose, and a2-macroglobulin. Results. There were statistically significant improvements in SNOT-20 score, nasal endoscopy, saccharine transit time, and IL-8 levels in lavage fluid (P < .05) in the macrolide group. A correlation was noted between improved outcome measures and low IgE levels. No significant improvements were noted for olfactory function, peak nasal inspiratory flow, or lavage levels for fucose and a2-macroglobulin. No improvement in any outcome was noted in the placebo-treated patients. Conclusion: These findings suggest that macrolides may have a beneficial role in the treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis, particularly in patients with low levels of IgE, and supports the in vitro evidence of their antiinflammatory activity. Additional studies are required to assess their place in clinical practice.