Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are used chronically to reduce pain and inflammation in patients with arthritic conditions, and also acutely as analgesics by many patients. Both therapeutic and adverse effects of NSAIDs are due to inhibition of cyclooxygenase (COX) enzyme. NSAIDs are classified as non-selective and COX-2-selective inhibitors (COXIBS) based on their extent of selectivity for COX inhibition. However, regardless of their COX selectivity, reports are still appearing on the GI side effect of NSAIDs particularly on the lower gastrointestinal (GI) tract and the harmful role of their controlled release formulations. In addition, previously unpublished data stored in the sponsor's files, question the GI sparing properties of rofecoxib, a COXIB that has been withdrawn due to cardiovascular (CV) side effects. Presently, the major side effects of NSAIDs are the GI complications, renal disturbances and CV events. There is a tendency to believe that all NSAIDs are associated with renal and CV side effects, a belief that is not supported by solid evidence. Indeed, lower but still therapeutics doses of some NSAIDs may be cardioprotective. In this review, we briefly discuss the GI toxicity of the NSAIDs and assess their renal and CV adverse effects in more detail.

NSAIDs are heterogeneous in increasing CV/renal risks. The low increased risk associated with meloxicam is mainly vascular in origin.

No abstract

BackgroundBoth omeprazole and its S enantiomer (esomeprazole) have been available and used to treat  symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and conditions associated with excessive stomach acid secretion for more than a decade. Controversy exists over improved efficacy of S enantiomer (esomeprazole) over parent racemate (omeprazole). However, a comparison of the clinical outcomes of these products may reveal the rationale for switching from the racemate to single enantiomer. Since enantiomers of omeprazole are equipotent, we compared the outcomes of equal doses of each product to see if both actually differ in their efficacy’s or the reported superiority of S enantiomer is just a dose effect.MethodsA web search was carried out for randomized controlled trials with head-to-head comparisons of omeprazole and S-omeprazole. The data were abstracted and after calculating theodd ratios (OR) for the outcomes reported in each study, the combined overall odd ratios (OR’) were estimated. The random effect inverse variance method with omeprazole as the reference (OR” = 1) was used.ResultsOut of 1171 studies, 14 were deemed eligible. There was no significant difference in the therapeutic success between omeprazole and S-omeprazole as a part of triple therapy for the treatment of H. pylori in both intention-to-treat (OR’, 1.06; CI, 0.83, 1.36; p = 0.63) as well as per-protocol analysis (OR’, 1.07; CI, 0.84, 1.36; p = 0.57). For the treatment of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, S-omeprazole was significantly but marginally superior to the racemate (OR’, 1.18; CI, 1.01, 1.38; p = 0.04). The two products were equipotent in all metrics used to assess intragastric pH except for the % patients maintaining a 24 h gastric pH above 4 (1.57; CI, 1.04, 2.381; p = 0.03).ConclusionThe therapeutic benefit of chiral switch of omeprazole is questionable considering the substantially greater economic burden involved.

A co-morbidity of inflammatory conditions is increased cardio-renal risks. Additionally, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) which are used to treat pain and inflammation are also associated with increase in such risks. We hypothesized that inflammation and NSAIDs impose the cardio-renal risk through the activation of the renin-angiotensin-system (RAS), a regulating pathway of the renal and cardiovascular homeostasis. We investigated the effect of adjuvant arthritis and NSAIDs on the RAS. Western blotting and ELISA were used to measure the RAS components. Inflammation caused significant imbalances in the cardiac and renal angiotensin converting enzymes, their biologically active angiotensin peptides (AngII and Ang1-7) and the target proteins involved in the peptide-receptor binding (AngII type 1 and type 2, and Ang1-7 receptor, Mas) toward cardio-renal toxicity. However, 7 days treatment of arthritic animals with NSAIDs (rofecoxib, meloxicam, celecoxib and flurbiprofen) restored the constitutive balances, perhaps due to their anti-inflammatory properties. Inflammation exerts its cardio-renal effects by causing imbalance in the RAS. NSAIDs through their anti-inflammatory effect restore this imbalance. Thus, mechanisms other than imbalances in the RAS may be involved in the NSAIDs cardiotoxicity.

No abstract

Synthetic analogues of the peptide hormone calcitonin have been used in medicine as biologic drug therapies for decades, to treat pathological conditions of excessive bone turnover, such as osteoporosis, where more bones are removed than replaced during bone remodeling. Osteoporosis and other chronic skeletal diseases, including inflammatory arthritis, exact a substantial and growing toll on aging populations worldwide however they respond poor to synthetic biologic drug therapy, due in part to the rapid half-life of elimination, which for calcitonin is 43 minutes. To address those shortcomings, we have developed and synthesized bone-targeting variants of calcitonin as a targeted drug delivery strategy, by conjugation to bisphosphonate drug bone-seeking functional groups in highly specific reaction conditions. To evaluate their in vivo efficacy, bisphosphonate-mediated bone targeting with PEGylated (polyethylene glycol conjugated) and non-PEGylated salmon calcitonin analogues were synthesized and dose escalation was performed in female rats developing Osteoporosis. The bone-targeting calcitonin analogues were also tested in a separate cohort of male rats developing adjuvant-induced arthritis. Ovariectomized female rats developing Osteoporosis were administered daily sub-cutaneous injection of analogues equivalent to 5, 10 and 20 IU/kg of calcitonin for 3 months. Adjuvant arthritis was developed in male rats by administering Mycobacterium butyricum through tail base injection. Daily sub-cutaneous injection of analogues equivalent to 20 IU/kg of calcitonin was administered and the rats were measured for visible signs of inflammation to a 21 day endpoint. In both studies, the effect of drug intervention upon bone volume and bone mineral density (BMD) was assessed by measuring the trabecular bone volume percentage and BMD at the proximal tibial metaphysis using in vivo micro-computed tomography. With dose escalation studies, only bone targeting analogue dosed groups showed a trend towards increased BMD and bone volume at 4, 8 and 12 weeks. Significant preservation of bone volume and BMD as evidenced by nonsignificant (P<0.05) loss of bone volume and BMD at the end of 3 month study endpoint was seen in animals dosed with 20 IU/kg of calcitonin compounds. Similarly, in case of adjuvant-induced arthritis rats, there was a significant increase (P<0.05) in bone volume and BMD in calcitonin-bisphosphonate and calcitonin-PEG-bisphosphonate treated groups at 21 days compared to the baseline values. Improved efficacy in terms of preserving bone volume and BMD in Osteoporosis, and in rats developing adjuvant-induced arthritis, by these analogues suggests their potential as new drug candidates for further evaluation to determine their usefulness in bone diseases characterized by excessive bone resorption.

No abstract