RE DRUGSCAN DrugScan is a review of the international literature on therapeutic drugs. Leading pharmacy practitioners scan the literature and present information on major clinical trials, important pharmacoepidemiology studies, pharmacoeconomic research and other related materials in a succinct format. Interested readers are encouraged to explore the original publications in greater detail. Developments in Oncology—2002 Michael J Cain Introduction When asked by a lay person what advances have been made in the treatment of cancer in the last year the reply could be summarised as ‘we know more about how cancer works, but save for rare examples this has not yet translated into substantial change’. There is a short list of cancers against which substantial improvements have been reported, although this result is still poor if measured against what we would wish for. Some new drugs have found a place in cancer treatment and some old agents have been reworked with improved effect, reduced toxicity, and sometimes both. If sheer publication volume can be taken as a reasonable measure, the unravelling of cancer cell biology is the guiding force of anticancer research. The emerging information is a mosaic, quite incomplete and to those at the patient end of the business looks something like a partly solved puzzle of uncertain dimension. Nonetheless a decade of basic science is bearing fruit, with imatinib (Glivec) representing the foremost therapeutic example to date.1-4 Rituximab (Mabthera), likewise a therapy born of clever science, has further cemented a position in therapy. 5,6 Ultimately, the greater benefit of understanding cancer biology will be the ability to choose not to treat those individual patients who will not respond to particular therapies. As yet, practical examples of this approach have not emerged. The other common feature of cancer-related literature is the apparently boundless reports of phase I and II studies initiated to determine the next direction in treating some aspect of cancer by applying new agents or rearranging available therapies. Phase II studies have particular impact when they present outcomes substantially better than the rest. The reports detailed in this review on the activity of imatinib in chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) and on the use of weekly cisplatin in relapsed ovarian cancer are good examples of this type of research.1-4,7 Phase III studies provide a cornerstone of proof but do not always lend clarity to decision making. The recently reported four-arm study of newer cytotoxics against non-small cell lung cancer found all of them equally unimpressive.8 Conversely, irinotecan plus cisplatin Michael J Cain, BPharm, GradDipPharm, FPS, Senior Pharmacist (Oncology), Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, Perth, Western Australia Address for correspondence: Michael Cain, Pharmacy Department, Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, Perth WA 6000 E-mail: [email protected] appears to have a clear benefit over cisplatin plus etoposide against small cell lung cancer.9 Bleomycin, however, has been proven to be non-contributory in the treatment of advanced cervical cancer.10 Imatinib—convincing against late chronic phase CML Preliminary results from a landmark phase II study reveal an unprecedented level of activity against CML after the failure of interferon.1 After 18 months of follow-up 40% of patients have become cytogenetically negative for the Philadelphia chromosome, 89% have not progressed to accelerated or blast phase, and 95% are still alive. CML is a myeloproliferative disease characterised by three distinct phases: a chronic phase lasting three to six years, an accelerated phase lasting less than six months, and finally the more aggressive blast phase. From a treatment and research perspective CML is unique in that an oncogene very intimately linked to the genesis of the disease was identified a long time ago. The Philadelphia chromosome is a fusion gene brought about by a genetic translocation that places the BCR and ABL genes together. The BCR-ABL gene product is a tyrosine kinase which is ‘always on’. Imatinib mesylate (Glivec), previously known as STI-571, is a tyrosine kinase inhibitor specifically designed to inhibit BCR-ABL. A large multicentre phase II study tested the effectiveness of imatinib in chronic phase CML resistant to interferon, or where the patient was intolerant of interferon. Strict definitions for chronic phase were set and a central panel independently confirmed the classification of each case. Of 532 patients enrolled, 484 met the predetermined criteria. There was no upper age limit but patients were required to have reasonable performance status as well as good renal, liver and cardiac function. A daily oral 400 mg dose of imatinib was given and researchers were given the option of increasing the dose to 400 mg twice daily if a patient did not respond after three months. The primary end point for this study was cytogenetic response, as determined by the degree of clearance of the Philadelphia chromosome from bone marrow. Other end points included complete haematological response, time to progression, and survival. After a median follow up of 18 months the outcomes, particularly cytogenetic response, were better than that normally achieved with first-line interferon. Almost all patients (95%) achieved a complete normalisation of blood counts, 60% had a major or complete cytogenetic Journal of Pharmacy Practice and Research Volume 32, No. 2, 2002. 119 response, 5% had a minor response and 11% had minimal response. Responses were largely durable with an estimated 89% of patients alive without progressing disease after 18 months. Serious (grade III/IV) haematological adverse effects included anaemia (7%), thrombocytopenia (20%) and neutropenia (35%). Non-haematological side effects (oedema, nausea, muscle cramp, rash) were common but generally mild. Treatment was discontinued in only 2% of patients because of side effects. The combination of a long natural history for chronic phase CML and a possible extended benefit from imatinib means that mature results for this study will be a long time coming. In the meantime the authors have used cytogenetic response as an indicator of longer-term benefit. With up-front interferon therapy cytogenetic response does correlate with better survival. Is this also true for imatinib? This remains to be demonstrated. Practically, however, for patients who don’t respond to interferon or who cannot tolerate it there are precious few alternative treatments. Imatinib in the short term offers very good activity. Does this indicate that imatinib should be used as initial therapy when CML presents? The answer for most individuals at this stage is no. Interferon induction and allogeneic stem cell transplantation can be offered with some prospect of cure to the 30% of individuals who have a compatible donor. The definitive answers will be known once early data from a phase III comparison of imatinib with interferon plus cytarabine in early CML sees publication. Imatinib—useful also for accelerated and blast crisis CML Two studies demonstrate substantial activity of imatinib against late stage CML. The outcomes against accelerated and blast phase CML were not as good nor as persistent as against chronic phase CML but are nonetheless better than would be expected from the limited alternative treatment options. Results were considerably better when dosage was increased from 400 mg to 600 mg per day. An unexpected feature was a high incidence of severe myelosuppression.2,3 Accelerated phase CML is associated with raised blood cell counts, splenomegaly, and constitutional symptoms as the disease displays an increasing array of karyotypic and genetic changes. Blast crisis, which is the extension of this, is usually defined as greater than 30% of cells in bone marrow being the more primitive blast cells. Blast phase generally follows within six months of diagnosis of accelerated phase and runs a course before death that is often measured in weeks. Treatments available for these patients are limited and there is a lack of consensus on what standard therapy might be. Two recently reported multicentre phase II studies of similar design have characterised the efficacy of imatinib against accelerated and blast phase CML.2,3 In both studies a central review panel was used to reassess the classification of each case against strict criteria, ensuring that the results obtained reliably represented the true activity of imatinib in these groups. The accelerated phase study enrolled 235 patients from 18 centres, and 181 were confirmed as eligible for use in the analysis of imatinib efficacy.2 The blast phase study enrolled 260 patients, 229 were confirmed as eligible. In both studies a protocol change was introduced to escalate the daily dose used from 400 mg per day to 600 mg. In the study of accelerated phase, 62 patients received 400 mg per day of imatinib and 119 were given 600 mg per day. The overall response rates (defined as complete response, marrow response or a return to chronic phase lasting at least four weeks) were 65% and 71% respectively. Cytogenetic responses were also more likely with the higher dose, 28% compared with 16%. After median follow up of 11 months, the benefits of higher dose appear more durable. The estimated 12-month response duration exceeds 57% and 79% respectively for the 400 mg and 600 mg dosages (though at this early stage the 95% confidence levels overlap). The study of patients with blast phase CML revealed an overall response rate of 52%. In only 31% of patients was there a response that persisted for at least four weeks. The median survival times for non-responders and those with only a transient response were 3 months and 4.7 months respectively, while for those with a durable response median survival was 19 months. Though only 14% of patients started with the lower 400 mg daily dose, an interesting dose effect was noted. Amongst patients started on 400 mg per day, 6% had a major cytogenetic response, while with 600 mg daily the rate was 18%. As in other studies non-haematological side effects were common but rarely problematic. Haematological toxicity was significant but manageable for the most part. Approximately half the treated patients had a reduction in dose or a delay in therapy at some time. At the time of publication, 85% of enrolled patients had withdrawn from imatinib therapy; 58% because of inadequate or lost effect and 9% because of adverse events. This was a relatively large, closely regulated phase II trial that produced results substantially better than those published elsewhere. There is no standard therapy and as such it is difficult to see at this point how a phase III study could be contemplated. Consequently the results published from the MD Anderson Cancer Centre provide useful additional commentary.4 These researchers have collated outcome data for 75 patients treated at their centre as part of three phase I or II studies, and compared this with data from 133 historical controls treated with cytarabine-containing chemotherapy between 1972 and 2000. Response rates and median survival were almost twice as high with imatinib. Weekly cisplatin plus daily etoposide—surprising activity against relapsed ovarian cancer The report of a phase II study using weekly cisplatin at 50–70 mg/m2 in conjunction with daily oral etoposide to treat relapsed ovarian cancer reveals a surprisingly high level of activity. The report is particularly noteworthy because of the high level of activity noted in patients who had relapsed very quickly after their initial course of chemotherapy—classically this is a group that responds poorly to second line therapies.7 Cisplatin and its analogue carboplatin have played a pivotal role in the treatment of epithelial ovarian cancer for over a decade. Cisplatin-cyclophosphamide combinations were used extensively in the early to mid 1990s Journal of Pharmacy Practice and Research Volume 32, No. 2, 2002. 120 as first line therapy until being displaced by cisplatinpaclitaxel or carboplatin-paclitaxel combinations. For second line therapies, the time between the last treatment and disease recurrence is a major predeterminant of likely response. Disease that recurs within four months of platinum-based therapy is considered to have a poor prognosis while disease that relapses more than 12 months later characteristically responds better to second line therapies and indeed to retreatment with cisplatin. Researchers at a Dutch institution have investigated the worth of intensified cisplatin therapy in conjunction with a synergistic agent (oral etoposide) against relapsed ovarian cancer. Individual doses of cisplatin cannot be escalated much above 100 mg/m2 without causing substantial renal, otic and neurological toxicity. Normally such doses would be repeated every 21 days. These researchers have established previously that cisplatin at 50–70 mg/m2 given weekly for six weeks with oral etoposide 50 mg/m2 on days 1–15 and again on days 29–43 is as tolerable as conventional therapy, and now report the results of treating 107 patients (98 of whom were evaluable for response). The 38 ‘good prognosis’ patients (who had relapsed more than 12 months after the last of their initial therapy) were treated with 50 mg/m2 of cisplatin, while the ‘intermediate risk’ patients (n = 32, relapse 4–12 months posttreatment) and ‘poor risk’ patients (n = 28, relapse <4 months post-treatment) received 70 mg/m2. Patients who had stable disease or maintained a response at the end of therapy were maintained on 50 mg/m2 of oral etoposide per day for 21 days in each 4-week period, repeated for 6–9 cycles. For the good, intermediate and poor risk cohorts respectively the reported response rates were 92%, 91%, and 46%. The complete response rates were 63%, 31% and 29% respectively and median survival 26 months, 16 months and 13 months respectively. Toxicity reported was modest. Serious leukopenia was noted at some time in up to 16% of patients, though there was only one case of neutropenic fever. Substantial thrombocytopenia affected 25% of patients treated with 70 mg/m2 of cisplatin. There were no grade III/IV non-haematological toxicities. Grade I neurotoxicity was common and persistent. Renal impairment was mild and apparently only affected 4% of patients. The response figures are impressive when compared to outcomes with other second line therapy. For example, the recently published phase III comparison between topotecan and liposomal doxorubicin reported response rates of 40% and 47%, complete response rates of 11% and 9%, and median survivals of 13 and 14 months respectively.11 The response rates in the poor risk group are particularly notable. For example, in the study just mentioned, the response rates for topotecan and liposomal doxorubicin in poor risk cases were 8% and 16% respectively, with 1% in each having a complete response. Conversely, a second set of researchers have applied the weekly cisplatin-etoposide protocol to 47 patients with similar responses in poor risk patients.12 Irinotecan improves survival with small cell lung cancer A study comparing an irinotecan-cisplatin combination to conventional cisplatin-etoposide in patients with advanced small cell lung cancer was terminated early because of a strikingly better survival rate in the test arm.9 Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) behaves and is treated very differently from the more common non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). It is an aggressive malignancy, causing death within six to twelve weeks if left untreated. It spreads early and surgery has little if any role. It is, however, very sensitive (at least initially) to a number of cytotoxic agents. Complete responses to chemotherapy are not uncommon, even with advanced disease, and survival is extended out to a median of 7–11 months and 12–18 months respectively depending on whether disease is advanced or limited. While a variety of cytotoxic combinations have been applied, improvements in survival have been small. A Japanese multicentre trial comparing combined cisplatin-irinotecan to a conventional cisplatin-etoposide protocol in the treatment of advanced SCLC was terminated early when an interim analysis revealed a statistically significant benefit with the cisplatin-irinotecan combination. Of the planned 250 patients, 154 were enrolled and randomised using a technique that balanced the treatment arms for patients’ performance status and the treating institution. To be eligible patients needed to have previously untreated, extensive SCLC, an expected life span of more than three months, good organ function, age less than 70 years and a reasonable performance status. Planned treatment consisted of four cycles of chemotherapy. Subjects in the control arm received cisplatin 80 mg/m2 and etoposide 100 mg/m2 (both on day 1) with etoposide repeated on the following two days. Cycles were repeated every three weeks. Those in the treatment arm received cisplatin 80 mg/m2 on day 1 and irinotecan 60 mg/ m2 on days 1, 8, and 15—all repeated four-weekly. The groups were equally balanced for possible confounding factors, with 77 predominantly male patients with a mean age of 63 years in each group. Grade III or IV myelosuppression was more common in the cisplatinetoposide arm, but severe diarrhoea affected 16% of the cisplatin-irinotecan treated group while none of the control group was affected. There were no other significant differences in toxicity. The overall response rate was 84% with cisplatinirinotecan treatment and 67% in the control group (though interestingly there were more complete responses, 9.1% versus 2.6%, in the control arm). The one-year survival rate was 58% in the cisplatin-irinotecan arm, compared with 38% in the control arm. The two-year survival rates were 19% and 5.2%. A quality of life analysis planned for this study was abandoned because of poor compliance. The median period of time spent without cancer progressing was 6.9 months with cisplatinirinotecan and 4.8 months with the control arm. Six months after randomisation 65% of irinotecan-treated patients were free of progression, after one year the figure was 12%. Corresponding values in the control arm were 36% and 7.9% respectively. The impetus for this trial came from response rates seen in earlier phase II trials against untreated and treated SCLC. Similar phase III studies are currently underway and will hopefully confirm the newly demonstrated benefits. There remain some obvious questions that will Journal of Pharmacy Practice and Research Volume 32, No. 2, 2002. 121 need to be answered. Will there be a similar or better increase in survival with less advanced disease? How might irinotecan be added to or otherwise incorporated with the combined radiotherapy-chemotherapy protocols already in use? Once the answers are forthcoming the place for this new treatment will be much clearer. Bleomycin adds little in advanced cervical cancer A study comparing cisplatin and ifosfamide with and without bleomycin removes one of the uncertainties about what represents best therapy for advanced cervical carcinoma.10 Carcinoma of the cervix that has progressed past locoregional management approaches (surgery or combined radiotherapy-chemotherapy) has a bleak prognosis. A variety of cytotoxic agents and combinations have reported activity in disease control though none has a demonstrated survival benefit. Median survival in these circumstances is approximately six months. Published response rates from small phase II studies have been 50–60% in some studies, and occasionally higher. The Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG) has systematically been assessing the most promising of these candidate therapies in phase III comparisons. From a previously reported phase III study a combination of cisplatin and ifosfamide proved superior.13 With high response rates reported with the addition of bleomycin to cisplatin-ifosfamide,14,15 the GOG initiated a recent study. The trial enrolled 303 women (287 evaluable cases) using a design powered to detect a 15% or greater response rate with the bleomycin-cisplatin-ifosfamide arm. Women with stage IVB, recurrent, or persistent squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix but not suitable for surgery or other definitive local therapy were eligible. Patients had at least a moderate performance status and adequate renal, hepatic, lung and bone marrow function. All patients received cisplatin 50 mg/m2 with ifosfamide 5 g/m2 over 24 hours starting the same day. Those randomised to the test arm had, preceding cisplatin-ifosfamide, a 24-hour infusion of bleomycin 30 000 international units. Cycles were repeated every three weeks up to a maximum of six. All ifosfamide administration was supported with prophylactic mesna. There was no meaningful difference in disease control between the groups, with a response rate of 32% in each arm. Median duration of response was 5.8 months with bleomycin and 6.2 months without. Median survival was 8.5 and 8.4 months respectively. Additional toxicity amongst bleomycin-treated patients was minimal. There was a 13% increase in lung toxicity with bleomycin, though this represented largely asymptomatic changes detected with lung function testing. The GOG is systematically bringing order to the treatment options proposed for advanced cervical cancers. Another GOG study, GOG-169, comparing cisplatin to cisplatin-paclitaxel, closed in 1999. Preliminary results have been released in abstract form only at this point. The cisplatin-paclitaxel combination had the superior response rate but again with no improvement in survival.16 Other comparative trials are in progress. References 1. Kantarjian H, Sawyers C, Hochhaus A, Guilhot F, Schiffer C, GambacortiPasserini C, et al. Hematologic and cytogenetic responses to imatinib mesylate in chronic myelogenous leukemia. N Engl J Med 2002; 346: 645-52. 2. Talpaz M, Silver RT, Druker BJ, Goldman JM, Gambacorti-Passerini C, Guilhot F, et al. Imatinib induces durable hematologic and cytogenetic responses in patients with accelerated phase chronic myeloid leukemia: results of a phase 2 study. Blood 2002; 99: 1928-37. 3. Sawyers CL, Hochhaus A, Feldman E, Goldman JM, Miller CB, Ottmann OG, et al. Imatinib induces hematologic and cytogenetic responses in patients with chronic myelogenous leukemia in myeloid blast crisis: results of a phase II study. Blood 2002; 99: 3530-9. 4. Kantarjian HM, Cortes J, O’Brien S, Giles FJ, Albitar M, Rios MB, et al. Imatinib mesylate (STI571) therapy for Philadelphia chromosome-positive chronic myelogenous leukemia in blast phase. Blood 2002; 99: 3547-53. 5. Davis TA, Grillo-Lopez AJ, White CA, McLaughlin P, Czuczman MS, Link BK, et al. Rituximab anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody therapy in non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma: safety and efficacy of re-treatment. J Clin Oncol 2000; 18: 3135-43. 6. Coiffier B, Lepage E, Briere J, Herbrecht R, Tilly H, Bouabdallah R, et al. CHOP chemotherapy plus rituximab compared with CHOP alone in elderly patients with diffuse large-B-cell lymphoma. N Engl J Med 2002; 346: 235-42. 7. van der Burg ME, de Wit R, van Putten WL, Logmans A, Kruit WH, Stoter G, et al. Weekly cisplatin and daily oral etoposide is highly effective in platinum pretreated ovarian cancer. Br J Cancer 2002; 86: 19-25. 8. Schiller JH, Harrington D, Belani CP, Langer C, Sandler A, Krook J, et al. Comparison of four chemotherapy regimens for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med 2002; 346: 92-8. 9. Noda K, Nishiwaki Y, Kawahara M, Negoro S, Sugiura T, Yokoyama A, et al. Irinotecan plus cisplatin compared with etoposide plus cisplatin for extensive small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med 2002; 346: 85-91. 10. Bloss JD, Blessing JA, Behrens BC, Mannel RS, Rader JS, Sood AK, et al. Randomized trial of cisplatin and ifosfamide with or without bleomycin in squamous carcinoma of the cervix: a gynecologic oncology group study. J Clin Oncol 2002; 20: 1832-7. 11. Gordon AN, Fleagle JT, Guthrie D, Parkin DE, Gore ME, Lacave AJ. Recurrent epithelial ovarian carcinoma: a randomized phase III study of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin versus topotecan. J Clin Oncol 2001; 19: 3312-22. 12. Meyer T, Nelstrop AE, Mahmoudi M, Rustin GJ. Weekly cisplatin and oral etoposide as treatment for relapsed epithelial ovarian cancer. Ann Oncol 2001; 12: 1705-9. 13. Omura GA, Blessing JA, Vaccarello L, Berman ML, Clarke-Pearson DL, Mutch DG, et al. Randomized trial of cisplatin versus cisplatin plus mitolactol versus cisplatin plus ifosfamide in advanced squamous carcinoma of the cervix: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study. J Clin Oncol 1997; 15: 165-71. 14. Murad AM, Triginelli SA, Ribalta JC. Phase II trial of bleomycin, ifosfamide, and carboplatin in metastatic cervical cancer. J Clin Oncol 1994; 12: 55-9. 15. Tay SK, Lai FM, Soh LT, Ho TH, Ang PT, Au E. Combined chemotherapy using cisplatin, ifosfamide and bleomycin (PIB) in the treatment of advanced and recurrent cervical carcinoma. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 1992; 32: 2636. 16. Moore DH, McQuellon RP, Blessing JA. A randomized phase III study of cisplatin versus cisplatin plus paclitaxel in stage IVB, recurrent or persistent squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix [abstract]. Proc Soc Gynecol Oncol 1991; 32: 21. Journal of Pharmacy Practice and Research Volume 32, No. 2, 2002. 122 RE DRUGSCAN Developments in Rheumatology–2002 David G Cosh This review offers the reader three suggestions for consideration, all of which may have relevance to pharmacists who wish to work in the area of clinical therapeutics. Musculoskeletal disease is the template upon which the suggestions are offered, but they have equal relevance to other areas of therapeutics. The first suggestion is not to forget the past in a rush to embrace the new. The example chosen to support this exhortation is the new evidence for prednisolone in rheumatoid arthritis that adds to the clinical story made possible by Philip Hench and those who shared the Nobel Prize with him 52 years ago.1 The second message is to never dismiss out of hand an improbable association between two events. Australian evidence of the importance of this axiom includes the acceptance, albeit unduly delayed by many, of the relationship between peptic ulcer disease and Helicobacter pylori. Warren and Marshall did not dismiss what might have first appeared to be an improbable association, and their persistence has resulted in a paradigm shift in the treatment of peptic ulcer disease. With this in mind, reviewed here is the possible relationship between the COX-2 specific inhibitors and risk of cardiovascular disease. It so happens that in this case the ‘risk’ referred to is cardiovascular but the implicated drugs fit comfortably within the field of musculoskeletal medicine. With this example, the reverse to the ulcer story applies, in that there appears there is not an association when one was first thought to exist, although it remains early days. The last suggestion is to resist the temptation to become overly excited with the prospect that evidencebased medicine will convert the practice of therapeutics into a set of tidy algorithms, allowing one to simply follow the dotted lines and—Hey Presto—arrive at the right answer! Wouldn’t domiciliary medication management and residential care medication reviews be so easy if this were to be the case? Unfortunately a book of algorithms will not act as a substitute for critical thought based on a sound knowledge of drug and disease. To illustrate this point this review examines an intriguing scenario involving a group of Australian experts who were asked to arrive at a position statement on the clinical use of the COX-2 specific inhibitors. The outcome of their endeavours would have been of interest, but not as interesting, if the group had not agreed to publish the reasons why all could not agree on a joint position statement. The fact that they have aired their differences in the pages of the Medical Journal of Australia provides a very useful and cogent insight into how we all are likely to find ourselves dealing with the evidence surrounding drug use. David G Cosh, MPharm, FSHP, FPS, BCPS, Clinical Pharmacist, Private Practice, Netherby, South Australia Address for correspondence: David Cosh, 9 Smith-Dorrien St, Netherby SA 5062, E-mail: [email protected] Low dose oral steroids are disease-modifying in rheumatoid arthritis The risks associated with the use of oral corticosteroids are well known and a decision to use these drugs on a continuing basis is not usually taken lightly. The emphasis in treating inflammatory rheumatoid arthritis has been to use one of the so-called disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), sometimes in combination with each other and often with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and or corticosteroids (regular or intermittent). The question of whether oral prednisolone is a DMARD has been asked before, but results from studies designed to answer the question have been confounded by concurrent use of DMARDs, short study duration and methodological shortcomings. The study by van Everdingen et al. is important because it demonstrates a disease modifying role for low-dose prednisone given on a regular basis, and quantifies some of the risks associated with the use of steroids in this clinical setting.2 From October 1992 until October 1995, 81 eligible outpatients with evidence of untreated inflammatory rheumatoid arthritis and naive to any DMARDs were consecutively selected from those attending the outpatient clinic of two tertiary referral centres in the Netherlands. Those selected needed to have evidence of disease activity for at least one year, including symptoms and objective markers of inflammation. A history of an inability to tolerate prednisone or NSAIDs led to exclusion, as did a history of active gastrointestinal (GI) problems, severe hypertension, the presence of a bleeding diathesis, current treatment with immunosuppressive drugs, a history of mental illness or drug or alcohol abuse. In double blind fashion, 41 patients received 10 mg of oral prednisone daily, and 40 were given placebo. Randomisation was in blocks of 10 and the planned duration of the study was two years. Both groups were allowed to take NSAIDs of their choice. After six months, sulfasalazine (up to 2000 mg daily) and intra-articular corticosteroids were allowed at the discretion of the treating rheumatologist. Each patient took 500 mg of elemental calcium at night and all patients recorded their use of NSAIDs, simple analgesics and physiotherapy services. The groups were well matched at baseline; 50 patients (24 in the prednisone group and 26 in the placebo group) had non-erosive disease, and the mean total score for the chosen radiologic outcome measure (the combination of the scores for joint space narrowing and erosions) was slightly higher for the placebo group than for the prednisone group, although the difference was not statistically significant. Disability was assessed using the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), and radiological assessment of joint destruction (the 44 joints in hands and feet were used for comparison) was performed Journal of Pharmacy Practice and Research Volume 32, No. 2, 2002. 123 at six-monthly intervals. Adverse effects were documented at baseline and at three-monthly intervals. Infections (both site and incidence) were recorded and a post-prandial serum glucose of 11 mmol/L or above was defined as the cut-off point for a diagnosis of hyperglycaemia. GI bleeding and the presence of peptic ulcers were monitored for, as were the standard blood tests for biochemical and haematological abnormalities. Body weight was recorded throughout the study and neuropsychiatric status was evaluated. Five radiographs of the spine were taken throughout the study (baseline and six-monthly thereafter) to assess for the presence of osteoporosis. There was a significant increase in weight of the order of 3 kg in the prednisone group compared with no increase in those receiving placebo. Serum glucose increased to the point where hyperglycaemia occurred in two patients on steroid and one on placebo. Five patients in the prednisone group developed new vertebral fractures compared with two in the placebo group, this difference not reaching significance. There was no significant difference in the rate or type of infections, GI disorders or the development of hypertension. Ten patients (four treated with prednisone and six receiving placebo) withdrew from the study but their last measurements were carried forward with the exception of the radiographic score. Mean differences in changes from baseline between the two groups for radiographic scores, disability and grip strength were tested after 24 months with two-sided t-tests or the Mann-Whitney Utest, where appropriate. None of the 10 patients who withdrew from the study did so because of adverse effects associated with the study medication. Of the 71 who completed the study, 39 (20 receiving placebo and 19 receiving prednisone) required supplemental sulphasalazine. After 24 months, 30% of patients in the placebo group and 22% in the prednisone group still had non-erosive disease. For most clinical variables, the changes from baseline favoured the prednisone group after 12 and 24 months, but did not differ significantly between the two groups. Exceptions were grip strength and the 28-joint score for tenderness, where a larger, statistically significant improvement was seen in the prednisone group compared with the placebo group. A statistically significant interaction of time and medication was seen for three clinical variables: pain, 28-joint score for tenderness, and grip strength. This was due to more rapid improvement during the first six months in the prednisone group than in the placebo group. Individual patient improvement was 33% in the prednisone group and 24% in the placebo group after 12 months, and 30% and 22% respectively after 24 months. There was a marked difference in the need for intraarticular steroid injections, so that after 24 months the total number of injections given to the prednisone group was 40% lower than the number needed by those taking placebo. A reduction of similar magnitude (49%) in the number of paracetamol tablets ingested was seen. There was no statistical difference between the two groups in radiographic evidence of joint erosions at baseline, but after 12 months radiographs showed significantly less joint erosions in the prednisone group. It is now known that not to use DMARDs in patients with inflammatory arthritis results in a greater rate of disease progression, and both the authors and Pincus et al. in an associated editorial agree that to seek to perform this study in 2002 would be unethical because of the risk to those allocated placebo.3 Nevertheless, the results do provide important information that would not have been possible to obtain without a placebo group in place. Prednisone at a daily dose of 10 mg does have some disease modifying activity and importantly this was demonstrated in a group that had not been given DMARDs prior to entering the study. This benefit is parallelled by objective symptomatic improvement. The authors advocate combination of oral corticosteroids with other DMARDs and a more aggressive prophylaxis of osteoporosis than they provided to those enrolled in their study. There are many patients in Australia, especially amongst the elderly, whose rheumatoid arthritis is managed with low doses of prednisolone without the concurrent use of other DMARDs. There may well be good reasons for doing so, such as comfort care or intolerance of DMARDs, but for some prescribers the decision not to use DMARDs will have been taken on the basis of regimen simplicity, a fear of side effects, or a reluctance to embark on a course of treatment that requires constant monitoring. Any reservations about denying disease modification to this group appears to have been somewhat exaggerated (although there are obviously different levels of disease modification, hence van Everdingen’s advice to combine agents). There is now good evidence that this approach does provide some disease modification and this should reawaken interest in the use of low doses of prednisone or prednisolone in younger patients with evidence of inflammatory disease in an era when aggressive pharmacological protection against osteoporosis is available. Evidence to support pro-thrombotic effect of celecoxib is lacking Data from the celecoxib long-term arthritis safety study (CLASS study) have been examined to test the hypothesis that celecoxib is more likely to be associated with thromboembolic cardiovascular events than the conventional comparator NSAIDs ibuprofen and diclofenac. The authors conclude that the study provides no evidence to support the hypothesis.4,5 Subjects with a diagnosis of rheumatoid or osteoarthritis that had been evident for at least three months and who were aged 18 years or older and considered to need continuous ongoing treatment with an NSAID were randomised in a double-blind fashion to receive celecoxib 400 mg twice daily, (celecoxib group—CG) ibuprofen 800 mg three times daily (IG) or diclofenac 75 mg twice daily (DG). Three hundred and eighty-six centres in the USA and Canada participated in the study, which began recruiting patients in December 1998. Patients were reviewed at baseline and then again 4, 13, and 26 weeks later, and thereafter at 13-week intervals. Cardiovascular protective doses of aspirin up to 325 mg per day were permitted. At each visit subjects were asked to describe any untoward event not associated with their arthritis, and cardiovascular events were categorised into cardiac events, cerebrovascular events and peripheral vascular events. This population is that enrolled in the CLASS Journal of Pharmacy Practice and Research Volume 32, No. 2, 2002. 124 study, which sought to evaluate the comparative gastrointestinal toxicity of celecoxib compared with two conventional NSAIDs.4 The average age of subjects in the study population was 60 years. The CG contained 3987 subjects and 3981 subjects received either ibuprofen or diclofenac. Cardiovascular prophylactic doses of aspirin were taken by 22% of all patients and the average blood pressure (again for all patients) was 133/80 mm Hg. Forty per cent had a history of cardiovascular disease, the most common being hypertension. All patients who received at least one dose of study medication were included in the analysis. Baseline characteristics, aspirin use and risk factors for a thromboembolic event were compared using 2-way ANOVA or Pearson’s chi-square test. Crude event rates and time to event analysis were conducted. Given that the CLASS study was powered for a total of 40 GI ulcer complications it was that end point that determined study cessation and the oversight committee terminated the study when 38 events had been obtained. There was no difference in the incidence of a cardiovascular events requiring hospitalisation between the groups. The relative risk of an event in those taking celecoxib versus ibuprofen or diclofenac was 1.1 (95% CI 0.7–1.6). No difference was observed when the events were divided into the three aforementioned categories (cardiac, cerebral or peripheral). Subgroup analysis of those patients not taking aspirin showed a lower rate of events than would be expected of a group with no known reason to be on low-dose aspirin. Again, no differences in event rates were found and the relative risk of a cardiovascular event in those taking celecoxib was 1.1 (95% CI 0.6–1.9). There was no difference in ‘time to an event’ amongst the groups, with a Kaplan-Meier rate for a combination of the 3 categories of events being CG 1.4%, DG 1.6% and IG 0.7% respectively. There was a high-risk subgroup of 371 patients who were not taking aspirin but had an indication to do so (secondary prevention, post-myocardial infarction). With myocardial infarction as an end point there was no significant difference in event rate between the groups. This study also sought to establish the rate of potential risk factors for cardiovascular events—hypertension, oedema and congestive cardiac failure. A lower rate of oedema (peripheral and generalised) was seen in the CG group and there was less hypertension in the CG group compared with the IG group, but no difference between the CG and the combined NSAID group. It was as a result of the analysis of the VIGOR study where the potential for upper gastrointestinal toxicity of rofecoxib was compared with naproxen that the observation of less cardiovascular events in the naproxen group was made.6 This prompted the study described above and there have been others. Shapiro and colleagues from Merck Laboratories have reviewed eight phase II and IIIb trials of rofecoxib in the treatment of osteoarthritis and have not found an association between cardiovascular events and use of rofecoxib.7 Fleming has commented on the propensity of two COX-2 specific inhibitors on the Australian market to cause hypertension, and argues for a dose-dependent effect of rofecoxib, but adds a note of caution on the practice of dredging data for answers to questions that studies were not designed to answer.8 The debate will continue and the following publication advises us to accept the postulate that all COX-2 specific inhibitors can cause fluid and salt retention, which in turn can increase blood pressure and worsen cardiac failure. This is eminently sensible advice. Position statements are not necessarily easy even in the era of evidence-based medicine An Australian working group comprising 31 clinicians and others has produced a position statement on the safe prescribing and use of COX-2 specific inhibitors.9 The findings are of interest but some will undoubtedly be modified as further experience with the class accrues. What may better stand the test of time are the reasons given for the failure of the group to arrive at consensus. Most of us are likely to be able to agree on the quality of evidence on offer; however, to agree on the interpretation and description of such evidence may be more difficult, as Edmonds et al. show in an editorial in the same edition of the MJA.10 The factors at play are applicable to any area of therapeutics and suggest that debates over therapeutic options will become no less interesting despite the increasing sophistication with which evidence for or against treatment modalities is made available to those needing to make prescribing decisions. Revisiting White et al.’s group (see above) who arrived at the conclusion that celecoxib, in doses higher than those usually used in practice, poses no greater cardiovascular risk than ibuprofen or diclofenac (the doses of these drugs were a ‘healthy’ 2400 mg and 150 mg daily respectively), we should note that the Australian prescribing group (APG) state that ‘whether any COX-2 specific inhibitor poses a risk to cardiovascular safety remains a subject to debate’. They did restrict their search to papers published no later than May 2001; however, there is no reason to assume that they would change their position if given the opportunity to review more recent evidence, a point that becomes obvious when one reads the editorial by Edmonds et al.10 The APG comprised rheumatologists on the medical advisory boards of Pharmacia/Pfizer and Merck, Sharp & Dohme, and experts in the fields of general practice, clinical epidemiology, gastroenterology, cardiology, nephrology and clinical pharmacology. Representatives from the Arthritis Foundation of Australia, the Australian Rheumatology Association and the National Prescribing Service were included. The group has published guidelines that have majority but not unanimous support, and in doing so took the unusual step of giving all members of the group the opportunity to: • sign off on the final draft; • decline to sign off and remain anonymous; • decline to sign off and add their name without expressing a reason; • decline to sign off and add both their name and reason(s). Those who did not agree with the group’s findings all exercised the final option. The final position statement addresses a range of issues. On the matter of efficacy equivalence of the COX2 specific inhibitors with conventional NSAIDs, the group found in favour of equivalence. When asked to decide whether the COX-2 specific inhibitors are disease modi- Journal of Pharmacy Practice and Research Volume 32, No. 2, 2002. 125 fying in any of the musculoskeletal diseases for which they have been used, the answer was no. In regard to comparative gastrointestinal toxicity, the APG opinion is that when compared with the NSAIDs the COX-2 specific inhibitors are associated with considerably fewer peptic ulcers, slightly fewer upper GI symptoms and fewer serious upper GI complications, notably bleeding. With respect to effects on renal function and blood pressure, equivalent effect is suggested. As mentioned previously, the matter of cardiovascular risk remains open to debate. Prescribers are advised to take into account comorbidities and co-prescribed drugs when prescribing drugs from either class, and the group advocates regular patient review irrespective of which class is used. In arriving at the position statement, eight of the 31 members of the group decided to not sign off on the statement and as stated above accepted the option that allowed them to publish the reasons for their decision. Four of the eight worked for Pfizer/ Pharmacia, and the others were rheumatologists (two with expertise in epidemiology). The problem in reaching consensus developed because of differing opinions on how to both interpret the evidence, and to express in writing the interpretations. The reader should be cautioned against jumping to the conclusion that any bias (if any existed) of those working for the industry is obvious compared with biases that others might hold. Edmonds et al. remind us that there are equally relevant biases associated with knowledge, expertise and affiliations outside those deemed ‘commercial’. Those with an interest in either of the drugs in question, or the broader question of how we use evidence in our daily practice may find both articles of interest. References 1. Shampo MA, Kyle R. Philp S. Hench-1950 Nobel Laureate. Mayo Clin Proc 2001; 76: 1073-5. 2. van Everdingen AA, Jacobs JWG, Siewertsz van Reesema DR, Bijlsma JWJ. Low-dose prednisone therapy for patients with early active rheumatoid arthritis: clinical efficacy, disease-modifying properties and side effects. A randomised double-blind placebo controlled clinical trial. Ann Intern Med 2002; 136: 112. 3. Pincus T, Sokka T, Stein CM. Are long-term very low doses of prednisone for patients with rheumatoid arthritis as helpful as high doses are harmful? [editorial]. Ann Intern Med 2002; 136: 76-8. 4. Silverstein FE, Faich G, Goldstein JL, Simon LS, Pincus T, Whelton A, et al. Gastrointestinal toxicity with celecoxib vs nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis - The CLASS study: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2000; 284: 1247-55. 5. White WB, Faich G, Whelton A, Maurath MS, Ridge N, Nancy J, et al. Comparison of thromboembolic events in patients treated with celecoxib, a cyclooxygenase-2 specific inhibitor, versus ibuprofen or diclofenac. Am J Cardiol 2002; 89: 425-30. 6. Bombardier C, Laine L, Reicin A, Shapiro D, Burgos-Vargas R, Davis B, et al. Comparison of upper gastrointestinal toxicity of rofecoxib and naproxen in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. N Engl J Med 2000; 343: 1520-8. 7. Reicin AS, Shapiro D, Sperling RS, Barr E, Yu Q. Comparison of cardiovascular thrombotic events in patients with osteoarthritis treated with rofecoxib versus nonselective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (ibuprofen, diclofenac, and nabumetone) Am J Cardiol 2002; 89: 204-9. 8. Fleming M. Cardiovascular events and COX-2 inhibitors. JAMA 2001; 286: 2808-9. 9. The Australian COX-2-specific inhibitor (CSI) prescribing group. Considerations for the safe prescribing and use of COX-2-specific inhibitors. Med J Aust 2002; 176: 328-31. 10. Edmonds JP, Day RO, Bertouch JV. The road to consensus: considerations for the safe use and prescribing of COX-2-specific inhibitors [editorial]. Med J Aust 2002; 176: 332-4. Breaking News In this section, we present concise overviews of important clinical trials and observational studies, new insights into the safety of drug therapies, highlights in pharmacoepidemiology and pharmacoeconomics, details of particularly noteworthy case reports, and other brief items of appeal to healthcare practitioners with an interest in safe and effective drug treatment. Psychiatry—Chris Alderman Over seven million people use cannabis products weekly or more often in the United States alone, and with interest in marijuana regulations running high, researchers have set out to ascertain the answers to fundamental questions that should inform the debates that are ongoing. In particular, recent research has been designed to determine whether frequent, heavy or prolonged use of cannabis products leads to a deterioration in cognitive function that persists beyond acute intoxication. A threeyear study in the USA compared 102 near-daily cannabis users (51 long-term users: mean duration of use 23.9 years; 51 shorter-term users: mean duration 10.2 years of use) with 33 controls who were non-users. Measures from standard neuropsychological tests assessed attention, memory, and executive functioning, and were administered prior to entry to a treatment program and following a median 17-hour abstinence. Long-term users performed significantly less well than shorter-term users and controls on tests of memory and attention, but there was no difference between shorter-term users and controls. Long-term users also demonstrated impaired learning, retention, and retrieval, and both groups of cannabis users performed poorly on a time estimation task. Performance measures often correlated significantly with the duration of cannabis use, being worse with increasing years of use. (Solowij N et al. JAMA 2002; 287: 112331.) A recent consensus conference on the use of placebo in mood disorder studies included expert presentations on bioethics, biostatistics, unipolar depression, and bipolar disorder. There was consensus that placebo controls should be used in mood disorder studies. The group considered that a finding of equivalence between a new drug and standard treatment in an active control study is not evidence of efficacy unless the new drug is also significantly more effective than placebo. It was stated that mood disorders in elderly and paediatric patients are understudied, and properly designed trials were thought to be urgently needed. The group identified the need to limit risks of medication-free intervals and to facilitate post-study treatment, and suggested that patients must be fully informed about the risks involved in research. This consensus statement provides useful guidance for institutional ethics committees that must Journal of Pharmacy Practice and Research Volume 32, No. 2, 2002. 126 grapple with this contentious issue. (Charney DS et al. Arch Gen Psychiatry 2002; 59: 262-70.) British researchers have recently explored the putative relationship between measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccination and bowel problems and developmental regression in children with autism, looking for evidence of a ‘new variant’ form of autism. 278 children with core autism and 195 with atypical autism, born between 1979 and 1998, were the subjects. The proportion of children with developmental regression (25% overall) or bowel symptoms (17%) did not change significantly during the 20 years from 1979, a period which included the introduction of MMR vaccination in October 1988. A possible association between non-specific bowel problems and regression in children with autism was seen but this was unrelated to MMR vaccination. This comforting research provides no support for an MMR-associated ‘new variant’ form of autism with developmental regression and bowel problems, and further evidence against involvement of MMR vaccine in the aetiology of autism. (Taylor B et al. BMJ 2002; 324; 393-6.) A recent six-week double-blind, randomised, placebocontrolled trial examined the efficacy of combined therapy with olanzapine and either valproate or lithium, compared with valproate or lithium alone in treating acute manic or mixed bipolar episodes. Olanzapine (520 mg daily) or placebo was added to ongoing moodstabiliser therapy. Concurrent treatment with olanzapine produced significantly more improvement than placebo and clinical response rates were significantly higher with the combination therapy. Extrapyramidal symptoms were not significantly changed from baseline to end point in either treatment group, but treatment-emergent symptoms that were significantly higher for the olanzapine group included somnolence, dry mouth, weight gain, increased appetite, tremor, and slurred speech. Researchers conclude that compared with the use of valproate or lithium alone, the addition of olanzapine provided superior efficacy in the treatment of manic and mixed bipolar episodes. (Tohen M et al. Arch Gen Psychiatry 2002; 59: 62-9.) Pharmacy Practice—Sandra Mangion A recent review of literature dealing with medication errors provides an insightful discussion on system errors, from latent conditions in the system that make an error more likely to active failures where the system breaks down. The review is peppered with discussions on error analysis in the aviation and nuclear industries, and the need for a ‘systems approach’ when reviewing medication incidents is emphasised. The authors have comprehensively discussed the literature on medication errors in relation to medical specialty, stage of drug delivery process, drug class, time of day, staff experience and other factors. There was a particular focus on transfusion medicine due to the often-complex drug protocols and regimens involved. This review also critiques medication error studies in general and highlights the essential elements that are required to allow these to provide useful information in establishing cause and determining solutions. The authors point out the limited value of error counting and instead highlight the need to trace errors through the system and to understand the circumstances under which error recovery takes place. (Allard J et al. Br J Haematol 2002; 116: 255-65.) Although medication errors in hospitals are a significant problem, less than 20% of these errors in US hospitals are related to distribution or dispensing problems. A large study evaluating medication errors and their relationship to clinical pharmacy services and hospital staffing in US hospitals sought to identify the particular aspects of pharmaceutical services to hospital that were associated with increased or decreased medication errors. The researchers found that increased medication errors that adversely affected patient care outcomes were associated with increased pharmacy administrator staffing per occupied bed and increased dispensing pharmacist staffing per occupied bed. On the other hand, the two most important factors for reducing medication errors were pharmacist-conducted drug histories and increased staffing levels for clinical pharmacists. Other factors associated with decreased medication errors included drug information services, clinical research, adverse drug reaction management, drug therapy monitoring, drug protocol management, drug counselling, and medical rounds participation. In a current climate of pharmacist shortages perhaps the results of this study can help guide decisions on where best to invest pharmacist services. (Bond CA et al. Pharmacotherapy 2002; 22: 134-47.) The Audit Commission for the National Health Service (NHS) in England and Wales published its review of medicines management in NHS hospitals, entitled ‘A spoonful of sugar’, in December 2001. The two aims of this report were to raise the profile of medicines management in hospitals and to make a case for providing adequate investment to enable standards to be raised. A somewhat scathing assessment of the report suggests that the Audit Commission’s conclusions are based on uncertain analysis of unreliable data and that their advocacy of clinical pharmacy is not enough to remedy the problems they have identified relating to medicines management in hospitals. The author purports that although good clinical pharmacy services are essential, so are other elements such as doctors skilled in specific aspects of the therapeutic process. His commentary makes for some thought-provoking reading. ‘A spoonful of sugar’ can be accessed via the Internet at http://www.auditcommission.gov.uk/publications/pdf/nrspoonfulsugar. pdf. (Ferner RE. QJM 2002; 95: 181-4.) Pharmacists have been able to substitute brand name medications with less expensive, generic bioequivalent medications for some time now. Whilst many patients value the savings generic substitution provides, pharmacists need to be cognisant that dispensing errors are less likely to be noticed by patients as they may assume that the product they don’t recognise as their regular medication is a generic equivalent. In addition, pharmacists may change the generic brands they are stocking and different pharmacies may stock different generic brands, therefore patients may receive a variety of generically substituted medications. A recent letter highlighting this problem describes the ordeal of a patient who was dispensed glibenclamide instead of metopro- Journal of Pharmacy Practice and Research Volume 32, No. 2, 2002. 127 lol. She was admitted to two hospitals with hypoglycaemia, subjected to numerous investigations and escaped unnecessary surgery only through some clever clinical detective work. A warning to all who dispense to be vigilant with generic substitution and to ensure that the patient is adequately counselled! (Barzel US. Mayo Clin Proc 2002; 77: 296-7.) attributed to the use of NSAIDs and the mortality figures for UGIB in North Jutland are quoted as 8–14%. The findings are consistent with those from similar cohort studies conducted elsewhere and demonstrate the value of comprehensive databases constructed within publicly funded healthcare systems. (Mellemkjær L et al. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2002; 53: 173-81.) Gastroenterology—Dave Cosh Investigators at the Prince of Wales hospital in Hong Kong recently studied 100 patients proven to be Helicobacter pylori positive and deemed to need long-term non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) treatment. In 51 cases the patients were randomly assigned to a H. pylori eradication treatment group (7 days of treatment with omeprazole, amoxycillin and clarithromycin). Fortynine patients received omeprazole and placebo instead of antibiotics. All patients were then given 100 mg of slow release diclofenac daily and after six months an endoscopy was performed (earlier if clinically indicated). The groups were well matched; nine subjects in the eradication group were taking low dose aspirin compared with eight in the placebo group, and the number of subjects with a history of previous ulcer disease were seven and nine in the respective cohorts. Eradication was achieved in 90% of the antibiotic group and in 6% of the placebo group. Ulcers were detected in five of those in the eradication group and in 15 of those receiving placebo. Two of the patients with ulcers in the eradication group had symptoms but none bled. Ulcers were larger in the placebo group—nine patients were symptomatic and three required hospitalisation for gastrointestinal bleeding. The authors suggest that screening for H. pylori with an intention to offer eradication therapy is worthwhile in those with a need for long-term NSAID treatment. (Chan FK et al. Lancet 2002; 359: 9-13.) Perhaps not surprisingly, the reason that three patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) enrolled in a study of 10 subjects using thalidomide as a moderator of inflammation withdrew was because of sedation— the drug was widely used as a sedative before its worldwide withdrawal in the 1960s because of teratogenicity. Inhibitors of tumour necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) such as infliximab have been shown to reduce disease activity in IBD. Other pro-inflammatory cytokines, for example interleukin (IL)-1α and IL-6 are produced by intestinal lamina propria mononuclear cells and peripheral blood monocytes. IL-12 has also been demonstrated in patients with active Crohn’s disease. All patients in the study had symptomatic and objective evidence of active disease despite treatment with corticosteroids and azathioprine. After baseline colonoscopy and establishment of an index score of disease severity, subjects received 300 mg of thalidomide at bedtime. Patients were reviewed at intervals two, four, eight and 12 weeks after commencing treatment (with repeat colonoscopy at two and 12 weeks). At each review laboratory tests and a physical examination were performed, and index scores of severity were calculated. In-vitro studies using tissue obtained at biopsy was carried out concurrently, and confirmed the ability of the drug to reduce the levels of inflammatory cytokines. Four of the remaining six patients with Crohn’s disease (one had ulcerative colitis) experienced remission with a significant decline in disease activity scores. Three were able to stop their steroid treatment, and in one case prednisolone was reduced from 20 mg to 10 mg daily. Significant improvement was also seen in the one patient with ulcerative colitis. One patient developed peripheral neuropathy (a known adverse effect of thalidomide) that resolved on drug cessation. The authors suggest that lower doses may be equally effective and that analogues of thalidomide without teratogenic effects are under development. (Bauditz J et al. Gut 2002; 50: 196-200.) The existence of a population pharmacoepidemiologic database in the North Jutland county of Denmark (pop. 490 000) that can be linked to other databases constructed under the auspices of the Danish National Health Service has allowed Danish investigators to identify (within the time frame 1991–95) approximately 164 000 users of non-aspirin non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Prescription records were then linked to the National Hospital Discharge Database to determine the incidence of hospitalisation for upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) in this group. After excluding those with conditions that predispose to UGIB, about 156 000 remained. The risk of an UGIB was compared with the incidence in the background population not exposed to NSAIDs. There were 515 UGIBs observed for NSAID users, compared to the expected figure of 124 (yielding an odds versus expected ratio (O/E) of 4.1—95% CI 3.8–4.5). Given that there are other commonly used drugs that increase the risk of an UGIB (e.g. aspirin and anticoagulants), the risks of such combinations were assessed. The majority (98%) of the users had periods when only NSAIDs were taken and in this group the incidence of UGIB was 3.6 times more than expected (95% CI 3.3–4.0). The risk was higher when NSAIDs were used in combination with other drugs such as glucocorticoids, anticoagulants and aspirin. The authors conclude that about 15% of hospital admissions for UGIB in North Jutland can be Sixteen subjects (nine male) who suffered from chronic heartburn at least three times a week entered a recent single-blind, three-way crossover study and were allocated in sequential fashion to receive omeprazole 20 mg at 8 a.m. and placebo at 10–11 p.m. (OP arm), omeprazole 20 mg at 8 a.m. and ranitidine 75 mg at 10-11 p.m. (OR), or omeprazole 20 mg twice daily (OBD). Gastric and oesophageal pH data were measured at baseline and then at six days after treatment. There was a 7–10 day washout period between treatments. The use of 24-hour pH monitoring allowed researchers to record a reading for integrated acidity, a parameter that allows for a determination of cumulative acid concentration for any time period. Before treatment there was a significant increase in nocturnal gastric acidity (10 p.m. to 4 a.m.), and while OP decreased both integrated gastric and oesophageal acidity it did not eliminate the nocturnal increase in gastric acid release. Journal of Pharmacy Practice and Research Volume 32, No. 2, 2002. 128 Both OR and OBD nearly abolished nocturnal acid secretion. The OP group had evidence of nocturnal gastric acidity but were not troubled by nocturnal reflux, leading to the conclusion that once daily omeprazole would suffice for this pattern of disease. However, for those patients on a daily proton pump inhibitor (PPI) and yet still troubled by nocturnal reflux there is now objective evidence that the addition of a small night time dose of ranitidine will be effective (the dose of 75 mg was chosen in the study on the basis that this dose is contained in non-prescription products available in the USA). A second dose of a PPI will also provide relief but at greater cost and reduced ease of availability. It always has been the case that pharmacists seeing patients on a PPI/H2 receptor antagonist combination should not assume that the prescriber has forgotten to stop the latter on starting the former. There is now objective evidence that the agents from both drug classes used together can be more effective than a single daily dose of PPI for patients troubled by nocturnal acidity. (Robinson M et al. Dig Dis Sci 2002; 47: 265-73.) Infectious Diseases—Jeff Hughes Diarrhoea associated with Clostridium difficile contributes significantly to the length of hospital stay (LOS) and healthcare costs. In a recent study of 271 patients admitted with infections, 40 developed nosocomial C. difficile-associated diarrhoea. Adjusted hospital costs were 54% higher (95% CI 17%–105%) for this group compared to those whose admission was not complicated by C. difficile-associated diarrhoea. The length of stay for patients with C. difficile-associated diarrhoea was 3.6 days longer (95% CI 1.5–6.2 days) than for those without. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that C. difficile-associated diarrhoea was an independent predictor of extended length of stay. Forty-eight percent of patients with nosocomial C. difficile-associated diarrhoea died compared with 22% whose course was not complicated by C. difficile-associated diarrhoea, but after adjusting for age, comorbidity and severity of illness, C. difficile-associated diarrhoea was not an independent predictor of death. The authors estimated that the annual cost of C. difficile-associated diarrhoea in the USA exceeds US $1.1 billion. (Kyne L et al. Clin Infect Dis 2002; 34: 346-53.) Single dose gatifloxacin offers an alternative for the management of uncomplicated urinary tract infections (UTIs) in women. In a multicentre study, women with uncomplicated UTIs were randomly assigned to receive either single dose gatifloxacin (400 mg), gatifloxacin 200 mg daily for three days, or ciprofloxacin (100mg twice daily for three days). Patients were assessed in the 48 hours before the initiation of the study medication, at the end of treatment (by telephone contact on day three), and in person 5–9 days after completion of treatment (test-of-cure visit). Patients who achieved eradication of their infection were followed up again at a time 29–42 days after treatment. The bacterial eradication rate for the single-dose gatifloxacin, three-day gatifloxacin, and three-day ciprofloxacin groups was 90%, 95%, and 89%, respectively; and the clinical efficacy rate was 93%, 95%, and 93% respectively for microbiologically assessable patients at the test-of-cure visit. Both gatifloxacin and ciprofloxacin eradicated common uropathogens, including Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae and Proteus mirabilis. The authors concluded that single dose gatifloxacin offers advantages of decreasing secondary use of medical resources and improving patient compliance. (Richards GA et al. Urology 2002; 59: 344-9.) Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) exhibit fungicidal properties against Aspergillus species in vitro. Using a microdilution broth, researchers tested the fungicidal activity of fluoxetine, citalopram, sertraline, paroxetine and reboxetine against clinical isolates of A. fumigatus (n = 11), A. flavus (n = 9), A. terreus (n = 10) and Candida parapsilosis. All drugs showed time-dependent and dose-dependent effects and were fungicidal against all fungi tested. Sertraline and paroxetine were the most active drugs. The SSRIs also demonstrated a concentration-dependent post-antibiotic effect. The authors suggest that animal studies are needed to evaluate the potential role of these psychotropic drugs in the management of fungal infections. (Lass-Flörl C et al. J Antimicrob Chemother 2001; 48: 775-9.) Prior use of amoxycillin-clavulanic acid (co-amoxiclav) has been shown to increase the risk of isolation of a coamoxiclav-resistant Eschericia coli in patients with urinary tract infections (UTIs). In a study involving 108 patients with E. coli UTIs, exposure to co-amoxiclav in the four weeks prior to the diagnosis of a UTI increased the risk of having a co-amoxiclav-resistant isolate by a factor of 4.36 (95% CI 1.97–9.65; p < 0.001). Patients with co-amoxiclav-resistant E. coli infections represented only 11% of those studied and were mostly elderly (≥ 60 years old) or babies ( ≤ 6 months old). The authors pointed out that these two population categories are commonly prescribed co-amoxiclav for sinusitis, otitis media and lower respiratory tract infections. They highlight the need to question patients with a UTI about recent treatment with co-amoxiclav in order to avoid another course, since these patients have a significantly higher risk of co-amoxiclav-resistant E. coli infections. (Leflon-Guibout V et al. J Antimicrob Chemother 2002; 49: 367-71.) Respiratory Medicine—Karin Nyfort-Hansen One of the main goals of bronchodilator therapy in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is to decrease airflow limitation and as a consequence improve dyspnoea and exercise tolerance. The authors of a recent systematic review of the effects of bronchodilators on exercise capacity in COPD have concluded that benefits are limited, although a number of methodological problems in the 33 studies included in the review were identified. Anticholinergic agents had significant effects in the majority of studies, with a trend toward an improved response with higher doses (>80 mcg ipratropium per day). Shorter-acting β-agonists had favourable effects in more than two-thirds of the studies, but studies with salmeterol did not show significant effects. The majority of findings with theophylline products provided negative results. The search strategy in this review was limited to Medline, and did not include unpublished studies, which suggests that the identified benefits may be over- Journal of Pharmacy Practice and Research Volume 32, No. 2, 2002. 129 estimated. The paper includes a short description and comparison of the various types of exercise tests used in research studies, which may be of additional interest to some readers. (Liesker JJ et al. Chest 2002; 121: 597608.) The systematic review by Liesker et al (above) found no studies of the effects of tiotropium bromide on exercise capacity. This new, once-daily inhaled anticholinergic agent with prolonged antagonism of M3 muscarinic receptors is expected to reach the Australian market this year. Earlier studies have examined the effects of this agent with short-term use in COPD, but now the first reports to confirm the benefits of tiotropium bromide therapy over twelve months in patients with COPD have appeared. An accompanying editorial suggests that when tiotropium becomes generally available, this drug is likely to replace ipratropium as standard anticholinergic therapy in COPD. Benefits may include more convenient administration with improved compliance, a reduction in the number of COPD exacerbations and improved health-related quality of life. (Rees PJ. Eur Respir J 2002; 19: 205-6.) A recent case report is a reminder that HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) can be associated with interstitial lung disorders. The 51-year-old patient had been taking simvastatin for six years when he was admitted to hospital with fever, polymyalgia, cough and progressive dyspnoea over one month. Pulmonary function tests revealed a restrictive ventilatory pattern with decreased diffusing capacity, and computed tomography of the lungs showed bilateral interstitial infiltrates with groundglass opacities predominating in the lower lobes. An open lung biopsy showed histological features consistent with a fibrotic, non-specific interstitial pneumonia. Simvastatin was ceased and the patient made a progressive recovery on corticosteroid therapy over six months. One month later pravastatin was inadvertently introduced and an increase in dyspnoea, myalgia and new infiltrates on chest radiography were observed. This case differs from earlier cases of statin-related lung disease, where biopsies have revealed a pattern of hypersensitivity pneumonitis with granulomas. (Lantuejoul S et al. Eur Respir J 2002; 19: 577-80.) A small placebo-controlled, randomised, prospective study has investigated the influence of smoking on the efficacy of inhaled corticosteroids in mild asthma. Steroid-naive patients (n = 38) were randomised to receive either fluticasone 1000 µg daily or placebo for three weeks. In non-smoking patients fluticasone produced expected improvements in morning peak expiratory flow (PEF), spirometric values, bronchial hyper-reactivity and sputum eosinophilia, whereas no significant changes were found in smokers who received fluticasone. A possible explanation for these results is that the smoking patients had mild COPD, not asthma, although the investigators believe this was not the case. Cigarette smoking is common amongst patients with asthma and this study is the first randomised, placebo-controlled study examining this issue. Larger studies are needed to confirm these results, and to investigate whether increasing the dose of inhaled steroids can restore responsiveness. Until this happens the results further reinforce the need for smoking cessation in all patients with asthma. (Chalmers GW et al. Thorax 2002; 57: 226-30.) Neurology—Phil Nairn Raised plasma homocysteine levels are a risk factor for the development of dementia and Alzheimer’s disease (AD). A recent study followed 1092 dementia-free subjects from the Framingham study, with a mean age of 76 years. Plasma homocysteine levels, measured at baseline and eight years later, were correlated with the incidence of new cases of AD and dementia. Over a median period of eight years, 111 individuals developed dementia (83 with AD). The relative risk of dementia was 1.4 (95% CI 1.1–1.9) for each increase of one standard deviation (SD) of the log-transformed homocysteine level. The relative risk for AD was 1.8 (95% CI 1.3-2.5) for each increase of one SD in homocysteine level. When the plasma homocysteine level exceeded 14 mmol/L the risk of AD doubled. This intriguing study links AD to raised homocysteine levels; however, it does not demonstrate that reducing homocysteine with vitamin B12, B6, and folic acid will prevent or treat AD. The study was weakened by the fact that homocysteine levels were not measured in fasting subjects, and that vitamin levels were not determined for all subjects. (Seshadri S et al. N Engl J Med 2002; 346: 476-83.) Use of a blood pressure lowering regimen based on perindopril and indapamide reduced the risk of stroke in both hypertensive and non-hypertensive subjects with a history of stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA). The Progress Study compared perindopril 4 mg daily to perindopril 4 mg with indapamide 2.5 mg, with a third arm allocated to receive placebo. For the combined treatment groups there was a 28% relative risk reduction (absolute risk reduction 4%) in the primary outcome measure (stroke) relative to placebo. The relative risk reduction (43%) and mean blood pressure reduction (12/5 mm Hg) were greatest in the combined drug treatment arm. The single agent perindopril reduced BP by only 5/3 mm Hg and had no effect on stroke risk. The cut-off point selected for normotensive individuals (160/90 mmHg) was higher than would be considered normal. It is important to consider absolute risk reduction, and number needed to treat to avoid an incident, rather than relative risk reduction. (Progress Collaborative Group. Lancet 2001; 358: 1033-41.) Treatment with valaciclovir did not reduce the formation of active lesions in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis examined in a recent trial. The Scandinavian multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) study compared valaciclovir 1000 mg three times daily to placebo. The study followed 70 patients for 24 weeks. The primary outcome measure—formation of new active lesions on MRI—and other secondary clinical measures, were not different between the groups. However, a subgroup analysis of individuals with high levels of disease activity in the treatment group suggested a reduced number of new active lesions (28% of scans free of lesions compared to 5% in placebo group). Given the short trial duration and small number of participants, a positive clinical benefit Journal of Pharmacy Practice and Research Volume 32, No. 2, 2002. 130 was not expected. Overall, valaciclovir did not reduce the formation of MRI lesions; however, the subgroup analysis is intriguing. A higher dose or another antiviral drug may be more effective, as some of the suspected viruses are not susceptible to this drug. (Bech E et al. Neurology 2002; 58: 31-6.) Interferon β -1b (IFNβ-1b) is effective in delaying the progression of secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (SPMS). The final analysis of the European multicentre trial of IFN β -1b in SPMS demonstrated a significant delay in the time to a one-point progression on the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS), when compared to placebo (p = 0.007). The proportion of patients with a two-point progression in EDSS was 27% lower in the treatment group. Subgroup analysis suggested that patients with higher levels of pre-study disease, (more than two relapses or EDSS progression by greater than one point, or both) seemed to have more pronounced benefit. This study supports the use of IFNβ1b in the secondary progressive form of multiple sclerosis. (Kappos L et al. Neurology 2001; 57: 1969-75.) Cardiovascular Medicine—Neil Cottrell The early use of aspirin (prior to thrombolysis) reduces mortality for patients experiencing an acute myocardial infarction. The Argatroban in Acute Myocardial Infarction study (ARGAMI-2) was a three arm, parallel, randomised trial comparing two dosages of argatroban with heparin in patients receiving alteplase or streptokinase after acute myocardial infarction. A subgroup of patients (30% of 12 000) enrolled in the study) received aspirin prior to randomisation and thrombolysis, with the remaining receiving aspirin within one hour of thrombolysis. In the early aspirin group the mortality was lower at seven days (2.5% vs 5.6%, p = 0.001), and this effect was maintained at 30 days (3.3% vs 7.3%, p = 0.008) and at one year (5% vs 10.6%, p = 0.002). A shorter time to thrombolysis, use of β-blockers, and a higher incidence of re-ischaemia were all higher in the early aspirin users. The analysis of early aspirin users in the ARGAMI-2 study adds further evidence that early use of aspirin in myocardial infarction is beneficial. (Freimark D et al. Am J Cardiol 2002; 89: 381-5.) Gemfibrozil is a cost-effective therapy for patients with low HDL cholesterol and normal LDL cholesterol. An economic analysis of the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Co-operative Studies Program HDL-C Intervention Trial (VA-HIT) demonstrated that gemfibrozil was cost-effective therapy in this patient population. VA-HIT investigated the effect of gemfibrozil 1200 mg daily compared with placebo in patients with coronary heart disease and low HDL-cholesterol and normal LDL-cholesterol levels, and revealed a reduction in major cardiovascular events. The analysis was based on that used in the Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study. As age increased the cost-effectiveness ratios rose from $6300 per year to $17 000 per year of life saved. The net lifetime cost saving is cost-effective as long as the purchase price of the gemfibrozil remains below US$100 per patient per year, and the VA currently purchases for less than this price. This analysis of the VAHIT is the first to assess the cost-effectiveness of raising HDL-cholesterol and lowering triglycerides in patients without an effect on LDL-cholesterol levels. (Nyman JA et al. Arch Intern Med 2002; 162: 177-82.) Losartan, an angiotensin II type I receptor blocker, appears to be more effective than atenolol in reducing cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in patients with signs of left ventricular hypertrophy. The recently published Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension (LIFE) study was a multicentre trial comparing losartan with atenolol in patients with essential hypertension. A target blood pressure of 140/80 mmHg was set and drugs were titrated to achieve this. Evidence of left ventricular hypertrophy was also noted through ECG observations. The primary end points were cardiovascular morbidity and mortality (stroke, myocardial infarction and other cardiovascular death). 9222 patients entered the study and were followed over 4 years. There was a 13% relative risk reduction in the primary end point with losartan compared with atenolol. Losartan also produced a 25% reduction in the incidence of stroke. Blood pressure reduction was not achieved in 3% of the atenolol group and there was an increased incidence of the occurrence of diabetes (25%) amongst those treated with the β-blocker. The study provides further evidence that inhibition of the angiotensin system may have additional benefits in the management of hypertension. (Dahlöf B et al. Lancet 2002; 359: 995-1003.) A subgroup of patients in the LIFE study who had diabetes on entry to the study was also analysed. As for others, medication for these subjects was titrated to a target blood pressure of 140/80 mmHg or less. Patient characteristics were similar in losartan and atenolol groups, with a slightly higher proportion (3%) of patients in the atenolol group receiving a biguanide. 1195 patients were included in this analysis. The primary composite end point was lower in the losartan group (relative risk 0.76, p = 0.031). This trend was also repeated when individual outcomes were analysed: cardiovascular death (relative risk 0.63, p = 0.028), stroke (relative risk 0.79, p = 0.204) and myocardial infarction (relative risk 0.83, p = 0.373) appeared lower, and the average blood pressure was lower in the losartan group than the atenolol group (146/79 mm Hg vs 148/79 mm Hg). Albuminuria was reported significantly less frequently in those patients treated with losartan (p = 0.002). The results of this subgroup analysis suggest that patients with diabetes, hypertension and left ventricular hypertrophy may benefit more from losartan than atenolol. (Lindholm LH et al. Lancet 2002; 359: 1004-10.) Geriatrics—Bruce Williamson A multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial that enrolled 592 patients with probable vascular dementia or Alzheimer’s disease showed that after six months, those randomly assigned to receive 24 mg of galantamine daily had statistically significantly improved cognitive function relative to baseline and compared to placebo (p < 0.0001 in both cases). The primary efficacy measures were the standard 11-item ADAS-cog instrument (ADAScog/11) which assesses cognitive ability, and the clinician’s interview based impression of change plus Journal of Pharmacy Practice and Research Volume 32, No. 2, 2002. 131 caregiver input (CIBIC-plus). The neuropsychiatric inventory (NPI) indicated significant beneficial effects of galantamine upon behavioural symptoms compared to placebo (p = 0.016) with significant improvements in anxiety and apathy (both p < 0.0001). (Erkinjuntti T et al. Lancet 2002; 359: 1283-90.) In a case-control study of psychiatric patients with hyponatraemia, researchers identified that 29 subjects who had a serum sodium in the range 104 to 130 mmol/ L were treated with antidepressants (22 using selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor antidepressants—SSRIs). Those using SSRIs were nearly four times more likely (odds ratio OR 3.9; 95% CI 1.2–13.1) to develop hyponatraemia compared to those treated with drugs from other antidepressant groups. Patients who were 65 years of age and older were markedly at risk for hyponatraemia (OR 6.3; 95% CI 1.0–41). A synergistic effect for the concurrent use of diuretics was evident (OR 8.4; 95% CI 2.1–34) and this effect was even more pronounced in those 65 years and over (OR 13.5; 95% CI 1.8–101). Over half (55%) of all the prescriptions were for paroxetine. (Movig KL et al. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2002; 53: 363-9.) A cross-sectional study of 802 patients (502 females) with a mean age of 63 years, showed that renal impair- Journal of Pharmacy Practice and Research Volume 32, No. 2, 2002. 132
© Copyright 2024