Video: Knock on Wood| Webinar: ACR/CHEST ILD Guidelines in Practice
fa-facebookfa-linkedinfa-youtube-playfa-rss

An official publication of the ACR and the ARP serving rheumatologists and rheumatology professionals

  • Conditions
    • Axial Spondyloarthritis
    • Gout and Crystalline Arthritis
    • Myositis
    • Osteoarthritis and Bone Disorders
    • Pain Syndromes
    • Pediatric Conditions
    • Psoriatic Arthritis
    • Rheumatoid Arthritis
    • Sjögren’s Disease
    • Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
    • Systemic Sclerosis
    • Vasculitis
    • Other Rheumatic Conditions
  • FocusRheum
    • ANCA-Associated Vasculitis
    • Axial Spondyloarthritis
    • Gout
    • Lupus Nephritis
    • Psoriatic Arthritis
    • Rheumatoid Arthritis
    • Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
  • Guidance
    • Clinical Criteria/Guidelines
    • Ethics
    • Legal Updates
    • Legislation & Advocacy
    • Meeting Reports
      • ACR Convergence
      • Other ACR meetings
      • EULAR/Other
    • Research Rheum
  • Drug Updates
    • Analgesics
    • Biologics/DMARDs
  • Practice Support
    • Billing/Coding
    • EMRs
    • Facility
    • Insurance
    • QA/QI
    • Technology
    • Workforce
  • Opinion
    • Patient Perspective
    • Profiles
    • Rheuminations
      • Video
    • Speak Out Rheum
  • Career
    • ACR ExamRheum
    • Awards
    • Career Development
  • ACR
    • ACR Home
    • ACR Convergence
    • ACR Guidelines
    • Journals
      • ACR Open Rheumatology
      • Arthritis & Rheumatology
      • Arthritis Care & Research
    • From the College
    • Events/CME
    • President’s Perspective
  • Search

Celecoxib & Cardiovascular Death: NSAID Safety Under Review

Michele B. Kaufman, PharmD, BCGP  |  December 7, 2016

GENERIC_Drugs_500x270Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) have been used therapeutically since the 1960s.1 Evidence of adverse cardiovascular outcomes led to the withdrawal of the selective COX-2 inhibitor rofecoxib in September 2004, when the question of cardiovascular safety of NSAIDs first came into the limelight.2 Valdecoxib (Bextra) was subsequently withdrawn from the market in April 2005 due to adverse cardiovascular effects and serious skin reactions.3 The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) allowed celecoxib to remain on the market, but mandated a cardiovascular safety trial.4,5 The results of this trial, Prospective Randomized Evaluation of Celecoxib Integrated Safety vs. Ibuprofen or Naproxen (PRECISION), were recently published.6

PRECISION Safety Trial
This was a randomized, multicenter, double-blind, noninferiority trial in 24,081 patients with osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis, and with increased cardiovascular risk. Randomization was stratified by the patients’ primary diagnosis, aspirin use and geographic location. The trial goal was to assess the non-inferiority of celecoxib with regard to the primary composite outcome of cardiovascular death.

ad goes here:advert-1
ADVERTISEMENT
SCROLL TO CONTINUE

Patients were treated with celecoxib (100 mg twice daily), ibuprofen (600 mg three times daily) or naproxen (375 mg twice daily) for a mean duration of 20.3±16 months, with a mean follow-up of 34.1±13.4 months. Investigators could increase the celecoxib dose to 200 mg twice daily, ibuprofen to 800 mg three times daily or naproxen to 500 mg twice daily, following the first visit. All participants were provided with esomeprazole 20–40 mg for gastric protection. Patients who were receiving low-dose aspirin (<325 mg) were allowed to continue using it.

The primary composite outcome was the first occurrence of an adverse event that met Antiplatelet Trialists Collaboration (APTC) criteria. These criteria included death due to cardiovascular causes (including hemorrhage), nonfatal myocardial infarction or nonfatal stroke. A secondary composite outcome, major adverse cardiovascular events, included components of the primary outcome plus coronary revascularization, hospitalization for unstable angina, or transient ischemic attack. Clinically significant gastrointestinal (GI) events were also secondary outcomes. Tertiary outcomes included iron deficiency anemia (GI origin), clinically significant renal events, and heart failure or hypertension hospitalization. A non-adjudicated secondary outcome was arthritis pain intensity, which was assessed using a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) (scores range from 0 to 100 mm, higher scores equal worse pain). Noninferiority required a hazard ratio of 1.12 or lower, as well as an upper 97.5% confidence limit of 1.33 or lower in the intention-to-treat population and 1.40 or lower in the on-treatment population.

ad goes here:advert-2
ADVERTISEMENT
SCROLL TO CONTINUE

The trial duration was 10 years, and 90% of the participants had osteoarthritis, while 10% had rheumatoid arthritis. During the trial, 69% of the patients stopped taking the study drug, and 27% of patients discontinued follow-up.

Results
The primary outcome (APTC) occurred in 2.3% of celecoxib-treated patients (n=188), 2.5% of the naproxen-treated patients (n= 201), and 2.7% of the ibuprofen-treated patients (n=218). In the on-treatment population, the primary outcome (APTC) occurred in 1.7% of the celecoxib-treated patients (n=134), 1.8% of the naproxen-treated patients (n=144) and 1.9% of the ibuprofen-treated patients (n=155). Hazard ratios were: 0.90 for celecoxib vs. naproxen; 0.81 for celecoxib vs. ibuprofen (P<0.001 for non-inferiority); and 1.12 for ibuprofen vs. naproxen. When celecoxib was compared with either ibuprofen or naproxen, it met all four of the prespecified noninferiority requirements.

The event rate for the composite outcome of serious GI events was lower in the celecoxib group than in the naproxen-treated patients (0.71) or the ibuprofen-treated patients (0.65). Serious renal events occurred at a lower rate in celecoxib-treated patients than in ibuprofen-treated patients (HR, 0.61), but the rate did not significantly differ from naproxen-treated patients (HR, 0.79). Hypertension hospitalization was lower for celecoxib-treated patients than for ibuprofen-treated patients, but not for naproxen-treated patients. For pain assessment, a significant, but small, advantage was identified for naproxen vs. celecoxib or ibuprofen.

In summary, because higher doses of celecoxib were not studied, the data cannot be extrapolated to other, higher doses. In addition, only two non-selective NSAIDs were compared, so the same holds true for data extrapolation. These data show that at moderate doses, celecoxib was found to be noninferior with respect to cardiovascular safety compared with ibuprofen or naproxen. Use of celecoxib also led to fewer GI events than either NSAID, and fewer renal adverse events compared with ibuprofen.


Michele B. Kaufman, PharmD, BCGP, is a freelance medical writer based in New York City and a pharmacist at New York Presbyterian Lower Manhattan Hospital.

References

  1. Brune K, Hinz B. The discovery and development of antiinflammatory drugs. Arthritis Rheum. 2004 Aug;50(8):2391–2399.
  2. U.S. Food & Drug Administration. FDA Public Health Advisory: Safety of Vioxx. 2004 Sep 30.
  3. U.S. Food & Drug Administration. Information for healthcare professionals: Valdecoxib (marketed as Bextra). 2005 Apr 7.
  4. U.S. Food & Drug Administration. FDA announces series of changes to the class of marketed non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). 2005 Apr 7.
  5. Pfizer. Advisory committee briefing document: Assessment of cardiovascular safety in non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). 2014 Feb 10–11.
  6. Nissen SE, Yeomans ND, Solomon DH, et al. Cardiovascular safety of celecoxib, naproxen, or ibuprofen for arthritis. N Engl J Med. 2016 Nov 13; doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1611593

Page: 1 2 3 | Multi-Page
Share: 

Filed under:AnalgesicsDrug Updates Tagged with:cardiovascularFDAFood and Drug AdministrationheartNSAIDsPREC

Related Articles

    Rheumatology Drug Updates: Celecoxib and Cardiovascular Safety Trial Results Reviewed

    December 13, 2016

    Image Credit: ajt/shutterstock.com Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) have been used therapeutically since the 1960s.1 Evidence of adverse cardiovascular outcomes led to the withdrawal of the selective COX-2 inhibitor rofecoxib in September 2004, when the question of cardiovascular safety of NSAIDs first came into the limelight.2 Valdecoxib (Bextra) was subsequently withdrawn from the market in April…

    A Comprehensive Review of NSAID Cardiovascular Toxicity

    A Comprehensive Review of NSAID Cardiovascular Toxicity

    July 18, 2018

    Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are the most used drugs for acute and chronic pain. More than 30 billion doses of NSAIDs are consumed annually from more than 70 million prescriptions.1 Despite their common use, NSAIDs are not free of serious toxicities. In the pre-Vioxx (rofecoxib) era, gastrointestinal toxicity was the primary concern for many NSAIDs….

    Celecoxib Is a Safe Treatment for Arthritis

    February 20, 2017

    A study compared celecoxib with ibuprofen and naproxen to determine its cardiovascular safety, as well as gastrointestinal and renal outcomes, in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis. The results showed that celecoxib met all prespecified noninferiority requirements and is as safe as other non-selective NSAIDs…

    Ibuprofen More Likely to Raise BP than Naproxen or Celecoxib

    September 12, 2017

    NEW YORK (Reuters Health)—Ibuprofen boosts blood pressure (BP) more than naproxen or celecoxib in patients who take non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) to treat arthritis, according to a new substudy from the PRECISION trial. “These drugs are different with regard to BP, and ibuprofen is the worst,” Dr. Frank Ruschitzka of University Hospital Zurich in Switzerland,…

  • About Us
  • Meet the Editors
  • Issue Archives
  • Contribute
  • Advertise
  • Contact Us
fa-facebookfa-linkedinfa-youtube-playfa-rss
  • Copyright © 2025 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies. ISSN 1931-3268 (print). ISSN 1931-3209 (online).
  • DEI Statement
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Cookie Preferences