7/12/2015 Etoricoxib for arthritis and pain management

Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2006 Mar; 2(1): 4557. PMCID: PMC1661646
Published online 2006 Mar.

Etoricoxib for arthritis and pain management

Peter Brooks1 and Paul Kubler2
1
Executive Dean (Health Sciences), Edith Cavell Building, Royal Brisbane Hospital, Queensland, Australia
2
Staff Specialist Clinical Pharmacology/Rheumatology, Royal Brisbane Hospital & Royal Womens Hospital and Health Service Districts, Brisbane,
Queensland, Australia
Correspondence: Peter Brooks Executive Dean (Health Sciences), Edith Cavell Building, Royal Brisbane Hospital, Queensland QLD 4029, Australia Tel
+61 7 3365 5106 Fax +61 7 3365 5533 Email [email protected]

Copyright 2006 Dove Medical Press Limited. All rights reserved

This article has been cited by other articles in PMC.

Abstract Go to:

Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), including selective cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 inhibitors, have
come to play an important role in the pharmacologic management of arthritis and pain. Clinical trials have
established the efficacy of etoricoxib in osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, acute gouty arthritis, ankylosing
spondylitis, low back pain, acute postoperative pain, and primary dysmenorrhea. Comparative studies indicate at
least similar efficacy with etoricoxib versus traditional NSAIDs. Etoricoxib was generally well tolerated in these
studies with no new safety findings during long-term administration. The gastrointestinal, renovascular, and
cardiovascular tolerability profiles of etoricoxib have been evaluated in large patient datasets, and further insight
into the cardiovascular tolerability of etoricoxib and diclofenac will be gained from a large ongoing cardiovascular
outcomes program (MEDAL). The available data suggest that etoricoxib is an efficacious alternative in the
management of arthritis and pain, with the potential advantages of convenient once-daily administration and
superior gastrointestinal tolerability compared with traditional NSAIDs.

Keywords: etoricoxib, cyclooxygenase-2, nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, arthritis, pain

Introduction Go to:

Musculoskeletal conditions are often progressive and associated with considerable pain and disability (WHO
2005). These conditions place a huge burden on society in terms of lost productivity and the cost of treatment
(WHO 2005). Rheumatoid arthritis (RA), osteoarthritis (OA), and spinal disorders (including chronic low back
pain [LBP]) are among those musculoskeletal conditions with the greatest impact on society (WHO 2005).
Approximately 14% of all primary care visits are for musculoskeletal pain or dysfunction (ACRCCG 1996).
Symptomatic OA affects approximately 10% of men and 18% of women over 60 years of age (WHO 2005), while
RA affects between 0.3% and 1% of adults worldwide (WHO 2005). Approximately 2.0% of all disability-adjusted
life years are lost due to musculoskeletal diseases, including 1.0% due to OA, and 0.3% due to RA (WHO 2004).

Current approaches to the management of these conditions are many and varied, but pharmacologic intervention is
usually required at some stage for relief of acute or chronic pain and inflammation. In patients with RA, treatment
with nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) is usually required as part of initial drug therapy, alongside
disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), and/or glucocorticoids (ACRRAG 2002). Pharmacologic
intervention in patients with OA, as an adjunct to nonpharmacologic strategies, may include the use of
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1661646/ 1/15
7/12/2015 Etoricoxib for arthritis and pain management

acetaminophen or NSAID therapy (ACRSOG 2002). Analgesic drugs, including NSAIDs, also play a regular role
in the management of other chronic musculoskeletal pain syndromes such as low back pain and ankylosing
spondylitis, and in other painful conditions including postsurgical dental pain and headache (Argoff 2002).

Selective cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 inhibitors, a subclass of NSAIDs, continue to have a place in the management
of RA and OA (ACRRAG 2002; ACRSOG 2002; Cush et al 2006). NSAIDs inhibit the COX-mediated synthesis
of prostaglandins, which are important intermediaries in the development of inflammation and pain. Traditional
NSAIDs inhibit both constitutive COX-1 and inducible COX-2, two processes which are believed to be
responsible for the adverse effects (primarily gastrointestinal toxicity) and clinical benefits of treatment, respectively
(Warner and Mitchell 2004). Dyspeptic upper gastrointestinal symptoms with chronic use of traditional NSAIDs
often lead to discontinuation by the patient with consequent inadequate pain control, switching from one NSAID to
another, or the addition of a gastroprotective agent to prevent or treat upper gastrointestinal symptoms or clinical
events (Watson et al 2004). Major gastrointestinal complications, such as perforation, ulcers, and bleeding may
require visits to the emergency department, hospitalization, and endoscopic or barium tests. In addition to
discomfort and inconvenience for the patient, the costs of dealing with these adverse events are substantial (Moore
et al 2004).

In contrast, selective COX-2 inhibitors have greater affinity for COX-2 than COX-1. Clinical evidence has shown
that selective COX-2 inhibitors have comparable efficacy with traditional NSAIDs in the treatment of arthritis and
pain, but offer the major advantage of reduced gastrointestinal toxicity (Warner and Mitchell 2004), thus providing
physicians with an important therapeutic alternative. Recently, reports from two long-term studies in patients with a
history of colorectal adenomas have detailed an increased risk of cardiovascular events associated with the COX-2
inhibitors celecoxib and rofecoxib compared with placebo (Bresalier et al 2005; Solomon et al 2005), leading to
questions about the cardiovascular safety of these agents (Drazen 2005; Psaty and Furberg 2005), and highlighting
the importance of careful patient selection based on the benefits and risks of treatment.

This article will review available data regarding the efficacy and tolerability of etoricoxib, a selective COX-2
inhibitor that has been evaluated in arthritis and pain.

Pharmacology Go to:

In vitro, etoricoxib exhibits a greater selectivity for COX-2 over COX-1 compared with the COX-2 inhibitors
rofecoxib, valdecoxib, and celecoxib (Riendeau et al 2001; Tacconelli et al 2002). Etoricoxib binds competitively
to COX-2 with 1:1 stoichiometry in a reversible, noncovalent manner (Riendeau et al 2001). In human whole
blood assays, etoricoxib inhibited COX-2 with an IC50 of 1.1 0.1 M, compared with an IC50 of 116 8 M for
COX-1, representing 106-fold selectivity for COX-2 over COX-1 (Riendeau et al 2001). No inhibitory effect was
observed against a wide range of other receptors and enzymes evaluated. Selective COX-2 inhibition was also
observed in ex vivo blood samples from healthy human volunteers who received etoricoxib at various therapeutic
and supratherapeutic doses (Dallob et al 2003). Etoricoxib produced markedly less interference with the
cardioprotective COX-1-mediated antiplatelet activity of low-dose aspirin in vitro than other NSAIDs including (in
ascending order of aspirin antagonism) rofecoxib, valdecoxib, celecoxib, and ibuprofen, reflecting the lower
affinity of etoricoxib for COX-1 (Ouellet et al 2001). These findings are consistent with results from clinical studies
in which ibuprofen, but not rofecoxib (Catella-Lawson et al 2001) or etoricoxib (Wagner et al 2001), antagonized
aspirin antiplatelet activity. Etoricoxib showed potent, dose-dependent efficacy similar to other NSAIDs in animal
models of acute inflammation, hyperalgesia, pyresis, and chronic adjuvant-induced arthritis (Riendeau et al 2001).
Preclinical and clinical data were consistent with the gastrointestinal tolerability of selective COX-2 inhibition; no
effects on gastrointestinal integrity were observed in animal models as measured by urinary or fecal excretion of
51
creatinineethylenediamine tetraacetic acid (51Cr-EDTA), an inert compound that is not taken up by extravascular
tissue after its absorption from the gastrointestinal tract, but is completely excreted by the kidney (Riendeau et al
2001). Inhibition of prostaglandin synthesis in the gastric mucosa was not significantly different from that of
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1661646/ 2/15
7/12/2015 Etoricoxib for arthritis and pain management

placebo in human volunteers (Dallob et al 2003).

In healthy volunteers, oral etoricoxib is rapidly and completely absorbed. It reaches Cmax after approximately 1
hour and has up to 100% absolute bioavailability (Agrawal, Porras, et al 2003; Rodrigues et al 2003). Absorption is
slowed, but not diminished, following a high-fat meal meaning that etoricoxib can be administered without dietary
consideration (Agrawal, Porras, et al 2003). Etoricoxib shows linear pharmacokinetics through doses at least 2-fold
higher than the maximum anticipated clinical dose (120 mg) (Agrawal, Porras, et al 2003). Steady state conditions
are reached after 7 days of daily administration, with an accumulation half-life of approximately 22 hours and an
apparent terminal half-life of approximately 25 hours (Agrawal, Porras, et al 2003), supporting once-daily dosing.

Etoricoxib is extensively metabolized and excreted mostly in the urine, with less than 1% of the oral dose recovered
intact from urine (Rodrigues et al 2003). It is metabolized primarily by 6-methyl hydroxylation in human liver
microsomes, a process catalyzed in large part (60%) by members of the hepatic cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A
subfamily with lesser contributions by multiple other CYP isoenzymes including CYP2C9, CYP2D6, CYP1A2,
and possibly CYP2C19 (Kassahun et al 2001). Etoricoxib is a weak inhibitor of CYP3A and other CYP
isoenzymes in vitro (IC50 > 100 M) (Kassahun et al 2001), and has a minimal inhibitory effect on CYP3A
activity in healthy volunteers (Agrawal et al 2004b). Coadministration of CYP3A inhibitors in healthy volunteers
increased the etoricoxib area under the curve, but this effect was not considered to be clinically relevant (Agrawal
et al 2004b). In contrast, agents that strongly induce CYP3A may reduce etoricoxib concentrations below
therapeutic levels (Agrawal et al 2004b). Patients with mild to moderate hepatic insufficiency exhibit reduced
clearance of etoricoxib. The etoricoxib dose should not exceed 60 mg once daily in patients with mild hepatic
insufficiency (Child-Pugh score 5 to 6), and 60 mg every other day in patients with moderate hepatic insufficiency
(Child-Pugh score 7 to 9). No data are available for patients with severe hepatic impairment (Child-Pugh score
10), and etoricoxib is not recommended for use in this patient population (Agrawal, Rose, et al 2003). Renal
insufficiency has little impact on etoricoxib pharmacokinetics and no dosage adjustment is required (Agrawal et al
2004a). However, etoricoxib, similar to other selective and traditional NSAIDs, appears to have dose-related
renovascular effects (see renovascular tolerability section) (Curtis et al 2004), and use of etoricoxib in patients with
a creatinine clearance < 30 ml/min is contraindicated (EMEA 2005a).

Clinical studies Go to:

Clinical studies have established the efficacy and tolerability of etoricoxib in arthritis and pain, and the drug is
available in over 50 countries worldwide. Etoricoxib is approved in Europe for the symptomatic relief of OA, RA,
and the pain and signs of inflammation associated with acute gouty arthritis (EMEA 2005a), whereas the US Food
and Drug Administration (FDA) has requested additional efficacy and safety data prior to approval of etoricoxib.
Some countries in Latin America and Asia have additional indications including LBP, ankylosing spondylitis, and
primary dysmenorrhea

Efficacy

Etoricoxib in the treatment of osteoarthritis Clinical studies have shown that etoricoxib is more effective than
placebo, and of similar efficacy to traditional NSAIDs, in the treatment of OA. A dose-ranging study in 617
patients with knee OA established that etoricoxib 5 mg to 90 mg every day (QD) was more effective than placebo
after 6 weeks as measured by the Western Ontario and McMasters University OA Index (WOMAC) pain subscale
and patient and investigator global assessments (p < 0.05 each comparison), with maximal efficacy at a dosage of
60 mg QD (Gottesdiener et al 2002). The efficacy of etoricoxib 60 mg QD was comparable with that of diclofenac
50 mg three times daily (TID) in long-term extensions of this study for up to 52 weeks (Curtis et al 2005) and up to
a total of 190 weeks (Fisher et al 2003) Etoricoxib 60 mg QD and diclofenac 50 mg TID also showed comparable
efficacy in a 6-week, randomized study of 516 patients with hip or knee OA assessed using the WOMAC pain
subscale (Zacher et al 2003), irrespective of baseline disease severity (Frizziero et al 2004). Interestingly, in this

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1661646/ 3/15
7/12/2015 Etoricoxib for arthritis and pain management

study etoricoxib had a more rapid effect with significantly more patients reporting a good or excellent response
within 4 hours of the first dose compared with diclofenac (Figure 1) (Zacher et al 2003).

Figure 1
Osteoarthritis PGART 4 hours 15 minutes after the first dose of etoricoxib
versus diclofenac. This randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study
evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of etoricoxib 60 mg QD versus
diclofenac 50 mg TID over ...

The Etoricoxib versus Diclofenac sodium Gastrointestinal tolerability and Effectiveness (EDGE) study which
primarily evaluated gastrointestinal tolerability in 7111 patients with hip, knee, hand, or spine OA, showed
sustained and comparable improvements in Patients Global Assessment of Disease Status (PGADS) with
etoricoxib 90 mg QD or diclofenac 50 mg TID at 12 months (Baraf et al 2004). Two randomized, double-blind,
12-week studies in a total of 997 patients with hip or knee OA showed that etoricoxib 60 mg QD and naproxen
500 mg TID were of comparable efficacy, and superior to placebo, as measured by WOMAC pain and physical
function subscales and PGADS (Fisher et al 2001; Leung et al 2002). In addition, patients receiving etoricoxib or
diclofenac also experienced treatment-related significant improvements in social and emotional quality of life and
vitality (Hunsche et al 2002). Early improvements in patient condition were observed 2 days after initiating
etoricoxib treatment (Leung et al 2002) and then maintained through up to 138 weeks on study extensions
(Reginster et al 2004).

The recommended etoricoxib dosage for OA is 60 mg QD (EMEA 2005a); however, etoricoxib also appears to
offer effective pain relief at lower doses consistent with the initial dose-ranging findings (Gottesdiener, 2002). A
recent randomized trial in 528 patients with hip or knee OA demonstrated that the efficacy of etoricoxib 30 mg QD
was comparable with that of ibuprofen 800 mg TID over 12 weeks on the WOMAC pain and physical functioning
subscales and PGADS (p < 0.001 versus placebo for all comparisons) (Wiesenhutter et al 2005).

Etoricoxib in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis

The efficacy of etoricoxib is similar to, or greater than, that of conventional NSAIDs in patients with RA. In a
randomized study evaluating etoricoxib doses of 10, 60, 90, and 120 mg QD in 581 adults with RA, patients
receiving etoricoxib 90 mg or 120 mg QD for 8 weeks achieved similar improvements in the primary endpoints of
patient and investigator global assessment of disease activity. Both treatment groups showed significant
improvements compared with placebo (average change from baseline p < 0.05) (Curtis et al 2001). Moreover, in
extensions to this study the efficacy of etoricoxib 90 mg or 120 mg QD was maintained, and was similar to that of
diclofenac 50 mg TID, over the subsequent 166 weeks (Curtis et al 2001; Curtis, Losada, et al 2003). Since
etoricoxib 90 mg QD produced maximal benefit in this study, with no additional efficacy at higher doses, this is
considered the optimal dosage for RA (EMEA 2005a).

In a randomized study in 816 patients with RA in the US, etoricoxib 90 mg QD was more effective than naproxen
500 mg TID (p < 0.05) or placebo (p < 0.01) over 12 weeks for all primary and most secondary endpoints (
Figure 2), including the percentage of patients who achieved an American College of Rheumatology 20%
Response Criteria (ACR20) response (57.9%, 46.8%, and 27.4%, respectively) (Matsumoto et al 2002). The
efficacy of etoricoxib was evident after 2 weeks (Matsumoto et al 2002), and was similar in patients with or without
concomitant DMARD and/or low-dose corticosteroid therapy (Matsumoto, Zhao, et al 2003).

Figure 2
Global assessment results for etoricoxib versus placebo and naproxen in patients with
rheumatoid arthritis. In this randomized, double-blind, controlled study, 816 adult patients with
rheumatoid arthritis were randomized to receive etoricoxib 90 mg QD ...
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1661646/ 4/15
7/12/2015 Etoricoxib for arthritis and pain management

Etoricoxib exhibited comparable efficacy versus placebo in a duplicate international study (n = 891), although there
was no significant difference between etoricoxib and naproxen. This discrepancy in results between the US and
international studies may be due to variances in the use of concomitant therapies or result from underlying medical
or cultural differences between the populations (Collantes et al 2002). Extensions of the US and international
studies showed that the efficacy of etoricoxib and naproxen was maintained through 52 weeks (Matsumoto,
Collantes, et al 2003).

Etoricoxib in the treatment of acute gouty arthritis

Within the EU, etoricoxib is approved for the treatment of acute gouty arthritis at a dosage of 120 mg QD during
the acute symptomatic period (EMEA 2005a). This approval is based on the results of two clinical trials which
indicate that etoricoxib and indomethacin have comparable efficacy in treating this painful condition. (Rubin et al
2004; Schumacher et al 2002) Duplicate randomized studies enrolling a total of 339 patients presenting with acute
gout showed that etoricoxib 120 mg QD or indomethacin 50 mg TID for 8 days produced comparable
improvements in pain in the affected joint, patient and investigator assessments of global treatment response, and
joint tenderness and swelling (Rubin et al 2004; Schumacher et al 2002). The onset of pain relief was rapid, with
similar benefit reported within 4 hours of the first dose of etoricoxib or indomethacin (Rubin et al 2004;
Schumacher et al 2002). An exploratory analysis in one study (n = 189) showed that etoricoxib produced
significantly greater resolution of erythema after 8 days compared with indomethacin (p = 0.038) (Figure 3) (Rubin
et al 2004), and post-hoc analysis of both studies indicated that the effectiveness of etoricoxib was due to significant
antiinflammatory and analgesic activity, and not natural resolution of the disease (Boice et al 2004).

Figure 3
Improvement in study joint erythema in patients with acute gout treated with
etoricoxib or indomethacin for 8 days. This randomized, double-blind study
compared the efficacy of etoricoxib 120 mg QD versus indomethacin 50 mg
TID in 189 patients experiencing ...

Etoricoxib in the treatment of other painful conditions

The efficacy of etoricoxib has been established in a variety of other painful conditions including ankylosing
spondylitis (AS), LBP, acute postoperative pain, and primary dysmenorrhea. In a randomized study in 387 patients
with AS, etoricoxib 90 mg or 120 mg QD showed superior efficacy to naproxen 500 mg twice daily (BID) (p <
0.05) or placebo (p < 0.001) at 6 weeks with respect to spinal pain, global disease activity, and function (van der
Heijde et al 2005). Significant pain relief versus placebo was observed within 4 hours of the first dose of etoricoxib
90 mg QD and following the second dose of etoricoxib 120 mg QD, and superior efficacy versus naproxen was
maintained over 52 weeks. In a post-hoc analysis of data from this study, etoricoxib and naproxen improved axial
symptoms in patients with or without peripheral disease, although patients without peripheral arthritis showed
greater spinal improvement (Gossec et al 2005). In addition, a small study (n = 22) suggested that etoricoxib 90 mg

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1661646/ 5/15
7/12/2015 Etoricoxib for arthritis and pain management

QD may reduce the need for biologic therapy in patients with severe previously NSAID-refractory AS (Jarrett et al
2004).

Duplicate 12-week studies in a total of 644 patients with chronic LBP showed that etoricoxib 60 or 90 mg QD
produced significant improvements in pain intensity relative to placebo at the primary 4-week time point (p <
0.001), and in most secondary endpoints at 12 weeks (Birbara et al 2003; Pallay et al 2004). Clinical benefit was
achieved as early as 1 week and was maintained throughout the 3 months of the study, with no significant
differences between etoricoxib dosage groups. In 1147 patients with acute LBP who completed an open,
nonrandomized 6-week study of etoricoxib 60 to 120 mg QD, improvements from baseline in physical activity
were observed at 2 weeks and improvements in lumbar pain and functional capacity were seen at 6 weeks (p <
0.001, each comparison) (Hernandez-Garduo et al 2005).

Etoricoxib is as effective as high-dose diclofenac in treating chronic LBP. In a 4-week, randomized, double-blind,
parallel-group study of 446 patients with chronic LBP (Quebec Task Force on Spinal Disorders Class 1 or 2),
etoricoxib 60 mg QD was as effective as diclofenac 50 mg TID in relieving LBP as assessed by the Lower Back
Pain Intensity Scale (LBP-IS). The time-weighted average change from baseline over 4 weeks for the LBP-IS was
33 mm in each group (95% confidence interval [CI] 36.25, 29.63). Both etoricoxib and diclofenac improved
measures of physical functioning, and were well-tolerated throughout the trial (Zerbini et al 2005).

A randomized single dose-response study in 398 patients with moderate to severe acute pain following dental
surgery showed that etoricoxib 120 mg was the optimal dosage for this indication. Overall, 93.4% of patients
receiving a single dose of etoricoxib 120 mg had perceptible pain relief, with a median time to pain relief of 0.4
hours and median time to use of rescue medication of more than 24 hours (p < 0.001 versus placebo and p < 0.05
versus etoricoxib 60 mg for all comparisons) (Malmstrom, Sapre, et al 2004). Subsequent studies have shown that a
single dose of etoricoxib 120 mg has greater overall analgesic efficacy in this setting than oxycodone 10
mg/acetaminophen 650 mg (Chang et al 2004; Malmstrom et al 2005) or codeine 60 mg/acetaminophen 600 mg
(Malmstrom, Kotey, et al 2004; Malmstrom et al 2005), and comparable efficacy to naproxen 550 mg (Malmstrom,
Kotey, et al 2004). A recent study (n = 228) also demonstrated comparable pain relief with a single dose of
etoricoxib 120 mg or extended-release naproxen 1000 mg administered within 72 hours of knee or hip replacement
surgery, and superior analgesic efficacy with etoricoxib 120 mg QD versus placebo over 7 days following surgery
(p < 0.001) (no active comparator group was available for the latter analysis) (Rasmussen et al 2004). Finally, a
single dose of etoricoxib 120 mg showed analgesic efficacy superior to placebo, and comparable with naproxen
550 mg, in a randomized study in 73 women with primary dysmenorrhea (Malmstrom et al 2003).

Tolerability and patient acceptability

Clinical trial data indicates that etoricoxib has a favorable tolerability profile and is associated with an improved
quality of life (Hunsche et al 2002; Ramos-Remus et al 2004). Moreover, clinical trial extensions showed that the
tolerability profile of etoricoxib was maintained without notable safety findings during prolonged treatment for a
total of 52 to 174 weeks (Fisher et al 2001, 2003; Curtis, Losada, et al 2003; Matsumoto, Collantes, et al 2003;
Reginster et al 2004; van der Heijde et al 2005). Based on clinical experience with other NSAIDs, issues of
particular interest in etoricoxib trials included gastrointestinal tolerability, renovascular effects, and cardiovascular
safety.

Gastrointestinal tolerability

Several clinical trials reported superior gastrointestinal tolerability with etoricoxib compared with traditional
NSAIDs. A 12-week study in 501 patients with OA showed that etoricoxib 60 mg QD was associated with a
lower rate of nuisance gastrointestinal adverse events (eg, abdominal pain, dyspepsia) (20.1% versus 33.0%) and
fewer upper gastrointestinal perforations, ulcers, or bleeding (PUBs) (0 versus 5 events) compared with naproxen
500 mg BID (Leung et al 2002). Moreover a pooled analysis of this and a duplicate study indicates that the

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1661646/ 6/15
7/12/2015 Etoricoxib for arthritis and pain management

favorable gastrointestinal tolerability of etoricoxib is maintained during long-term treatment over 138 weeks (0.8%
versus 5.9% PUBs) (Reginster et al 2004). The EDGE study reported a lower rate of discontinuations due to
gastrointestinal adverse events with etoricoxib 90 mg QD than with diclofenac 50 mg TID in patients with OA
(relative risk [RR], 0.50; p < 0.001) (Baraf et al 2004). In this study consistent benefit was also observed within
patient subgroups at risk for gastrointestinal adverse events, including patients using concomitant aspirin or
continuing or initiating gastroprotective therapy (Baraf et al 2005a). There was no difference with respect to the
incidence of PUBs or new use of gastroprotective agents in the EDGE study (Merck 2005); however, this was not
a prespecified endpoint and the analysis was confounded by use of aspirin and gastroprotective agents. An 8-day
study in 189 patients with acute gout showed that etoricoxib 120 mg QD was associated with a lower rate of drug-
related gastrointestinal adverse events than indomethacin 50 mg TID (7.8% versus 18.6%) (Rubin et al 2004). A 4-
week safety study in 62 healthy volunteers demonstrated that daily fecal blood loss with etoricoxib 120 mg QD
was comparable with placebo and lower than with ibuprofen 800 mg TID (p < 0.001) (Hunt, Harper, Callegari, et
al 2003).

Results from two large 12-week endoscopy studies in patients with OA or RA showed that etoricoxib 120 mg QD
was associated with a lower cumulative incidence of gastroduodenal ulcers ( 3 mm) and a smaller increase in
gastroduodenal erosions than naproxen 500 mg BID (Hunt, Harper, Callegari, et al 2003) or ibuprofen 800 mg
TID (Hunt, Harper, Watson, et al 2003) (p < 0.01 for each comparison). In addition, results from several large
pooled analyses also support the favorable gastrointestinal tolerability profile of etoricoxib (Hunt, Harper, Watson,
et al 2003; Watson et al 2004; Ramey et al 2005). An analysis of 5441 patients with OA, RA, or AS from 10
clinical trials, showed that etoricoxib 60 to 120 mg QD was associated with a lower incidence of PUBs than
traditional NSAIDs (ibuprofen 800 mg TID, diclofenac 50 mg TID, naproxen 500 mg BID) (Table 1) (Ramey et al
2005). The superior PUB profile of etoricoxib during the first year of treatment in the pooled population was driven
primarily by comparison with naproxen (Merck 2005). In the pooled analysis, as well as the EDGE study, the
reduction in PUBs with etoricoxib versus traditional NSAID comparator(s), appeared to be negated in patients
receiving concomitant aspirin therapy (Merck 2005).

Table 1
Pooled analysis of upper gastrointestinal safety: perforations ulcers and
bleeds with etoricoxib versus nonselective nonsteroidal antiinflammatory
drugs (NSAIDs)* (Ramey et al 2005)

Data from 4782 patients with OA, RA, chronic LBP, or AS, showed that etoricoxib 60 mg to 120 mg QD was
associated with less discontinuation due to dyspepsia (p = 0.007) and lower new use of gastroprotective agents (p <
0.001) compared with the NSAIDs diclofenac and naproxen (mean follow-up 80.5 versus 73.1 weeks) (Watson et
al 2004).

Renovascular and cardiovascular tolerability

All selective and traditional NSAIDs inhibit prostanoid biosynthesis (Warner and Mitchell 2004); however, it has
been hypothesized that selective suppression of COX-2-dependent synthesis of prostacyclin (a vasodilator and
inhibitor of platelet aggregation and vascular smooth muscle cell proliferation) without concomitant inhibition of
COX-1-dependent synthesis of thromboxane A2 (a vasoconstrictor and promoter of platelet aggregation and
vascular proliferation), may increase the risk of cardiovascular adverse effects owing to thromboembolism or
elevated blood pressure in patients predisposed to such events (Fitz Gerald 2002, 2004; Clark et al 2004; Warner
and Mitchell 2004). Clinical trials have suggested that long term use of celecoxib and rofecoxib may be associated
with more cardiovascular events than placebo or nonselective NSAIDs (Bombardier et al 2000; FDA 2001;
Bresalier et al 2005; Solomon et al 2005), and this has led to the market withdrawal of rofecoxib worldwide.
However, there has been uncertainty over these findings as a result of the small number of events reported and

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1661646/ 7/15
7/12/2015 Etoricoxib for arthritis and pain management

methodological problems with the trials. For example, the trials were statistically underpowered to evaluate
thrombotic events, comparisons between trials were limited by the different proportions of patients with RA (an
independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease [Solomon et al 2003]), and concomitant aspirin therapy or use of
a naproxen comparator group may have had a confounding cardioprotective effect (Fitz Gerald 2002; Clark et al
2004; Warner and Mitchell 2004).

The outstanding questions surrounding the cardiovascular safety of traditional NSAIDs and selective COX-2
inhibitors are important matters that greatly impact clinical care for patients such as those with RA who require
effective and long-term pain and symptom relief. The available evidence does not conclusively support a
mechanistic effect of COX-2 inhibitors on hemostasis. Of note, recent research has shown that acetaminophen also
significantly inhibits prostacyclin and thromboxane synthesis (Schwartz et al 2006), suggesting that there is a
general lack of information regarding the mechanistic effects of commonly used analgesic agents.

Etoricoxib appears to be associated with a low incidence of renovascular adverse events (hypertension, lower
extremity edema, or congestive heart failure) consistent with fluid retention observed with all selective and
nonselective NSAIDs (Curtis et al 2004). The EDGE study reported a numerically higher incidence of
hypertension-related adverse events and a significantly higher percentage of patients discontinuing therapy with
etoricoxib 90 mg QD compared with diclofenac 50 mg TID (11.7% versus 5.9%, respectively, for adverse events;
2.3% versus 0.7%, respectively, for discontinuations, RR 1.60 with 95% CI 1.06, 2.18) (Merck 2005). In addition,
a higher rate of new hypertension medication use was reported with etoricoxib compared with diclofenac (27.4
versus 22.3 events per 100 patient-years; RR 1.24, p < 0.001). Serious hypertension-related adverse events were
rare (Merck 2005). In a pooled analysis of 12-week data from 4770 patients with OA, RA, or chronic LBP, the risk
of renovascular adverse events associated with etoricoxib 60 mg, 90 mg, or 120 mg QD was low and generally
similar to that observed with naproxen 500 mg BID or ibuprofen 800 mg TID (Curtis et al 2004). It is therefore
important to monitor blood pressure in all patients taking NSAIDs (FDA 2005a).

Analysis of pooled data from more than 6700 patients (representing approximately 6500 patient-years of
observation) suggested that treatment with etoricoxib 60 mg QD was not associated with an excess risk of serious
thrombotic cardiovascular adverse events (fatal or nonfatal cardiac, cerebrovascular, or peripheral vascular events
confirmed by a blinded external committee) compared with placebo (RR 1.11; 95% CI 0.32, 3.81) or non-naproxen
NSAIDs (diclofenac 50 mg TID or ibuprofen 800 mg TID; RR 0.83, 95% CI, 0.26, 2.64) (Curtis, Mukhopadhyay,
et al 2003). There were fewer such events associated with naproxen 500 mg BID, which was evaluated separately
from other traditional NSAIDs because of its potential cardio-protective activity (etoricoxib versus naproxen RR
1.70; 95% CI 0.91, 3.18) (Curtis, Mukhopadhyay, et al 2003).

The EDGE study revealed no clear difference between etoricoxib and diclofenac with respect to the overall
incidence of confirmed thrombotic cardiovascular events (1.25 versus 1.15 events per 100 patient years,
respectively; RR 1.07) (Baraf et al 2005b). There were slight differences in the profile of cardiovascular events
with etoricoxib versus diclofenac (eg, 26 versus 19 cardiac events); however, the numbers were too small to draw
firm conclusions (Baraf et al 2005b; Merck 2005) and any potential difference appeared to be ameliorated in
patients receiving concomitant aspirin therapy (FDA 2005c).

The MEDAL Program (Multinational Etoricoxib and Diclofenac Arthritis Long-term) comparing etoricoxib with
diclofenac in over 34 000 RA and OA patients from three component clinical studies, EDGE (completed), EDGE
2 and MEDAL (both studies ongoing), over more than 18 months (with some patients receiving treatment for up to
40 months) is underway. This program is the first noninferiority comparison of thrombotic cardiovascular events
between a traditional NSAID (diclofenac) and a selective COX-2 inhibitor (etoricoxib), and it will provide further
insight into the long-term cardiovascular safety of etoricoxib and diclofenac. Additionally, as part of an ongoing
safety surveillance effort, a thrombotic cardiovascular event procedure was established in 1998 prior to phase IIb
etoricoxib studies in order to collect cardiovascular safety data for etoricoxib, NSAID comparators and placebo

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1661646/ 8/15
7/12/2015 Etoricoxib for arthritis and pain management

across etoricoxibs clinical development program.

Analysis of the available cardiovascular data for all COX-2 inhibitors, including etoricoxib, has led both the FDA
and the European Medicines Agency (EMEA) to request the addition of warnings about the potential for increased
cardiovascular risk in the prescribing information for these agents (EMEA 2005b; FDA 2005b). In the US, this
directive has been extended to apply to all NSAIDs (except aspirin), irrespective of their COX-2 selectivity (FDA
2005b). These warnings highlight the need for careful patient selection based on evaluation of the benefits and risks
of therapy.

Patient support/disease management programs Go to:

American College of Rheumatologists (ACR) guidelines indicate that pharmacologic therapies such as NSAIDs,
DMARDs, and/or glucocorticoids should be used alongside nonpharmacologic strategies (eg, patient education,
joint exercise) in the management of RA (ACRRAG 2002). COX-2 inhibitors may be selected for drug treatment
in patients at risk of peptic ulceration (ACRRAG 2002). Alternatively, low-dose prednisone therapy, a
nonacetylated salicylate, or a nonselective NSAID with concomitant gastroprotective therapy to reduce
gastroduodenal ulceration (eg, proton pump inhibitor, high-dose H2 blocker, or oral prostaglandin analog) may be
used in high risk patients (ACRRAG 2002). However, routine use of H2 blockers for dyspepsia is not
recommended due to the potential risk of other gastrointestinal complications (ACRRAG 2002). Moreover, patients
receiving gastroprotective therapy may still be at risk of lower gastrointestinal tract events. ACR guidelines
recommend that pharmacologic therapy for OA of the hip or knee should be considered an adjunct to
nonpharmacologic strategies including patient education, personalized social support, weight loss, and appropriate
physical activity (ACRSOG 2002). COX-2 inhibitors are considered useful among patients who do not achieve
symptom relief with acetaminophen, and in those where adverse events to acetaminophen or nonselective NSAIDs
are likely or have occurred (ACRSOG 2002). Analgesics, including selective COX-2 inhibitors, are an important
component of the management of a variety of other musculoskeletal pain syndromes (Argoff 2002).

Etoricoxib, like all COX-2 inhibitors, may be associated with a small increase in the risk of some cardiovascular
adverse events, and this needs to be weighed carefully against the benefits of treatment, particularly in patients with
underlying cardiovascular risk factors. European etoricoxib prescribing guidelines indicate that treatment is contra-
indicated in patients with congestive heart failure, poorly controlled hypertension, established ischemic heart
disease, peripheral arterial disease and/or cerebrovascular disease. The treatment should be given for the shortest
duration possible at the lowest effective daily dose, and the need for and response to treatment should be
reevaluated periodically (EMEA 2005a). This is in line with US guidelines for all prescription and nonprescription
NSAIDs (excluding aspirin) (FDA 2005d).

Economic evaluation in the UK showed that etoricoxib was a cost-effective option in patients with RA or OA
compared with nonselective NSAIDs plus gastroprotective therapy (proton pump inhibitors or misoprostol) (Moore
et al 2004). It was also cost effective compared with nonselective NSAIDs in patients with AS in the UK (Jansen et
al 2005). Etoricoxib is associated with higher treatment costs than indomethacin for acute gouty arthritis, but this
may be counterbalanced by indirect cost savings and improved quality of life due to fewer drug-related adverse
effects (Martin et al 2005).

Conclusion Go to:

A clinical summary for etoricoxib is presented in Figure 4. Etoricoxib is a COX-2 inhibitor with a high degree of
selectivity for its target. It provides an alternative to other selective and traditional NSAIDs in treating patients with
arthritis and other painful conditions. Etoricoxib may be given to a broad range of patients without need for dosage
adjustment, except in cases of hepatic insufficiency. It is suitable for once-daily administration, which may facilitate
patient compliance with treatment. Clinical trials have shown that etoricoxib has at least comparable efficacy and
greater gastrointestinal tolerability compared with nonselective NSAIDs, and may therefore be particularly suitable
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1661646/ 9/15
7/12/2015 Etoricoxib for arthritis and pain management

for patients with gastrointestinal risk factors. Results from the MEDAL Program will provide further insight into the
efficacy and gastrointestinal, renovascular, and cardiovascular tolerability of etoricoxib. In summary, etoricoxib
provides an effective therapeutic alternative in the management of arthritic and painful conditions. As for all drugs,
the benefits and risks of treatment should be evaluated carefully for each patient.

Figure 4
Clinical summary of etoricoxib in arthritis and pain management.

Abbreviations Go to:

ACR American College of Rheumatology

20 American College of Rheumatology 20% Response Criteria

AS ankylosing spondylitis

BID twice daily

CI confidence interval

COX cyclooxygenase

CYP cytochrome P450

DMARD disease-modifying antirheumatic drug

EDGE Etoricoxib versus Diclofenac sodium Gastrointestinal tolerability and Effectiveness study

EMEA European Medicines Agency

FDA United States Food and Drug Administration

IC50 inhibitory concentration of 50%

LBP low back pain

MEDAL Multinational Etoricoxib and Diclofenac Arthritis Long-term study

NSAID nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug

OA osteoarthritis

PGADS patients global assessment of disease status

QD once daily

RA rheumatoid arthritis

RR relative risk

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1661646/ 10/15
7/12/2015 Etoricoxib for arthritis and pain management

TID three times daily

WOMAC Western Ontario and McMasters University OA index.

References Go to:

1. Agrawal NG, Matthews CZ, Mazenko RS, et al. Pharmacokinetics of etoricoxib in patients with renal
impairment. J Clin Pharmacol. 2004a;44:4858. [PubMed]
2. Agrawal NG, Matthews CZ, Mazenko RS, et al. The effects of modifying in vivo cytochrome P450 3A
(CYP3A) activity on etoricoxib pharmacokinetics and of etoricoxib administration on CYP3A activity. J
Clin Pharmacol. 2004b;44:112531. [PubMed]
3. Agrawal NG, Porras AG, Matthews CZ, et al. Single- and multiple-dose pharmacokinetics of etoricoxib a
selective inhibitor of cyclooxygenase-2, in man. J Clin Pharmacol. 2003;43:26876. [PubMed]
4. Agrawal NG, Rose MJ, Matthews CZ, et al. Pharmacokinetics of etoricoxib in patients with hepatic
impairment. J Clin Pharmacol. 2003;43:113648. [PubMed]
5. [ACRCCG] American College of Rheumatology Ad Hoc Committee on Clinical Guidelines. Guidelines
for the initial evaluation of the adult patient with acute musculoskeletal symptoms. Arthritis Rheum.
1996;39:18. [PubMed]
6. [ACRSOG] American College of Rheumatology Subcommittee on Osteoarthritis Guidelines.
Recommendations for the medical management of osteoarthritis of the hip and knee: 2000 update. Arthritis
Rheum. 2000;43:190515. [PubMed]
7. [ACRRAG] American College of Rheumatology Subcommittee on Rheumatoid Arthritis Guidelines.
Guidelines for the management of rheumatoid arthritis: 2002 Update. Arthritis Rheum. 2002;46:32846.
[PubMed]
8. Argoff CE. Pharmacologic management of chronic pain. J Am Osteopath Assoc. 2002;102:S217.
[PubMed]
9. Baraf H, Fuentealba C, Greenwald M, et al. Gastrointestinal tolerability of etoricoxib compared with
diclofenac sodium in subgroups of patients at risk for gastrointestinal side effects from the edge study
[abstract]. Annual Meeting of the European League Against Rheumatism; 811 June 2005; Vienna,
Austria. 2005a. SAT0277.
10. Baraf H, Fuentealba C, Greenwald M, et al. Cardiovascular event rates with etoricoxib and comparator
NSAIDs in the edge study and the overall etoricoxib development program [abstract]. Annual Meeting of
the European League Against Rheumatism; 8-11 June 2005; Vienna, Austria. 2005b. SAT0276.
11. Baraf HSB, Fuentealba C, Greenwald M, et al. Tolerability and effectiveness of etoricoxib compared with
diclofenac sodium in patients with osteoarthritis: a randomized controlled study (EDGE trial) [abstract].
American College of Rheumatology 68th Annual Scientific Meeting; 1621 October 2004; San Antonio,
TX, USA. 2004. 832.
12. Birbara CA, Puopolo AD, Munoz DR, et al. Treatment of chronic low back pain with etoricoxib, a new
cyclo-oxygenase-2 selective inhibitor: improvement in pain and disabilitya randomized, placebo-
controlled, 3-month trial. J Pain. 2003;4:30715. [PubMed]
13. Boice JA, Ng J, Rubin BR, et al. The spontaneous resolution of acute gouty arthritis does not significantly
contribute to the potent and comparable antiinflammatory and analgesic effect of etoricoxib of
indomethacin over the first four days of treatment [abstract]. American College of Rheumatology 68th
Annual Scientific Meeting; 1621 October 2004; San Antonio, TX USA. 2004. 809.
14. Bombardier C, Laine L, Reicin A, et al. Comparison of upper gastrointestinal toxicity of rofecoxib and
naproxen in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. VIGOR Study Group. N Engl J Med. 2000;343:15208.
[PubMed]
15. Bresalier RS, Sandler RS, Quan H, et al. Cardiovascular events associated with rofecoxib in a colorectal

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1661646/ 11/15
7/12/2015 Etoricoxib for arthritis and pain management

adenoma chemoprevention trial. N Engl J Med. 2005;352:1092102. [PubMed]

16. Catella-Lawson F, Reilly MP, Kapoor SC, et al. Cyclooxygenase inhibitors and the antiplatelet effects of
aspirin. N Engl J Med. 2001;345:180917. [PubMed]
17. Chang DJ, Desjardins PJ, King TR, et al. The analgesic efficacy of etoricoxib compared with
oxycodone/acetaminophen in an acute postoperative pain model: a randomized, double-blind clinical trial.
Anesth Analg. 2004;99:80715. [PubMed]
18. Clark DW, Layton D, Shakir SA. Do some inhibitors of COX-2 increase the risk of thromboembolic
events?: Linking pharmacology with pharmacoepidemiology. Drug Saf. 2004;27:42756. [PubMed]
19. Collantes E, Curtis SP, Lee KW, et al. A multinational randomized, controlled, clinical trial of etoricoxib
in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis [ISRCTN25142273] BMC Fam Pract. 2002;3:10.
[PMC free article] [PubMed]
20. Curtis SP, Losada B, Bosi-Ferraz M, et al. Etoricoxib and diclofenac demonstrate similar efficacy in a
174-week randomized study of rheumatoid arthritis patients [poster]. American College of Rheumatology
67th Annual Scientific Meeting; 2328 October 2003; Orlando, FL, USA. 2003a. p. 213.
21. Curtis SP, Maldonado-Cocco J, Losada BR, et al. Treatment with etoricoxib (MK-0663), a COX-2-
selective inhibitor, resulted in maintenance of clinical improvement in rheumatoid arthritis [abstract].
Annual Meeting of the European League Against Rheumatism; 13 16 June 2001; Prague, Czech
Republic. 2001. FRI0030.
22. Curtis SP, Bockow B, Fisher C, et al. Etoricoxib in the treatment of osteoarthritis over 52-weeks: a
double-blind, active-comparator controlled trial [NCT00242489] BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2005;6:58.
[PMC free article] [PubMed]
23. Curtis SP, Mukhopadhyay S, Ramey D, et al. Cardiovascular safety summary associated with the
etoricoxib development program. Arthritis Rheum. 2003b;48(Suppl):S616.
24. Curtis SP, Ng J, Yu Q, et al. Renal effects of etoricoxib and comparator nonsteroidal antiinflammatory
drugs in controlled clinical trials. Clin Ther. 2004;26:7083. [PubMed]
25. Cush JJ, Kavanaugh A, Matteson EL. The safety of COX-2 inhibitors. Deliberations from the February
1618, 2005, FDA meeting [online] Am Coll Rheumatol. 2006 Accessed on 12 January 2006 URL:
http://www.rheumatology.org/publications/hotline/0305NSAIDs.asp.
26. Dallob A, Hawkey CJ, Greenberg H, et al. Characterization of etoricoxib, a novel, selective COX-2
inhibitor. J Clin Pharmacol. 2003;43:57385. [PubMed]
27. Drazen JM. COX-2 inhibitors a lesson in unexpected problems. N Engl J Med. 2005;352:11312.
[PubMed]
28. [EMEA] European Medicines Agency. Etoricoxib summary of product characteristics [online] 2005a.
Accessed 13 January 2006 URL: http://www.emea.eu.int/pdfs/human/epar/Etoricoxib.pdf.
29. [EMEA] European Medicines Agency. Press release: European Medicines Agency concludes action on
COX-2 inhibitors [online] 2005b. Accessed 13 January 2006 URL:
http://www.emea.eu.int/pdfs/human/press/pr/20776605en.pdf.
30. Fisher C, Bockow B, Curtis SP, et al. Results of a 190-week randomized study demonstrated similar
efficacy of etoricoxib compared with diclofenac in patients with osteoarthritis (OA) [abstract]. Annual
Meeting of the European League Against Rheumatism; 1821 June 2003; Lisbon, Portugal. 2003.
FRI0256.
31. Fisher CA, Curtis SP, Resnick H, et al. Treatment with etoricoxib, a COX-2 selective inhibitor, resulted in
clinical improvement in knee and hip osteoarthritis (OA) over 52 weeks [abstract] Arthritis Rheum.
2001;44(Suppl 9):S135. 495.
32. Fitz Gerald GA. Cardiovascular pharmacology of nonselective nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs and
coxibs: clinical considerations. Am J Cardiol. 2002;89:26D32D. [PubMed]
33. Fitz Gerald GA. Coxibs and cardiovascular disease. N Engl J Med. 2004;351:170911. [PubMed]
34. [FDA] Food and Drug Administration. Consultation NDA 21-042, S-007. Review of cardiovascular
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1661646/ 12/15
7/12/2015 Etoricoxib for arthritis and pain management

safety database: rofecoxib [online] 2001. Accessed 7 July 2005 URL:

http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/01/briefing/3677b2_06_cardio.pdf.
35. [FDA] Food and Drug Administration. COX-2 selective (includes Bextra, Celebrex, and Vioxx) and non-
selective non-steroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) [online] 2005a. Accessed 24 February 2006
URL: http://www.fda.gov/cder/drug/infopage/COX2.htm.
36. [FDA] Food and Drug Administration. COX-2 selective and non-selective non-steroidal antiinflammatory
drugs (NSAIDs) [online] 2005b. Accessed 7 July 2005 URL:
http://www.fda.gov/cder/drug/infopage/COX2/default.htm.
37. [FDA] Food and Drug Administration. FDA presentation: analysis of cardiovascular thromboembolic
events with etoricoxib [online] 2005c. Accessed 7 July 2005 URL:
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/05/transcripts/2005-4090T2.htm.
38. [FDA] Food and Drug Administration. FDA Public Health Advisory: FDA announces important changes
and additional warnings for COX-2 selective and non-selective non-steroidal antiinflammatory drugs
(NSAIDs) [online] 2005d. Accessed 23 June 2005 URL:
http://www.fda.gov/cder/drug/advisory/COX2.htm.
39. Frizziero L, Graninger W, Langevitz P, et al. Etoricoxib is effective in osteoarthritis patients with different
levels of baseline severity of the disease [poster]. Annual European Congress of Rheumatology; 9 12
June 2004; Berlin, Germany. 2004. FRI0429.
40. Gossec L, van der HD, Melian A, et al. The efficacy of cyclooxygenase-2 inhibition by etoricoxib and
naproxen on the axial manifestations of ankylosing spondylitis in the presence of peripheral arthritis. Ann
Rheum Dis. 2005;64:15637. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
41. Gottesdiener K, Schnitzer T, Fisher C, et al. Results of a randomized, dose-ranging trial of etoricoxib in
patients with osteoarthritis. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2002;41:105261. [PubMed]
42. Hernandez-Garduo A, Vzquez-Leduc A, Querol-Vinagre JV, et al. Clinical evaluation following
treatment with etoricoxib (60, 90 and 120mg once a day) in patients with acute low back pain: a cohort,
open, non-randomized, multicenter study [abstract]. Annual Meeting of the European League Against
Rheumatism; 811 June 2005; Vienna, Austria SAT0362. 2005.
43. Hunsche E, Geling O, Kong SX, et al. Impact of etoricoxib, a novel COX-2 inhibitor, on social and
emotional quality of life of patients with osteoarthritis. Osteoporosis Int. 2002;13:S20.
44. Hunt RH, Harper S, Callegari P, et al. Complementary studies of the gastrointestinal safety of the cyclo-
oxygenase-2-selective inhibitor etoricoxib. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2003a;17:20110. [PubMed]
45. Hunt RH, Harper S, Watson DJ, et al. The gastrointestinal safety of the COX-2 selective inhibitor
etoricoxib assessed by both endoscopy and analysis of upper gastrointestinal events. Am J Gastroenterol.
2003b;98:172533. [PubMed]
46. Jansen JP, Hunsche E, Choy E, et al. Economic evaluation of etoricoxib versus non-selective NSAIDs in
the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis in the UK [abstact]. Annual Meeting of the European League
Against Rheumatism; 811 June 2005; Vienna, Austria. 2005. FRI0475.
47. Jarrett SJ, Mcgonagle D, Marzo-Ortega H, et al. Etoricoxib reduces the need for biologic therapy in
ankylosing spondylitis (AS) but has no effect on magnetic resonance imaging. Results from an open study
[abstract]. American College of Rheumatology 68th Annual Scientific Meeting; 1621 October 2004; San
Antonio, TX, USA. 2004. 1634.
48. Kassahun K, McIntosh IS, Shou M, et al. Role of human liver cytochrome P4503A in the metabolism of
etoricoxib, a novel cyclooxygenase-2 selective inhibitor. Drug Metab Dispos. 2001;29:81320. [PubMed]
49. Leung AT, Malmstrom K, Gallacher AE, et al. Efficacy and tolerability profile of etoricoxib in patients
with osteoarthritis: A randomized, double-blind, placebo and active-comparator controlled 12-week
efficacy trial. Curr Med Res Opin. 2002;18:4958. [PubMed]
50. Malmstrom K, Ang J, Fricke JR, et al. The analgesic effect of etoricoxib relative to that of two opioid-
acetaminophen analgesics: a randomized, controlled single-dose study in acute dental impaction pain. Curr
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1661646/ 13/15
7/12/2015 Etoricoxib for arthritis and pain management

Med Res Opin. 2005;21:1419. [PubMed]

51. Malmstrom K, Kotey P, Cichanowitz N, et al. Analgesic efficacy of etoricoxib in primary dysmenorrhea:
results of a randomized, controlled trial. Gynecol Obstet Invest. 2003;56:659. [PubMed]
52. Malmstrom K, Kotey P, Coughlin H, et al. A randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study comparing
the analgesic effect of etoricoxib to placebo, naproxen sodium, and acetaminophen with codeine using the
dental impaction pain model. Clin J Pain. 2004a;20:14755. [PubMed]
53. Malmstrom K, Sapre A, Couglin H, et al. Etoricoxib in acute pain associated with dental surgery: a
randomized, double-blind, placebo-and active comparator-controlled dose-ranging study. Clin Ther.
2004b;26:66779. [PubMed]
54. Martin M, Hunsche E, Boice J, et al. An economic cost analysis of etoricoxib versus indomethacin in the
treatment of acute gouty arthritis in the UK [abstract]. Annual Meeting of the European League Against
Rheumatism; 8-11 June 2005; Vienna, Austria. 2005. FRI0472.
55. Matsumoto AK, Collantes E, Melian A, et al. Treatment with etoricoxib resulted in clinical improvement
of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in two randomized active comparator-controlled 52-week trials [abstract].
Annual Meeting of the European League Against Rheumatism; 1821 June, 2003; Lisbon, Portugal.
2003a. THU0249.
56. Matsumoto AK, Melian A, Mandel DR, et al. A randomized, controlled, clinical trial of etoricoxib in the
treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol. 2002;29:162330. [PubMed]
57. Matsumoto AK, Zhao PL, Cichanowitz N, et al. Etoricoxib is efficacious in patients with rheumatoid
arthritis (RA) on concomitant therapy with disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), and/or
low-dose corticosteroids [poster]. American College of Rheumatology 67th Annual Scientific Meeting;
2328 October 2003; Orlando, FL, USA. 2003b. 209.
58. Merck Briefing Package for NDA 21-389: Etoricoxib [online] 2005. Accessed 23 June 2005 URL:
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/05/briefing/2005-4090B1_31_AA-FDA-Tab-T.pdf.
59. Moore A, Phillips C, Hunsche E, et al. Economic evaluation of etoricoxib versus non-selective NSAIDs
in the treatment of osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis patients in the UK. Pharmacoeconomics.
2004;22:64360. [PubMed]
60. Ouellet M, Riendeau D, Percival MD. A high level of cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor selectivity is associated
with a reduced interference of platelet cyclooxygenase-1 inactivation by aspirin. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S
A. 2001;98:145838. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
61. Pallay RM, Seger W, Adler JL, et al. Etoricoxib reduced pain and disability and improved quality of life in
patients with chronic low back pain: a 3 month, randomized, controlled trial. Scand J Rheumatol.
2004;33:25766. [PubMed]
62. Psaty BM, Furberg CD. COX-2 inhibitors lessons in drug safety. N Engl J Med. 2005;352:11335.
[PubMed]
63. Ramey DR, Watson DJ, Yu C, et al. The incidence of upper gastrointestinal adverse events in clinical
trials of etoricoxib versus. non-selective NSAIDs: an updated combined analysis. Curr Med Res Opin.
2005;21:71522. [PubMed]
64. Ramos-Remus CR, Hunsche E, Mavros P, et al. Evaluation of quality of life following treatment with
etoricoxib in patients with arthritis or low-back pain: an open label, uncontrolled pilot study in Mexico.
Curr Med Res Opin. 2004;20:6918. [PubMed]
65. Rasmussen GL, Bourne MH, Rhondeau SM, et al. Etoricoxib provides pain relief and reduces opioid use
in post-orthopedic surgery patients [poster]. Annual European Congress of Rheumatology; 912 June
2004; Berlin, Germany. 2004. SAT0130.
66. Reginster JY, Fischer CL, Beualieu A, et al. Etoricoxib demonstrates similiar efficacy and improved
gastrointestinal safety compared with naproxen in two 138-week randomized studies of osteoarthritis
patients [abstract]. Annual European Congress of Rheumatology; 912 June 2004; Berlin, Germany.
2004. FRI0394.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1661646/ 14/15
7/12/2015 Etoricoxib for arthritis and pain management

67. Riendeau D, Percival MD, Brideau C, et al. Etoricoxib (MK-0663): preclinical profile and comparison
with other agents that selectively inhibit cyclooxygenase-2. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 2001;296:55866.
[PubMed]
68. Rodrigues AD, Halpin RA, Geer LA, et al. Absorption, metabolism, and excretion of etoricoxib, a potent
and selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor, in healthy male volunteers. Drug Metab Dispos. 2003;31:224
32. [PubMed]
69. Rubin BR, Burton R, Navarra S, et al. Efficacy and safety profile of treatment with etoricoxib 120mg
once daily compared with indomethacin 50mg three times daily in acute gout: a randomized controlled
trial. Arthritis Rheum. 2004;50:598606. [PubMed]
70. Schumacher HR, Jr, Boice JA, Daikh DI, et al. Randomised double blind trial of etoricoxib and
indometacin in treatment of acute gouty arthritis. BMJ. 2002;324:148892. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
71. Schwartz JI, Greenberg HE, Musser BJ, et al. Inhibition of prostacyclin and thromboxane biosynthesis in
healthy volunteers by single and multiple doses of paracetamol (acetaminophen) [poster]. Presented at the
Annual European congress of Rheumutalogy; 811 June 2005; Vienna, Austria. 2006.
72. Solomon DH, Karlson EW, Rimm EB, et al. Cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in women diagnosed
with rheumatoid arthritis. Circulation. 2003;107:13037. [PubMed]
73. Solomon SD, McMurray JJ, Pfeffer MA, et al. Cardiovascular risk associated with celecoxib in a clinical
trial for colorectal adenoma prevention. N Engl J Med. 2005;352:107180. [PubMed]
74. Tacconelli S, Capone ML Sciullimg, et al. The biochemical selectivity of novel COX-2 inhibitors in
whole blood assays of COXisozyme activity. Curr Med Res Opin. 2002;18:50311. [PubMed]
75. van der Heijde D, Baraf HS, Ramos-Remus C, et al. Evaluation of the efficacy of etoricoxib in ankylosing
spondylitis: results of a fifty-two-week, randomized, controlled study. Arthritis Rheum. 2005;52:120515.
[PubMed]
76. Wagner JA, Kraft W, Burke J, et al. The COX-2 inhibitor etoricoxib did not alter the anti-platelet of low
dose aspirin in health in healthy volunteers [abstract] Arthritis Rheum. 2001;44(Suppl 9):S135. 498.
77. Warner TD, Mitchell JA. Cyclooxygenases: new forms, new inhibitors, and lessons from the clinic.
FASEB J. 2004;18:790804. [PubMed]
78. Watson DJ, Bolognese JA, Yu C, et al. Use of gastroprotective agents and discontinuations due to
dyspepsia with the selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor etoricoxib compared with non-selective NSAIDs.
Curr Med Res Opin. 2004;20:1899908. [PubMed]
79. Wiesenhutter CW, Boice JA, Ko A, et al. Evaluation of the comparative efficacy of etoricoxib and
ibuprofen for treatment of patients with osteoarthritis: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled
trial. Mayo Clin Proc. 2005;80:4709. [PubMed]
80. [WHO] World Health Organization. World health report 2004 changing history [online] 2004. Accessed
27 June 2005 URL: http://www.who.int/whr/2004/en/index.html.
81. [WHO] World Health Organization. Chronic rheumatic conditions [online] 2005. Accessed 4 March 2005
URL: http://www.who.int/chp/topics/rheumatic/en/
82. Zacher J, Feldman D, Gerli R, et al. A comparison of the therapeutic efficacy and tolerability of etoricoxib
and diclofenac in patients with osteoarthritis. Curr Med Res Opin. 2003;19:72536. [PubMed]
83. Zerbini C, Ozturk ZE, Grifka J, et al. Efficacy of etoricoxib 60mg/day and diclofenac 150mg/day in
reduction of pain and disability in patients with chronic low back pain: results of a 4-week, multinational,
randomized, double-blind study. Curr Med Res Opin. 2005;21:203749. [PubMed]

Articles from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management are provided here courtesy of Dove Press

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1661646/ 15/15