Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (14)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Layton, D.
Right arrow Articles by Shakir, S. A. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Layton, D.
Right arrow Articles by Shakir, S. A. W.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Rheumatology 2003; 42: 622-631
© 2003 British Society for Rheumatology

Comparison of the incidence rates of selected gastrointestinal events reported for patients prescribed rofecoxib and meloxicam in general practice in England using prescription-event monitoring data

D. Layton, E. Heeley, K. Hughes and S. A. W. Shakir

Drug Safety Research Unit, Bursledon Hall, Blundell Lane, Southampton, UK

Background and objectives. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are associated with gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity. Rofecoxib and meloxicam are classified as cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 selective inhibitors. The Drug Safety Research Unit monitored the safety of these drugs immediately after their launch in England using the non-interventional observational cohort technique of prescription-event monitoring (PEM). Our objective was to investigate whether there is a clinically relevant difference in the incidence of reported symptomatic (acid/peptic) and complicated upper GI conditions (perforations/bleeding) between rofecoxib and meloxicam during use in general practice.

Methods. Patients were identified from dispensed prescriptions written by general practitioners (GPs) for meloxicam (between December 1996 and March 1997) and rofecoxib (between July and November 1999). Simple questionnaires requesting details of events occurring during/after treatment and potential risk factors (including age, sex, history of upper GI problems, and NSAIDS prescribed within 3 months of treatment) were posted to prescribing GPs approximately 9 months after the first prescription for each patient. Incidence rates of the first event were calculated, and crude and adjusted rate ratios were obtained using regression modelling.

Results. For rofecoxib and meloxicam respectively, 1127 (7.4%) and 1376 (7.2%) patients had symptomatic (acid/peptic) upper GI events, whereas 57 (0.4%) and 67 (0.4%) had complicated upper GI conditions (perforations/bleeding). A past medical history of upper GI problems was an important risk factor only for symptomatic (acid/peptic) upper GI events for both drugs, despite a two-fold difference in the proportion reporting previous GI problems (48.4 and 25.1% for rofecoxib and meloxicam respectively). The adjusted rate ratio of symptomatic (acid/peptic) upper GI events or complicated upper GI conditions (perforations/bleeding) for rofecoxib compared with meloxicam was 0.71 (95% confidence interval 0.65, 0.79) and 0.91 (95% confidence interval 0.59, 1.42) respectively.

Conclusions. This study reports a relative reduction (29%) in the incidence rate of symptomatic (acid/peptic) GI events, and no difference in the incidence rate of complicated upper GI conditions (perforations/bleeding) for rofecoxib compared with meloxicam.

KEY WORDS: COX-2-selective inhibitors, Rofecoxib, Meloxicam, Adverse events, Prescription event monitoring, Drug safety.

Correspondence to: Deborah Layton. E-mail: deborah.layton{at}dsru.org


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Rheumatology (Oxford)Home page
F. Degner, E. Lesaffre, and H. Zeidler
Re: Layton et al. Comparison of the incidence rates of selected gastrointestinal events reported for patients prescribed rofecoxib and meloxicam in general practice in England using prescription-event monitoring data
Rheumatology, May 1, 2004; 43(5): 680 - 681.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Rheumatology (Oxford)Home page
D. Layton, S. Harris, and S. Shakir
Reply: Re: Layton et al. Comparison of the incidence rates of selected gastrointestinal events reported for patients prescribed rofecoxib and meloxicam in general practice in England using prescription-event monitoring data
Rheumatology, May 1, 2004; 43(5): 681 - 682.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Rheumatology (Oxford)Home page
D. Layton, K. Hughes, S. Harris, and S. A. W. Shakir
Comparison of the incidence rates of selected gastrointestinal events reported for patients prescribed celecoxib and meloxicam in general practice in England using prescription-event monitoring (PEM) data
Rheumatology, November 1, 2003; 42(11): 1332 - 1341.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Rheumatology (Oxford)Home page
D. Layton, E. Heeley, K. Hughes, and S. A. W. Shakir
Comparison of the incidence rates of thromboembolic events reported for patients prescribed rofecoxib and meloxicam in general practice in England using prescription-event monitoring (PEM) data
Rheumatology, November 1, 2003; 42(11): 1342 - 1353.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Rheumatology (Oxford)Home page
D. Layton, K. Hughes, S. Harris, and S. A.W. Shakir
Comparison of the incidence rates of thromboembolic events reported for patients prescribed celecoxib and meloxicam in general practice in England using Prescription-Event Monitoring (PEM) data
Rheumatology, November 1, 2003; 42(11): 1354 - 1364.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.