Risk of myocardial infarction in patients taking cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors or conventional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs: population based nested case-control analysis.
Journal: 2005/June - British Medical Journal
ISSN: 1756-1833
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE
To determine the comparative risk of myocardial infarction in patients taking cyclo-oxygenase-2 and other non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in primary care between 2000 and 2004; to determine these risks in patients with and without pre-existing coronary heart disease and in those taking and not taking aspirin.
METHODS
Nested case-control study.
METHODS
367 general practices contributing to the UK QRESEARCH database and spread throughout every strategic health authority and health board in England, Wales, and Scotland.
METHODS
9218 cases with a first ever diagnosis of myocardial infarction during the four year study period; 86 349 controls matched for age, calendar year, sex, and practice.
METHODS
Unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals for myocardial infarction associated with rofecoxib, celecoxib, naproxen, ibuprofen, diclofenac, and other selective and non-selective NSAIDS. Odds ratios were adjusted for smoking status, comorbidity, deprivation, and use of statins, aspirin, and antidepressants.
RESULTS
A significantly increased risk of myocardial infarction was associated with current use of rofecoxib (adjusted odds ratio 1.32, 95% confidence interval 1.09 to 1.61) compared with no use within the previous three years; with current use of diclofenac (1.55, 1.39 to 1.72); and with current use of ibuprofen (1.24, 1.11 to 1.39). Increased risks were associated with the other selective NSAIDs, with naproxen, and with non-selective NSAIDs; these risks were significant at < 0.05 rather than < 0.01 for current use but significant at < 0.01 in the tests for trend. No significant interactions occurred between any of the NSAIDs and either aspirin or coronary heart disease.
CONCLUSIONS
These results suggest an increased risk of myocardial infarction associated with current use of rofecoxib, diclofenac, and ibuprofen despite adjustment for many potential confounders. No evidence was found to support a reduction in risk of myocardial infarction associated with current use of naproxen. This is an observational study and may be subject to residual confounding that cannot be fully corrected for. However, enough concerns may exist to warrant a reconsideration of the cardiovascular safety of all NSAIDs.
Relations:
Content
Citations
(124)
References
(25)
Diseases
(1)
Drugs
(15)
Chemicals
(2)
Organisms
(1)
Affiliates
(1)
Similar articles
Articles by the same authors
Discussion board
BMJ 330(7504): 1366

Risk of myocardial infarction in patients taking cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors or conventional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs: population based nested case-control analysis

Institution 13th floor, Tower Building, University Park, Nottingham NG2 7RD
Correspondence to: J Hippisley-Cox ku.ca.mahgnitton@xoc-yelsippih.ailuJ
Correspondence to: J Hippisley-Cox ku.ca.mahgnitton@xoc-yelsippih.ailuJ
Accepted 2005 Apr 13.

Abstract

Aims To determine the comparative risk of myocardial infarction in patients taking cyclo-oxygenase-2 and other non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in primary care between 2000 and 2004; to determine these risks in patients with and without pre-existing coronary heart disease and in those taking and not taking aspirin.

Design Nested case-control study.

Setting 367 general practices contributing to the UK QRESEARCH database and spread throughout every strategic health authority and health board in England, Wales, and Scotland.

Subjects 9218 cases with a first ever diagnosis of myocardial infarction during the four year study period; 86 349 controls matched for age, calendar year, sex, and practice.

Outcome measures Unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals for myocardial infarction associated with rofecoxib, celecoxib, naproxen, ibuprofen, diclofenac, and other selective and non-selective NSAIDS. Odds ratios were adjusted for smoking status, comorbidity, deprivation, and use of statins, aspirin, and antidepressants.

Results A significantly increased risk of myocardial infarction was associated with current use of rofecoxib (adjusted odds ratio 1.32, 95% confidence interval 1.09 to 1.61) compared with no use within the previous three years; with current use of diclofenac (1.55, 1.39 to 1.72); and with current use of ibuprofen (1.24, 1.11 to 1.39). Increased risks were associated with the other selective NSAIDs, with naproxen, and with non-selective NSAIDs; these risks were significant at < 0.05 rather than < 0.01 for current use but significant at < 0.01 in the tests for trend. No significant interactions occurred between any of the NSAIDs and either aspirin or coronary heart disease.

Conclusion These results suggest an increased risk of myocardial infarction associated with current use of rofecoxib, diclofenac, and ibuprofen despite adjustment for many potential confounders. No evidence was found to support a reduction in risk of myocardial infarction associated with current use of naproxen. This is an observational study and may be subject to residual confounding that cannot be fully corrected for. However, enough concerns may exist to warrant a reconsideration of the cardiovascular safety of all NSAIDs.

Abstract

Notes

We thank practices contributing to QRESEARCH database and David Stables (EMIS Computing) and Mike Pringle for their help and expertise in establishing QRESEARCH.

Contributors: JHC initiated and designed the study, got ethical approval, did the data extraction and manipulation, did the analysis, and drafted the paper. CC contributed to the study design, supervised and checked the analysis, advised on interpretation, and contributed to drafting the paper. JHC and CC are both guarantors.

Funding: This study was unfunded. QRESEARCH is a not for profit organisation that has received funding from the Department of Health, Health Protection Agency, National Audit Office, Disability Rights Commission, Medicines Partnership, Royal College of Physicians, and various universities for unrelated analyses and research. QRESARCH is entirely independent of the pharmaceutical industry.

Competing interests: None declared.

Ethical approval: Trent Multi-Centre Research Ethics Committee.

Notes
We thank practices contributing to QRESEARCH database and David Stables (EMIS Computing) and Mike Pringle for their help and expertise in establishing QRESEARCH.
Contributors: JHC initiated and designed the study, got ethical approval, did the data extraction and manipulation, did the analysis, and drafted the paper. CC contributed to the study design, supervised and checked the analysis, advised on interpretation, and contributed to drafting the paper. JHC and CC are both guarantors.
Funding: This study was unfunded. QRESEARCH is a not for profit organisation that has received funding from the Department of Health, Health Protection Agency, National Audit Office, Disability Rights Commission, Medicines Partnership, Royal College of Physicians, and various universities for unrelated analyses and research. QRESARCH is entirely independent of the pharmaceutical industry.
Competing interests: None declared.
Ethical approval: Trent Multi-Centre Research Ethics Committee.

References

  • 1. Blower A, Brooks A, Fenn G, Hill A, Perarce M, Morant SVEmergency admissions for upper gastrointestinal disease and their relation to NSAID use. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 1997;11: 283-91. [[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 2. Silverstein FE, Faich G, Goldstein JL, Simon LS, Pincus T, Whelton A, et al. Gastrointestinal toxicity with celecoxib vs. non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis. JAMA 2000;284: 1247-55. [[PubMed]
  • 3. Bombardier C, Laine L, Reicin A, Shapiro D, Burgos-Vargas R, Davis B, et alComparison of upper gastrointestinal toxicity of rofecoxib and naproxen in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. N Engl J Med 2000;343: 1520-8. [[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 4. Topol E, Falk GA coxib a day won't keep the doctor away. Lancet 2004;364: 640-1. [[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 5. Farkouh ME, Kishner H, Harrington RA, Ruland S, Verheught FW, Schnitzer TJ, et alComparison of lumiracoxib with naproxen and ibuprofen in the therapeutic arthritis research and gastrointestinal event trial (TARGET), cardiovascular outcomes: randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2004;364: 675-84. [[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 6. Juni P, Rutjes AWS, Dieppe PAre selective COX 2 inhibitors superior to traditional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs? BMJ 2002;324: 1287-8. [Google Scholar]
  • 7. Wright JMThe double-edged sword of COX-2 selective NSAIDs. CMAJ 2002;167: 1131-7. [Google Scholar]
  • 8. Jones REfficacy and safety of COX 2 inhibitors. BMJ 2002;325: 607-8. [Google Scholar]
  • 9. Dieppe P, Bartlett C, Davey P, Doyal L, Ebrahim SBalancing benefits and harms: the example of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. BMJ 2004;329: 31-4. [Google Scholar]
  • 10. National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Guidance on the use of cyclo-oxygenase (Cox) II selective inhibitors, celecoxib, rofecoxib, meloxicam and etodolac for osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis. London: NICE, 2001. (Technology appraisal guidance No 27.)
  • 11. Hippisley-Cox J, Stables D, Pringle MQRESEARCH—a new general practice database for research. Journal of Informatics in Primary Care 2004;12: 49-50. [[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 12. Office of National Statistics. Key health statistics from general practice. London: Department of Health, 1998: 192.
  • 13. Hippisley-Cox J, Pringle MPrevalence, care and outcomes for patients with diet controlled diabetes in general practice: cross sectional survey. Lancet 2004;364: 423-5. [[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 14. Hammersley V, Hippisley-Cox J, Wilson A, Pringle MA comparison of research general practices and their patients with other practices—cross sectional survey in Trent. Br J Gen Pract 2002;52: 463-8. [Google Scholar]
  • 15. Hippisley-Cox J, Hammersley V, Pringle M, Coupland C, Crown N, Wright LHow useful are general practice databases for research? Analysis of their accuracy and completeness in one research network. Health Informatics Journal 2004;10: 91-109. [PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 16. Hippisley-Cox J, Pringle M, Hammersley V, Crown N, Meal A, Wynn AAntidepressants as a risk factor for ischaemic heart disease: case control study in general practice. BMJ 2001;323: 666-9. [Google Scholar]
  • 17. Schlienger R, Jick H, Meier CRUse of non steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and risk of first time acute myocardial infarction. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2002;54: 327-32. [Google Scholar]
  • 18. Jick H, Vasilakis C, Derby LEAntihypertensive drugs and fatal myocardial infarction in persons with uncomplicated hypertension. Epidemiology 1997;8: 446-8. [[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 19. Meier CR, Jick SS, Derby LE, Vasilakis C, Jick HAcute respiratory infections and risk of first time acute myocardial infarction. Lancet 1998;351: 1467-71. [[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 20. Hippisley-Cox J, Pringle MDepression and risk of ischaemic heart disease in men: authors' reply. BMJ 1998;317: 1450. [PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 21. Townsend PDeprivation. J Soc Policy 1987;16: 125-46. [PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 22. Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study GroupRandomised trial of cholesterol lowering in 4444 patients with coronary heart disease: the Scandinavian simvastatin survival study (4S). Lancet 1994;344: 1383-9. [[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 23. McMahan ADApproaches to combat with confounding by indication in observational studies of intended drug effects. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2003;12: 551-8. [[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 24. Ray W, Stein M, Hall K, Daugherty J, Griffin MNon-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and risk of serious coronary heart disease: observational cohort study. Lancet 2002;359: 118-23. [[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 25. Juni P, Nartey L, Reichenback S, Sterchi R, Dieppe P, Matthias ERisk of cardiovascular events and rofecoxib: cumulative meta-analysis. Lancet 2004;364: 2021-9. [[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 26. Soloman D, Glynn RJ, Levin R, Avorn JNonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug use and acute myocardial infarction. Arch Intern Med 2002;162: 1099-104. [[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 27. Watson DJ, Rhodes T, Cai B, Guess HALower risk of thromboembolic events with naproxen among patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arch Intern Med 2002;162: 1105-10. [[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 28. Mamdani M, Rochon P, Juurlink DN, Anderson GM, Kopp A, Naglie G, et alEffect of selective cyclooxygenase 2 inhibitors and naproxen on short-term risk of acute myocardial infarction in the elderly. Arch Intern Med 2003;163: 481-6. [[PubMed][Google Scholar]
  • 29. Vandenbroucke JBenefits and harms of drug treatments. BMJ 2004;329: 2-3. [Google Scholar]
  • 30. MacDonald TM, Morant SV, Goldstein JL, Burke TA, Pettitt DChannelling bias and the incidence of gastrointestinal haemorrhage in users of meloxicam, coxibs, and older, non-specific non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Gut 2003;52: 1265-70. [Google Scholar]
  • 31. Department of Health. National service framework for coronary artery disease: modern standards and service models. London: Stationery Office, 2000.
  • 32. Rothman K, Greenland S. Modern epidemiology. 2nd ed. Boston: Lippincott-Raven, 1998.
Collaboration tool especially designed for Life Science professionals.Drag-and-drop any entity to your messages.