Safety of Anti-osteoarthritis Medications: A Systematic Literature Review of Post-marketing Surveillance Studies.

IF 13 1区 医学 Q1 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY Drugs Pub Date : 2025-03-17 DOI:10.1007/s40265-025-02162-4
Germain Honvo, Laetitia Lengelé, Majed Alokail, Nasser Al-Daghri, Jean-Yves Reginster, Olivier Bruyère
{"title":"Safety of Anti-osteoarthritis Medications: A Systematic Literature Review of Post-marketing Surveillance Studies.","authors":"Germain Honvo, Laetitia Lengelé, Majed Alokail, Nasser Al-Daghri, Jean-Yves Reginster, Olivier Bruyère","doi":"10.1007/s40265-025-02162-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Several meta-analyses of phase 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were published in 2019, reassessing the safety of most anti-osteoarthritis (OA) medications, mainly on the basis of data from full safety reports. The current systematic review (SR) intends to provide complementary insights into the safety of anti-OA medications, using evidence from post-marketing safety surveillance studies.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The review protocol was registered with PROSPERO database (registration no. CRD42021227872). We followed the Cochrane methodology for SRs of interventions and comprehensively searched the Medline, CENTRAL, Scopus and TOXLINE databases from inception to November 2023, to include all post-marketing safety surveillance studies on any anti-OA medications. The outcomes of this SR were any adverse events (AEs) reported in the included studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The literature search yielded 16,990 studies, of which 59 articles were ultimately included in the review. Most studies investigated non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs, 27 studies, 28 reports) and intra-articular hyaluronic acid (IAHA, 16 studies). Symptomatic slow-acting drugs for osteoarthritis (SYSADOAs) were assessed in seven studies (one of which also assessed NSAIDs), and corticosteroid injections in four studies, while opioids and \"herbal mixtures and other compounds\" each were investigated respectively in three and two studies. Most of the studies were cohort studies (n = 44), others were case reports or case series (n = 12), RCTs (n = 2 reports of the same trial), or a case-control study (n = 1). The most commonly reported AEs with NSAIDs from cohort (sample sizes varied between 129 and 22,938 patients), RCT (21,645 patients with OA), and case-control (174 cases and 926 control patients with OA) studies were gastrointestinal (GI) and/or cardiovascular (CV) AEs, with specific AEs varying with individual NSAIDs. Where comparisons between NSAIDs were made, the overall literature shows a better or similar safety profile for celecoxib (at a daily dose of 200 mg, where dosage was reported) compared with other NSAIDs in regards to GI, CV and renal events. Other anti-OA medications with most common AEs reported from cohort studies were: IAHA (injection site pain); diacerein (GI AEs and reddish urine); avocado-soybean unsaponifiables (GI AEs); non-pharmaceutical-grade glucosamine and chondroitin (allergic reactions, GI disorders); opioids (hip fracture associated with long-term tramadol use among older adults; GI and nervous system disorders with hydrocodone); corticosteroid injections (increased risk of OA progression); herbal mixtures and other compounds (GI AEs). There were case reports or case series of specific AEs with various anti-OA medications that require further investigations in well-designed cohort studies before any definitive conclusions can be reached.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This SR confirms previous evidence on the safety of anti-OA medications from meta-analyses of phase 3 RCTs. Beyond the evidence here reported, the limitations of this research highlight the urgent need of a reporting guideline for post-marketing safety surveillance studies. Importantly, real-life safety surveillance of anti-OA medications should be strengthened with large cohort studies with control groups, and results should be disaggregated by disease populations for drugs common to several conditions.</p>","PeriodicalId":11482,"journal":{"name":"Drugs","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Drugs","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40265-025-02162-4","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Several meta-analyses of phase 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were published in 2019, reassessing the safety of most anti-osteoarthritis (OA) medications, mainly on the basis of data from full safety reports. The current systematic review (SR) intends to provide complementary insights into the safety of anti-OA medications, using evidence from post-marketing safety surveillance studies.

Methods: The review protocol was registered with PROSPERO database (registration no. CRD42021227872). We followed the Cochrane methodology for SRs of interventions and comprehensively searched the Medline, CENTRAL, Scopus and TOXLINE databases from inception to November 2023, to include all post-marketing safety surveillance studies on any anti-OA medications. The outcomes of this SR were any adverse events (AEs) reported in the included studies.

Results: The literature search yielded 16,990 studies, of which 59 articles were ultimately included in the review. Most studies investigated non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs, 27 studies, 28 reports) and intra-articular hyaluronic acid (IAHA, 16 studies). Symptomatic slow-acting drugs for osteoarthritis (SYSADOAs) were assessed in seven studies (one of which also assessed NSAIDs), and corticosteroid injections in four studies, while opioids and "herbal mixtures and other compounds" each were investigated respectively in three and two studies. Most of the studies were cohort studies (n = 44), others were case reports or case series (n = 12), RCTs (n = 2 reports of the same trial), or a case-control study (n = 1). The most commonly reported AEs with NSAIDs from cohort (sample sizes varied between 129 and 22,938 patients), RCT (21,645 patients with OA), and case-control (174 cases and 926 control patients with OA) studies were gastrointestinal (GI) and/or cardiovascular (CV) AEs, with specific AEs varying with individual NSAIDs. Where comparisons between NSAIDs were made, the overall literature shows a better or similar safety profile for celecoxib (at a daily dose of 200 mg, where dosage was reported) compared with other NSAIDs in regards to GI, CV and renal events. Other anti-OA medications with most common AEs reported from cohort studies were: IAHA (injection site pain); diacerein (GI AEs and reddish urine); avocado-soybean unsaponifiables (GI AEs); non-pharmaceutical-grade glucosamine and chondroitin (allergic reactions, GI disorders); opioids (hip fracture associated with long-term tramadol use among older adults; GI and nervous system disorders with hydrocodone); corticosteroid injections (increased risk of OA progression); herbal mixtures and other compounds (GI AEs). There were case reports or case series of specific AEs with various anti-OA medications that require further investigations in well-designed cohort studies before any definitive conclusions can be reached.

Conclusions: This SR confirms previous evidence on the safety of anti-OA medications from meta-analyses of phase 3 RCTs. Beyond the evidence here reported, the limitations of this research highlight the urgent need of a reporting guideline for post-marketing safety surveillance studies. Importantly, real-life safety surveillance of anti-OA medications should be strengthened with large cohort studies with control groups, and results should be disaggregated by disease populations for drugs common to several conditions.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Drugs
Drugs 医学-毒理学
CiteScore
22.70
自引率
0.90%
发文量
134
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Drugs is a journal that aims to enhance pharmacotherapy by publishing review and original research articles on key aspects of clinical pharmacology and therapeutics. The journal includes: Leading/current opinion articles providing an overview of contentious or emerging issues. Definitive reviews of drugs and drug classes, and their place in disease management. Therapy in Practice articles including recommendations for specific clinical situations. High-quality, well designed, original clinical research. Adis Drug Evaluations reviewing the properties and place in therapy of both newer and established drugs. AdisInsight Reports summarising development at first global approval. Moreover, the journal offers additional digital features such as animated abstracts, video abstracts, instructional videos, and podcasts to increase visibility and educational value. Plain language summaries accompany articles to assist readers with some knowledge of the field in understanding important medical advances.
期刊最新文献
Safety of Anti-osteoarthritis Medications: A Systematic Literature Review of Post-marketing Surveillance Studies. Stapokibart: First Approval. Olezarsen: First Approval. Revumenib: First Approval. Update on the Treatment of Chronic Spontaneous Urticaria.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1