Rofecoxib for dysmenorrhoea: meta-analysis using individual patient data

BackgroundIndividual patient meta-analysis to determine the analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of single-dose rofecoxib in primary dysmenorrhoea.MethodsIndividual patient information was available from three randomised, double blind, placebo and active controlled trials of rofecoxib. Data were combined through meta-analysis. Number-needed-to-treat (NNT) for at least 50% pain relief and the proportion of patients who had taken rescue medication over 12 hours were calculated. Information was collected on adverse effects.ResultsFor single-dose rofecoxib 50 mg compared with placebo, the NNTs (with 95% CI) for at least 50% pain relief were 3.2 (2.4 to 4.5) at six, 3.1 (2.4 to 9.0) at eight, and 3.7 (2.8 to 5.6) at 12 hours. For naproxen sodium 550 mg they were 3.1 (2.4 to 4.4) at six, 3.0 (2.3 to 4.2) at eight, and 3.8 (2.7 to 6.1) at 12 hours. The proportion of patients who needed rescue medication within 12 hours was 27% with rofecoxib 50 mg, 29% with naproxen sodium 550 mg, and 50% with placebo. In the single-dose trial, the proportion of patients reporting any adverse effect was 8% (4/49) with rofecoxib 50 mg, 12% (6/49) with ibuprofen 400 mg, and 6% (3/49) with placebo. In the other two multiple dose trials, the proportion of patients reporting any adverse effect was 23% (42/179) with rofecoxib 50 mg, 24% (45/181) with naproxen sodium 550 mg, and 18% (33/178) with placebo.ConclusionsSingle dose rofecoxib 50 mg provided similar pain relief to naproxen sodium 550 mg over 12 hours. The duration of analgesia with rofecoxib 50 mg was similar to that of naproxen sodium 550 mg. Adverse effects were uncommon suggesting safety in short-term use of rofecoxib and naproxen sodium. Future research should include restriction on daily life and absence from work or school as outcomes.

[1]  D. Sackett,et al.  The number needed to treat: a clinically useful measure of treatment effect , 1995, BMJ.

[2]  I. Milsom,et al.  Comparison of the efficacy and safety of nonprescription doses of naproxen and naproxen sodium with ibuprofen, acetaminophen, and placebo in the treatment of primary dysmenorrhea: a pooled analysis of five studies. , 2002, Clinical therapeutics.

[3]  Juliea Morris,et al.  Calculating confidence intervals forrelative risks (oddsratios) andstandardised ratios andrates , 1988 .

[4]  D. Gavaghan,et al.  An evaluation of homogeneity tests in meta-analyses in pain using simulations of individual patient data , 2000, Pain.

[5]  P. Desjardins,et al.  Analgesic Efficacy of Etoricoxib in Primary Dysmenorrhea: Results of a Randomized, Controlled Trial , 2003, Gynecologic and Obstetric Investigation.

[6]  A. Jadad,et al.  The importance of quality of primary studies in producing unbiased systematic reviews. , 1996, Archives of internal medicine.

[7]  S. Nigam,et al.  Increased concentrations of eicosanoids and platelet-activating factor in menstrual blood from women with primary dysmenorrhea. , 1991, Eicosanoids.

[8]  M. Tramèr,et al.  Impact of covert duplicate publication on meta-analysis: a case study , 1997, BMJ.

[9]  A R Jadad,et al.  Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? , 1996, Controlled clinical trials.

[10]  A. Hewison,et al.  Dysmenorrhoea, menstrual attitude and GP consultation. , 1996, British journal of nursing.

[11]  R. Moore,et al.  Teasing apart quality and validity in systematic reviews: an example from acupuncture trials in chronic neck and back pain , 2000, Pain.

[12]  E. Franco,et al.  BMC Women's Health , 2004 .

[13]  S. Talwalker,et al.  Valdecoxib, a Cyclooxygenase‐2‐Specific Inhibitor, Is Effective in Treating Primary Dysmenorrhea , 2002, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[14]  I. Olkin,et al.  Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement , 1999, The Lancet.

[15]  C. Farquhar,et al.  Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for primary dysmenorrhoea. , 2003, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[16]  Douglas G. Altman,et al.  Statistics with confidence: Confidence intervals and statistical guidelines . , 1990 .

[17]  M. Dawood Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs and reproduction. , 1993, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[18]  B. Türkkani,et al.  Dysmenorrhea treatment with a single daily dose of rofecoxib , 2003, International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics.

[19]  J. Keogh,et al.  Primary dysmenorrhea in young Western Australian women: prevalence, impact, and knowledge of treatment. , 1999, The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine.

[20]  L. M. Anderson Statistics with Confidence. Confidence Intervals and Statistical Guidelines , 1989 .

[21]  C. Kainz,et al.  Concentrations of various arachidonic acid metabolites in menstrual fluid are associated with menstrual pain and are influenced by hormonal contraceptives. , 1995, Gynecological endocrinology : the official journal of the International Society of Gynecological Endocrinology.

[22]  S. Daniels,et al.  Rofecoxib, a specific cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor, in primary dysmenorrhea: a randomized controlled trial. , 1999, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[23]  Dawood My Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and changing attitudes toward dysmenorrhea. , 1988 .

[24]  J. L. Tang,et al.  Misleading funnel plot for detection of bias in meta-analysis. , 2000, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[25]  K A L'Abbé,et al.  Meta-analysis in clinical research. , 1987, Annals of internal medicine.

[26]  Weiya Zhang,et al.  Efficacy of minor analgesics in primary dysmenorrhoea: a systematic review , 1998, British journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.

[27]  D. Gavaghan,et al.  Size is everything – large amounts of information are needed to overcome random effects in estimating direction and magnitude of treatment effects , 1998, Pain.