PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 12973428

Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory agents.

Abstract

Since the synthesis of aspirin in 1897, aspirin-like or nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) have been the mainstay of therapy for rheumatoid arthritis. Although of diverse chemical structure, these drugs not only exhibit the same antipyretic, analgesic and antiinflammatory therapeutic actions, but they also manifest identical toxic actions on the gastric mucosa and the kidney. This indicated that a single pharmacological effect was responsible for the properties of NSAIDs, a theory that was confirmed by the epochal discovery by Vane in 1971, that inhibition of the enzyme-producing prostanoids (cyclooxygenase [COX]) produced both the therapeutic and side effects of aspirin-like drugs. However, at equivalent antiinflammatory doses, different NSAIDs exhibited different degrees of toxicity. The reason for this was resolved by the discovery that prostaglandins at sites of tissue damage were synthesized by an inducible COX (COX-2) formed by a gene distinct from that producing the constitutive enzyme (COX-1), responsible for the formation of prostaglandins that serve an essential physiological function. Modification of the structure of drugs showing a moderately selective effect on COX-2, and the elucidation of the crystal structure of both enzymes, has paved the way for the synthesis of NSAIDs that are highly selective for the inducible enzyme and which are, therefore, antiinflammatory without the typical side effects of the classical NSAIDs. The focus on COX-2 has also expanded our knowledge of the pathophysiological significance of prostanoids and raised the possibility of new uses for selective COX-2 inhibitors, for example, in colon cancer, premature labor and possibly Alzheimer's disease. However, the clinical effects of chronic administration of potent, selective COX-2 inhibitors must await the results of ongoing clinical trials.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

J H Botting. Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory agents.. https://doi.org/10.1358/dot.1999.35.4-5.552199

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Effectiveness of high-dose versus standard-dose influenza vaccines against hospitalisation according to frailty risk: a prespecified analysis of the randomised trial DANFLU-2.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a major risk factor for influenza-related complications and can influence vaccine effectiveness. We aimed to assess the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of high-dose (HD-IIV) versus standard-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (SD-IIV) in older adults aged 65 years or older according to frailty risk. METHODS: This study was a prespecified analysis of DANFLU-2, an open-label, individually randomised trial, conducted in Denmark during three consecutive influenza seasons (2022-23, 2023-24, and 2024-25). Adults aged 65 years or older were randomised (1:1) to the HD-IIV or SD-IIV group. The primary endpoint was hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia. Frailty was defined according to the validated Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) based on ICD-10 codes within 10 years before randomisation. Participants were stratified into three HFRS categories, namely low (<5 points), intermediate (5-15 points), and high (>15 points) frailty risk. The rVE of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint was assessed across prespecified HFRS categories and treating HFRS as a continuous variable. Pearson's chi-square test was used to compare safety events across frailty risk groups and randomisation groups. FINDINGS: Among 332&#x2009;438 randomised participants (mean age 73&#xb7;7 years [SD 5&#xb7;8]; 161&#x2009;538 [48&#xb7;6%] were female), 276&#x2009;173 (83&#xb7;1%) had low frailty risk, 52&#x2009;395 (15&#xb7;8%) had intermediate frailty risk, and 3861 (1&#xb7;2%) had high frailty risk. The primary endpoint of hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia occurred in 1424 (0&#xb7;5%) of 276&#x2009;173 participants with low frailty risk, 761 (1&#xb7;5%) of 52&#x2009;395 with intermediate frailty risk, and 163 (4&#xb7;2%) of 3861 with high frailty risk (relative risk [RR] for intermediate vs low frailty risk 2&#xb7;8 [95% CI 2&#xb7;6-3&#xb7;1]; RR for high vs low frailty risk 8&#xb7;2 [7&#xb7;0-9&#xb7;6]). HFRS as a continuous variable significantly modified the effect of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint with higher rVE estimates with increasing HFRS (pinteraction=0&#xb7;020). The rVE was 0&#xb7;2% (95% CI -10&#xb7;8 to 10&#xb7;2) among those with low frailty risk, 13&#xb7;1% (-0&#xb7;4 to 24&#xb7;8) among those with intermediate frailty risk, and 19&#xb7;9% (-10&#xb7;3 to 42&#xb7;1) among those with high frailty risk. No significant interaction was observed when HFRS was assessed according to the prespecified categorical frailty groups (pinteraction=0&#xb7;17). The proportion of participants with at least one serious adverse event increased across frailty risk groups (13&#x2009;366 [4&#xb7;8%] of 275&#x2009;795 for low frailty risk, 5475 [10&#xb7;5%] of 52&#x2009;315 for intermediate frailty risk, and 777 [20&#xb7;2%] of 3850 for high frailty risk; p<0&#xb7;0001), with similar proportions of serious adverse events in the HD-IIV and SD-IIV groups for each frailty risk group. INTERPRETATION: Among adults aged 65 years or older in Denmark, frailty risk might modify the effects of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia, with higher rVE estimates with increasing frailty risk. These findings might support considering high-dose influenza vaccines for frail older adults. However, effect modification was not evident when frailty was assessed using prespecified categorical subgroups, and subgroup-specific estimates were imprecise, with 95% CIs crossing the null. These results should be considered exploratory, warranting further investigation. FUNDING: The DANFLU-2 trial was funded by Sanofi.

Journal Article↗