Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Celecoxib”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 37 records · Page 2Linked to original sources
PubMed2003

The efficacy of celecoxib premedication on postoperative pain and recovery times after ambulatory surgery: a dose-ranging study.

UNLABELLED: Recently, the Food and Drug Administration increased the celecoxib dosage recommendation from 200 mg to 400 mg for acute pain management. No studies have directly compared the analgesic efficacy of different doses of celecoxib for the prevention of postoperative pain. In this prospective, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study, we compared oral celecoxib 200 mg to 400 mg when administered for premedication of outpatients undergoing minor ear-nose-throat surgery. A total of 93 healthy outpatients were assigned to 1 of 3 study groups: control (placebo; n = 30), celecoxib 200 mg (n = 30), or celecoxib 400 mg (n = 33). The study drug was given orally 30-45 min before surgery, and all patients received a standardized general anesthetic technique. During the postoperative period, pain scores (0-10), recovery times, the need for rescue analgesics, quality of recovery (0-100), patient satisfaction with pain management (0-100), and side effects were recorded. Pain was assessed at 30-min intervals using a verbal rating scale, with 0 = no pain to 10 = worst pain imaginable, in the postanesthesia care unit and day surgery unit recovery areas and at 24 h after surgery. Celecoxib 400 mg was significantly more effective than 200 mg (and placebo) in reducing postoperative pain. Both celecoxib 200 mg and 400 mg were more effective than placebo in reducing the postoperative fentanyl requirement (74 +/- 67 micro g and 56 +/- 62 micro g versus 120 +/- 86 micro g, respectively). The larger dose of celecoxib significantly reduced the percentage of patients with severe pain at discharge (6% versus 37% and 30% in the celecoxib 200 mg and control groups, respectively). The median number of doses of oral analgesic medication after discharge was also significantly reduced in the celecoxib 400 mg group (0 versus 2 and 2 in the celecoxib 200 mg and control groups, respectively). However, no differences were found among the three study groups with respect to recovery times and secondary outcome variables (e.g., patient satisfaction and quality of recovery). We conclude that oral premedication with celecoxib 400 mg was more effective than 200 mg in reducing severe postoperative pain and the need for rescue analgesic medication in the postoperative period. IMPLICATIONS: Oral premedication with celecoxib 400 mg was more effective than 200 mg in reducing postoperative pain and the need for rescue analgesic medication in the early postoperative period. However, neither dose of celecoxib was more effective than a placebo in facilitating the recovery process after outpatient surgery.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

Antitumor effects of celecoxib on K562 leukemia cells are mediated by cell-cycle arrest, caspase-3 activation, and downregulation of Cox-2 expression and are synergistic with hydroxyurea or imatinib.

Celecoxib, a specific cyclooxygenase-2 (Cox-2) inhibitor, has been shown to possess antitumor activity in a variety of cancer cells. However, the antitumor activity of celecoxib in hematopoietic tumors, especially in chronic myeloid leukemia (CML), has not been well established. This study was designed to investigate the effect of celecoxib on growth and apoptosis in a human CML cell line (K562 cells) or in primary CML cells, and to examine the synergistic actions of celecoxib and hydroxyurea or imatinib on K562 cell proliferation and apoptosis. Celecoxib significantly inhibited the growth of both K562 and primary CML cells and induced apoptosis in a dose-dependent fashion. The IC50 of celecoxib was 46 microM for inhibition of K562 cell proliferation. The effect of celecoxib on growth inhibition was accompanied by the downregulation of cyclin D1 and cyclin E and p-Rb expression, the upregulation of P16(INK4a) and P27KIP expression, and a G1-S phase arrest of the cell cycle. The pro-apoptotic effect of celecoxib was determined to be mediated by caspase-3 activation. When K562 cells were pretreated with DEVD-fmk, a specific inhibitor of caspases, the apoptotic activity of celecoxib was, in part, abrogated. Importantly, we demonstrated for the first time that K562 cells were Cox-2-positive both at the mRNA and protein levels. We noted the following observations: (i) we detected Cox-2 mRNA in K562 cells by reverse transcription-PCR (RT-PCR) and protein expression by western blot analysis; (ii) Cox-2 expression in K562 cells was stimulated by IL-1beta, a specific inducing agent of Cox-2 expression; (iii) primary CML cells from CML patient bone marrow also exhibited Cox-2 protein expression. Furthermore, Cox-2 expression was downregulated at higher doses of celecoxib (80-160 microM), suggesting a Cox-2-dependent mechanism was involved in the drug's effects of growth inhibition and induction of apoptosis. In addition, a synergistic effect was observed when cells were exposed to low-dose celecoxib (40 microM) and hydroxyurea (10 mM) or a combination of celecoxib (40 microM) and imatinib (0.2 microM). These findings provide the basis for uncovering the mechanism of celecoxib's antitumor effects and developing a new therapeutic strategy for treating CML.

Antineoplastic Agents↗
PubMed2005

Dimethyl celecoxib as a novel non-cyclooxygenase 2 therapy in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer.

OBJECTIVES: The cyclooxygenase 2 enzyme has become a therapeutic target in cancer treatment. Cyclooxygenase 2 blockade with selective inhibitors increases apoptosis and decreases the metastatic potential of lung cancer cells. Some of the antitumor effects of these inhibitors may occur through both cyclooxygenase 2-dependent and independent pathways. Our goal was to investigate these pathways using celecoxib (selective cyclooxygenase 2 inhibitor) and 2,5-dimethyl celecoxib, a structural analog modified to eliminate cyclooxygenase 2 inhibitory activity, while potentially maintaining antineoplastic properties. METHODS: 2,5-dimethyl celecoxib was synthesized in the Department of Chemistry at the University of Southern California. With the use of non-small cell lung cancer cells (A549), prostaglandin E2 production was quantified by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay to assess cyclooxygenase 2 activity. Cell proliferation was assessed by 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-5-(3-carboxymethoxyphenyl)-2-(4-sulfophenyl)-2H-tetrazolium, inner salt assay. Cell migration was performed using transwell inserts that were matrigel coated for invasion experiments. Gelatin zymography was used to assess matrix-metalloproteinase activity. RESULTS: 2,5-dimethyl celecoxib did not inhibit interleukin-1beta-stimulated prostaglandin E2 production, whereas celecoxib did even at low doses. Both celecoxib and 2,5-dimethyl celecoxib decreased tumor cell viability and proliferation with IC50 for celecoxib and 2,5-dimethyl celecoxib of 73 and 53 micromol/L, respectively. Both drugs were also potent inducers of apoptosis, and both inhibited tumor cell migration and invasion. This was associated with down-regulation of matrix metalloproteinase activity. CONCLUSIONS: 2,5-dimethyl celecoxib is a structural analog of celecoxib that lacks cyclooxygenase 2 inhibitory activity but exhibits significant antineoplastic properties comparable to celecoxib. This suggests that the antineoplastic activities of celecoxib are, at least in part, cyclooxygenase independent and that therapeutic strategies can be developed without the side effects of global cyclooxygenase 2 blockade.

Adenocarcinoma↗
PubMed2005

Radiosensitivity enhancement by celecoxib, a cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 selective inhibitor, via COX-2-dependent cell cycle regulation on human cancer cells expressing differential COX-2 levels.

To characterize the radiation-enhancing effects on human cancer cells and underlying mechanisms of celecoxib, a cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 selective inhibitor, and to ascertain whether its effects are COX-2 dependent. Clonogenic cytotoxicity assays and radiation survival assays after treatment with celecoxib +/- radiation were done on four human cancer cell lines that expressed differential COX-2 levels. Stably COX-2 knocked down or overexpressed cell lines were developed, and clonogenic assays, apoptosis assays, or cell cycle change measurements were conducted after treatment with celecoxib +/- radiation. Prostaglandin E(2) (PGE2) was applied to medium after treatment with celecoxib +/- radiation to determine whether the radiation-enhancing effect associated with celecoxib results from reduced generation of prostaglandin. Celecoxib's radiation-enhancing effect was observed in COX-2-expressing A549 and NCI-H460 cells but was not observed in the COX-2 nonexpressing MCF-7 and HCT-116 cells. Celecoxib's radiation-enhancing effects in A549 cells were shown to disappear after the administration of COX-2 knocked down. In contrast, the HCT-116 cells were radiosensitized by celecoxib after being transfected with COX-2 expression vector. The addition of PGE2 after treatment with celecoxib +/- radiation had no significant effects on celecoxib's radiation-enhancing effects in A549 and COX-2 transfected HCT-116 cells. Radiation-induced G2-M arrest was enhanced and sustained in the COX-2-overexpressing cells compared with that seen in COX-2 low-expressing cells. Celecoxib or NS-398 effected no changes or attenuated radiation-induced G(2)-M arrest in the COX-2-overexpressing cells but further enhanced the radiation-induced G(2)-M arrest in the COX-2 low-expressing cells. Celecoxib's radiation-enhancing effects seem to occur in a COX-2 expression-dependent manner in the cancer cells. This effect does not seem to be the result of reduced PGE2 generation. Celecoxib may exert an inhibitory effect on enhanced radiation-induced G2-M arrest in the COX-2-overexpressing cells, which may allow the arrested cells to enter mitosis and die after radiation, but may also further enhance radiation-induced G2-M arrest in the COX-2 low-expressing cells, by virtue of another mechanism.

Apoptosis↗
PubMed2004

Effects of a high-selenium yeast supplement on celecoxib plasma levels: a randomized phase II trial.

A combination of celecoxib and selenium was used in a randomized double-blind Phase II trial as a preliminary study to a multicenter Phase III colorectal cancer chemoprevention trial using these two agents together. The purpose of this trial was to determine whether high-selenium baker's yeast [(Saccharomyces cerevisiae) 200 microg once daily] in combination with celecoxib (400 mg once daily) altered the steady-state plasma concentration of celecoxib or produced clinically significant toxicities. Seventy-three healthy subjects (ages 40-75 years) were recruited to the 6-week study from the general local population and were randomized to either the celecoxib plus selenized baker's yeast group or the celecoxib plus placebo group after a 2-week run in period of celecoxib only. Blood samples were taken at baseline (to document that there was no evidence of celecoxib intake), after the 2-week run-in period on celecoxib to verify steady-state blood levels of this agent, and at end of study (4 weeks postrandomization). Toxicities were monitored at 2 weeks after initiation of celecoxib, at 4 weeks after initiation, and at the end of the study. Blood level concentrations of celecoxib did not differ between the two groups as determined by high-performance liquid chromatography analysis nor were there significant differences in blood chemistry values between the two groups. Subjects' self-report of general physical toxicities was uncommon and limited to National Cancer Institute toxicity grade 2 or less; however, 2 female participants (3%) were removed from the study medications because of grade 2 edema and significant weight gain after 2 and 2.5 weeks of celecoxib administration. In conclusion, high-selenium yeast and celecoxib can be taken at the described doses with minimum short-term negative effects. In future Phase III chemoprevention trials of celecoxib, weight gain should be carefully monitored, and participants should be made aware of this potential side effect before study entry.

Administration, Oral↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Upper gastroduodenal ulceration in arthritis patients treated with celecoxib.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the comparative incidence of endoscopic gastroduodenal ulcers in patients with rheumatoid arthritis or osteoarthritis treated with celecoxib. DESIGN: Quantitative systematic review of randomized controlled trials. SUBJECTS: Patients (n = 4632) with rheumatoid arthritis or osteoarthritis reported in five trials. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Rate ratios, rate differences, and the number needed to harm were calculated for the incidence of endoscopically documented gastroduodenal ulcers. RESULTS: Pooled rate ratios (RRs) relative to placebo for endoscopic ulcers at 12 weeks were 1.96 (95% CI 0.85 to 4.55) for celecoxib 100 mg twice daily and 2.35 (95% CI 1.02 to 5.38) for celecoxib 200 mg twice daily. There was no significant difference in gastroduodenal ulcers at 12 weeks between celecoxib 200 mg twice daily and celecoxib 100 mg twice daily; the corresponding pooled RR was 1.21 (95% CI 0.62 to 2.38). In contrast, celecoxib 200 mg twice daily was associated with a significantly lower rate of gastroduodenal ulcers than was naproxen 500 mg twice daily at 12 weeks (RR 0.24; 95% CI 0.17 to 0.33). On average, for every seven patients treated with naproxen, one more had an endoscopic ulcer than if they were treated with celecoxib. Celecoxib 200 mg twice daily also had a significantly lower risk of endoscopic ulcers than did either modified-release diclofenac 75 mg twice daily at 24 weeks (RR 0.24; 95% CI 0.11 to 0.52) or ibuprofen 800 mg three times daily at 12 weeks (RR 0.30; 95% CI 0.20 to 0.46). CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic studies have shown that celecoxib, at a wide range of doses, is associated with a lower incidence of gastroduodenal ulcers than are diclofenac, ibuprofen, or naproxen. The incidence rates of gastroduodenal ulcers associated with celecoxib were similar, although not equivalent, to placebo. Head-to-head comparisons suggest that, at the wide range of doses studied (100-800 mg/d), there are no dose-related increases in endoscopic gastroduodenal ulcers with celecoxib. The results of longer term comparative trials of celecoxib based on clinical outcomes are needed to determine celecoxib's ultimate risk-benefit profile.

Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal↗
PubMed2004

Effect of celecoxib on Ca2+ movement and cell proliferation in human osteoblasts.

In human osteoblasts, the effect of the widely prescribed cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor celecoxib on intracellular Ca(2+) concentrations ([Ca(2+)](i)) and cell proliferation was explored by using fura-2 and the tetrazolium assay, respectively. Celecoxib at concentrations greater than 1microM caused a rapid rise in [Ca(2+)](i) in a concentration-dependent manner ( EC 50= 10 microM). Celecoxib-induced [Ca(2+)](i) rise was reduced by 90% by removal of extracellular Ca(2+), and by 30% by l-type Ca(2+) channel blockers. Celecoxib-induced Mn(2+)-associated quench of intracellular fura-2 fluorescence also suggests that celecoxib-induced extracellular Ca(2+) influx. In Ca(2+)-free medium, thapsigargin, an inhibitor of the endoplasmic reticulum Ca(2+)-ATPase, caused a monophasic [Ca(2+)](i) rise, after which the increasing effect of celecoxib on [Ca(2+)](i) was greatly inhibited. Conversely, pretreatment with celecoxib to deplete intracellular Ca(2+) stores totally prevented thapsigargin from releasing more Ca(2+). U73122, an inhibitor of phoispholipase C, abolished histamine (an inositol 1,4,5-trisphosphate-dependent Ca(2+) mobilizer)-induced, but not celecoxib-induced, [Ca(2+)](i) rise. Pretreatment with phorbol 12-myristate 13-acetate and forskolin to activate protein kinase C and adenylate cyclase, respectively, partly inhibited celecoxib-induced [Ca(2+)](i) rise in Ca(2+)-containing medium. Separately, overnight treatment with 1-100microM celecoxib inhibited cell proliferation in a concentration-dependent manner. These findings suggest that in human osteoblasts, celecoxib increases [Ca(2+)](i) by stimulating extracellular Ca(2+) influx and also by causing intracellular Ca(2+) release from the endoplasmic reticulum via a phospholiase C-independent manner. Celecoxib may be cytotoxic at higher concentrations.

Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal↗
PubMed2003

Effect of the antenatal administration of celecoxib during the second and third trimesters of pregnancy on prostaglandin, cytokine, and nitric oxide levels in rabbits.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of celecoxib on prostaglandin, cytokine, and nitric oxide synthesis in the pregnant rabbit. STUDY DESIGN: Pregnant rabbits received celecoxib from 13 to 20 days (celecoxib-A), from 13 to 28 days (celecoxib-B), or vehicle from 13 to 28 days by gavage. Blood and tissue were assayed for prostaglandin, cytokine, and nitric oxide oxidation products. RESULTS: Preterm delivery occurred in 4 of 11 controls, 0 of 9 in celecoxib-A, and 0 of 8 in celecoxib-B. Plasma prostaglandin F(2alpha) was reduced in both treated groups at 20 days and at delivery in celecoxib-B. Plasma thromboxane B(2) was suppressed in celecoxib-B at 20 days and delivery. Cervical prostaglandin E(2) was increased; uterine and cervical plasma thromboxane B(2) declined in celecoxib-B. Celecoxib administration suppressed plasma nitric oxide oxidation products at delivery and cervical nitric oxide oxidation products in celecoxib-B. Uterine and cervical interleukin-1beta and interleukin-6 were decreased, and uterine tumor necrosis factor-alpha increased in celecoxib-B. CONCLUSION: Further studies are required to evaluate the therapeutic benefits of cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors in the setting of preterm parturition.

Animals↗
PubMed2000

The cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor celecoxib induces apoptosis by blocking Akt activation in human prostate cancer cells independently of Bcl-2.

This study investigates the apoptotic activity of the cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitor celecoxib in prostate carcinoma cells. COX-2 is constitutively expressed in androgen-responsive LNCaP and androgen-nonresponsive PC-3 cells. Exposure of these cells to celecoxib induces characteristic features of apoptosis, including morphological changes, DNA laddering, and caspase-3 activation, whereas piroxicam, a COX-1-specific inhibitor, displays no appreciable effect on either cancer cell line even after prolonged exposure. Moreover, the potency of celecoxib in apoptosis induction is significantly higher than that of other COX-2 inhibitors examined despite the observation that these inhibitors exhibit similar IC(50) in COX-2 inhibition. It is noteworthy that normal human prostate epithelial cells, expressing a marginally detectable level of COX-2, are insensitive to the induction of apoptosis by celecoxib. These data suggest a correlation between COX-2 expression and sensitivity to the apoptotic effect of the COX-2 inhibitor. In an effort to delineate the underlying mechanism, we examined the effect of celecoxib on the expression of Bcl-2 as well as the activation of the key anti-apoptotic kinase Akt. In contrast to an earlier report that attributed the apoptotic activity of NS398 in LNCaP cells to Bcl-2 down-regulation, we provide evidence that the induction of apoptosis by celecoxib in LNCaP and PC-3 cells is independent of Bcl-2. First, treatment with celecoxib does not alter the cellular Bcl-2 level in both cell lines. Second, enforced Bcl-2 expression in PC-3 cells does not confer protection against the induction of apoptosis by celecoxib. Our data show that celecoxib treatment blocks the phosphorylation of Akt. This correlation is supported by studies showing that overexpression of constitutively active Akt protects PC-3 cells from celecoxib-induced apoptosis. Nevertheless, how celecoxib down-regulates Akt is not clear because the drug does not adversely affect phosphoinositide 3-kinase activity in vivo and okadaic acid, a protein phosphatase 2A inhibitor, cannot rescue the inhibition. In summary, our data demonstrate that inhibition of Akt activation may play a crucial role in the induction of apoptosis by celecoxib.

Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal↗
PubMed2003

Combination of radiation and celebrex (celecoxib) reduce mammary and lung tumor growth.

The selective cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 inhibitor, celecoxib, alone and in combination with radiation was investigated in vitro and in vivo. Murine mammary tumor line (MCa-35) and human lung carcinoma line (A549) have high and low basal levels of COX-2 protein, respectively. Treatment of both tumor cells with celecoxib alone resulted in a dose- and time-dependent reduction of cell number (clonogenic cell death) and tumor cell growth rate in vitro; however, inhibition of tumor cell growth by celecoxib was not correlated with the reduction of COX-2 protein in tumor cells. Although both tumor cell types had similar DNA damage after celecoxib treatment, significant induction of tumor cell apoptosis was only observed in MCa-35. Celecoxib-mediated radiation sensitization also occurred in MCa-35 cells determined by clonogenic assay, in part due to a G2/M arrest at 8 to 24 hours after treatment. The tumor growth inhibitory effects of celecoxib were also studied in vivo. It was found that celecoxib inhibited both tumor growth after intragastric administration of celecoxib (5 daily doses of 50 mg/kg). Combined with a single 30-Gy dose of radiation, celecoxib resulted in additive effects on A549 tumors. Celecoxib-treated A549 tumors had marginal reduction of total and perfused blood vessels compared with untreated controls. Reduction of tumor angiogenic cytokine and growth factor mRNA was associated with decreased perfused vessels. Finally, reduction of vascular endothelial growth factor protein after celecoxib was also observed in both tumor lines by Western blot. Our results indicate that the selective inhibition of COX-2 combined with radiation has potential application in radiotherapy, and celecoxib-mediated antitumor effects may act through different mechanisms including direct inhibition of tumor cell proliferation, alteration of tumor cell cycle, and antiangiogenesis.

Animals↗
PubMed2005

Antimutagenic and anti-oxidant activities of the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug celecoxib.

1. Tumors arise and progress through the accumulation of serial genetic changes, including successive mutations, which involve activation of proto-oncogenes and inactivation of tumour suppressor genes, leading to the uncontrolled proliferation of progeny cells. The human body is continuously and unavoidably exposed to structurally diverse chemicals with established carcinogenic activity in animal models and/or mutagenic activity in short-term tests. 2. Celecoxib, a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug that specifically inhibits the enzyme cyclo-oxygenase-2, has been reported to be effective against certain types of cancers. The in vitro anti-oxidant and antimutagenic activities of the celecoxib were investigated in the present study using standard procedures. 3. The antimutagenic activity of celecoxib was determined using histidine mutant Salmonella typhimurium strains TA98, TA100, TA102 and TA1535 against directly acting mutagens (sodium azide (NaN3), N-methyl-N'-nitro-N-nitrosoguanidine (MNNG), 4-nitro-o-phenylenediamine (NPDA) and doxorubicin) and mutagens needing activation (2-acetamidofluorene (2-AF) and 7,12-dimethylbenz [a] anthracene (DMBA)). 4. Celecoxib inhibited NaN3-, MNNG- and NPDA-induced mutations of TA100. The antimutagenicity of celecoxib (0.2 mg/plate) against the NaN3-induced mutation of TA1535 was 39.8% (P < 0.001). The MNNG-induced mutation of TA1535 was also inhibited by 0.3 mg/plate celecoxib (46.0%; P < 0.05). At concentrations of 0.2 mg/plate, celecoxib significantly inhibited NPDA- and doxorubicin-induced mutations of TA98 by 52.5 and 58.0%, respectively (P < 0.001 and P < 0.05, respectively). 5. The antimutagenic activity of 0.3 mg/plate celecoxib against 2-AF- and DMBA-induced mutations of TA98 was 81.76 and 98.1%, respectively (P < 0.001). 6. The anti-oxidant activity of celecoxib was determined by the inhibition of lipid peroxidation and superoxide and hydroxyl radical-scavenging activities. 7. The IC50 values of celecoxib for hydroxyl radical-scavenging and the inhibition of lipid peroxidation were 1.97 +/- 0.06 and 1.99 +/- 0.05 micromol/mL, respectively. Celecoxib had no superoxide radical scavenging-activity up to a concentration of 2.6 micromol/mL. 8. The in vitro antimutagenic and anti-oxidant activities of celecoxib indicate its possible therapeutic use as a cancer chemopreventive agent.

2-Acetylaminofluorene↗
PubMed2004

Celecoxib, a cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor, reduces neointimal hyperplasia through inhibition of Akt signaling.

BACKGROUND: Celecoxib has been shown to have antitumor effects that may be mediated through the cyclooxygenase-independent inhibition of Akt signaling. Here, we examined the effects of celecoxib on neointimal formation after balloon injury and its mechanism of action. METHODS AND RESULTS: In vitro experiments were performed to evaluate the effects of celecoxib on the Akt/GSK signaling axis and the viability of rat vascular smooth muscle cells (VSMCs). In vivo experiments examined the effects of celecoxib, aspirin, and vehicle on neointimal growth after denudation injury to rat carotid arteries. In vitro, celecoxib suppressed the phosphorylation of Akt and GSK in cultured VSMCs, leading to a reduction in viable cell number, which was reversed by transduction of constitutively active Akt. Such a reduction in cell number was mediated by inhibition of proliferation and induction of apoptosis. In vivo, celecoxib reduced injury-induced phosphorylation of Akt and GSK, reduced VSMC proliferation, and increased caspase-3 activation and VSMC apoptosis at 3 days after injury, whereas aspirin had no effect. At 2 weeks after injury, celecoxib reduced intima-to-media ratio, whereas aspirin had no effect. Adenovirus-mediated delivery of dominant negative Akt was as effective as celecoxib at inhibiting neointimal formation. Conversely, gene delivery of constitutively active Akt significantly reversed the inhibition of intimal hyperplasia by celecoxib, providing causal evidence that the modulation of Akt signaling by celecoxib is a physiologically relevant mechanism. CONCLUSIONS: Celecoxib is a potential inhibitor of neointimal formation by blocking injury-induced Akt activation. These findings suggest a potential use for celecoxib in the prevention of restenosis after angioplasty.

Animals↗
PubMed2005

A comparison of reported gastrointestinal and thromboembolic events between rofecoxib and celecoxib using observational data.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Rofecoxib, a selective cyclo-oxygenase (COX)-2 inhibitor, was a widely marketed drug that was used for relief of pain and inflammation in arthritic conditions. It was withdrawn from the market worldwide in September 2004 because of an increased risk of cardiovascular events. Celecoxib, which belongs to the same class of drugs, is now under scrutiny for the risk of similar events. The objective of our study was to compare the incidence of gastrointestinal (GI) [symptomatic and complicated upper GI] events and thromboembolic (cardiovascular, cerebrovascular and peripheral venous) events reported for patients prescribed rofecoxib or celecoxib in primary care. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of selected events was conducted using data collected from previously conducted prescription-event monitoring (PEM) studies for rofecoxib and celecoxib. PEM is an observational cohort technique. Exposure data were derived from dispensed prescriptions for rofecoxib (July-November 1999) and celecoxib (May-December 2000) that were written by primary care general practitioners in England. Outcome data were clinical events and information on potential risk factors reported on simple questionnaires (posted to prescribers approximately 9 months after the date of the first prescription). Incidence rates of the first event during treatment within each thromboembolic and GI group were calculated during the 270 days after the patient started receiving either of the drugs; crude and adjusted rate ratios (RR) were calculated for rofecoxib compared with celecoxib using Poisson regression modelling. RESULTS: The rofecoxib and celecoxib PEM cohorts contained 15 268 and 17 458 patients, respectively. For the GI event groups, the adjusted RRs for rofecoxib compared with celecoxib were: 1.21 (95% CI 1.09, 1.36) for symptomatic upper GI events and 1.60 (95% CI 0.95, 2.70) for complicated upper GI conditions. For the thromboembolic event groups, the adjusted RRs were: 1.04 (95% CI 0.50, 2.17) for cardiovascular thromboembolic events; 1.43 (95% CI 0.86, 2.38) for cerebrovascular thromboembolic events; and 0.36 (95% CI 0.01, 1.34) for peripheral venous thromboembolic events. CONCLUSIONS: This study was a retrospective comparison of PEM studies conducted for rofecoxib and celecoxib. For symptomatic upper GI events, a 21% increase in the relative rate was found for rofecoxib users compared with celecoxib users after adjusting for identified risk factors. For complicated upper GI events, no statistically significant difference in the incidence was observed between rofecoxib and celecoxib users after adjusting for identified risk factors. For the three thromboembolic event groups, no evidence of a statistically significant difference between rofecoxib and celecoxib users was found after adjusting for identified risk factors. This study contributes to the understanding of the association between COX-2 inhibitors and thromboembolic events. However, it should be borne in mind that we had information on only a limited number of confounding variables for thromboembolic events. Further research is required to fully understand the risks and benefits of using celecoxib and other COX-2 inhibitors. Meanwhile, doctors should be cautious when prescribing these products, particularly to patients with risk factors for developing thromboembolic events.

Celecoxib↗
PubMed2000

Celecoxib inhibits N-butyl-N-(4-hydroxybutyl)-nitrosamine-induced urinary bladder cancers in male B6D2F1 mice and female Fischer-344 rats.

Epidemiological studies have shown that nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) may have a role in the prevention of human cancers. A number of preclinical studies have also suggested that inhibition of cyclooxygenase (COX) with NSAIDs has an anticancer effect in animal models of colon, urinary bladder, skin, and breast. In these studies, we evaluated the COX-2 inhibitor celecoxib in two rodent models of urinary bladder cancer. Male B6D2F1 mice treated with N-butyl-N-(4-hydroxybutyl)-nitrosamine (OH-BBN) developed transitional and squamous cell urinary bladder cancers, many of which grew rapidly and caused substantial morbidity that required sacrifice of the mice. Groups of mice received various daily doses of celecoxib in the diet (1250, 500, or 200 mg/kg of diet) beginning 7 days before the initiation of 12 weekly doses of OH-BBN. Mice were checked weekly for the presence of palpable urinary bladder masses. The study was terminated at 8 months following the initial treatment with OH-BBN. The percentage of mice with large palpable bladder lesions, which necessitated sacrifice of the mice, was 40% in the OH-BBN control group. In contrast, only 10% of all celecoxib-treated mice required sacrifice before the scheduled termination of the experiment, implying that all three doses of celecoxib inhibited the formation of large palpable lesions. Celecoxib did not significantly alter the incidence of preneoplastic bladder lesions, but did dose-dependently decrease the total number of urinary bladder cancers/mouse, palpable plus microscopic, by 77, 57, and 43% at dosages of 1250, 500, and 200 mg of celecoxib/kg of diet, respectively. In the second model, female Fischer-344 rats were administered OH-BBN twice/week for a period of 8 weeks. After 8 months, all rats developed preneoplastic lesions, whereas roughly 60% of the rats developed relatively small urinary bladder cancers. Rats were treated continually with celecoxib in the diet (500 or 1000 mg/kg of diet) beginning either 1 week prior to the initial OH-BBN treatment or beginning 1 week following the last OH-BBN treatment. Neither celecoxib treatment regimen significantly altered the number of preneoplastic lesions. Whereas celecoxib treatment initiated prior to OH-BBN administration decreased cancer incidence roughly 65%, celecoxib treatment initiated beginning 1 week after the last dose of OH-BBN profoundly decreased cancer incidence (>95%). Celecoxib did not alter the body weights of the mice or rats, or cause other signs of toxicity at any of the doses studied. Taken together these results demonstrate that: (a) celecoxib effectively inhibits tumor growth and enhances survival in the mouse model of urinary bladder cancer; and (b) celecoxib profoundly inhibits development of urinary bladder cancers in the rat model even when administered following the last dose of OH-BBN. Clinical trials will be necessary to determine whether COX-2 inhibitors will provide a clinical benefit in human bladder cancer.

Animals↗
PubMed2004

Blood pressure destabilization and edema among 8538 users of celecoxib, rofecoxib, and nonselective nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAID) and nonusers of NSAID receiving ordinary clinical care.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the relationship between nonselective nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NS NSAID), rofecoxib, celecoxib, and risk of edema and blood pressure destabilization in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and osteoarthritis (OA) receiving ordinary clinic care. METHODS: Patients participating in a longterm outcome study reported drug use, as well as the presence of edema and blood pressure increases occurring during the previous 6 months. To measure pure drug effect, analyses were restricted to 8538 patients who exclusively used a NS NSAID, rofecoxib, or celecoxib, and compared to nonusers of NS NSAID, rofecoxib, or celecoxib. We evaluated blood pressure destabilization using patient-reported increases in blood pressure and/or difficulty in controlling blood pressure. RESULTS: Compared with nonusers, after adjusting for age, sex, presence of RA, and history of heart disease and hypertension, patients using rofecoxib, but not celecoxib or NS NSAID, had an increased rate of edema (23.3% vs 18.0%), while the rates for celecoxib and NS NSAID were 17.5% and 18.2%, respectively. The adjusted risk of edema was significantly increased for rofecoxib compared to celecoxib (OR 1.33, 95% CI 1.08-1.64). For blood pressure increases, among patients who did not report having hypertension, no significant increase was noted for NS NSAID and celecoxib compared with nonusers. However a significant increased risk of blood pressure increase was seen for rofecoxib (OR 2.08, 95% CI 1.41-3.06). Among patients who reported having hypertension, patients taking rofecoxib had a significant increased risk of blood pressure increase compared to nonusers (OR 1.55, 95% CI 1.23-1.96), while the risks of blood pressure increase for users of celecoxib and NS NSAID were not significantly different than among nonusers. After controlling for age, sex, RA, and new starts on NSAID, the risk of blood pressure increase was significantly higher for users of rofecoxib than celecoxib (OR 1.21, 95% CI 1.03-1.61) among patients with hypertension, and numerically higher for nonhypertensives (OR 1.42, 95% CI 0.96-2.22). The increased risk for hypertension and edema of rofecoxib compared to celecoxib users was further confirmed by analysis of specific reported side effects during 2 separate 6-month periods (July 1 to December 31, 1999, and January 1 to June 30, 2000). During these 2 periods, rofecoxib-treated patients were 2.16 to 3.82 times more likely to report edema or blood pressure increase side effects compared to celecoxib-treated patients. CONCLUSION: Rofecoxib, but not celecoxib and NS NSAID, is associated with an increased risk of edema and blood pressure increase compared to nonusers of NSAID.

Adult↗
PubMed2005

Efficacy of rofecoxib, celecoxib, and acetaminophen in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee. A combined analysis of the VACT studies.

OBJECTIVE: To compare efficacy among 1578 patients with osteoarthritis randomized to take acetaminophen 4000 mg (n=269), celecoxib 200 mg (n=523), rofecoxib 12.5 mg (n=259), or rofecoxib 25 mg (n=527) in a double blind trial [Vioxx, Acetaminophen, Celecoxib Trial (VACT2)]. Results were also pooled with the similarly designed VACT1 trial. METHODS: Patients evaluated over Days 1 to 6 and 6 weeks with Patient Global Assessment of Response to Therapy (PGART) and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) Osteoarthritis Index. RESULTS: For VACT2, median time to good or excellent PGART response was 6, 5, 4, and 3 days for acetaminophen, celecoxib, rofecoxib 12.5 mg, and rofecoxib 25 mg (COX-2 inhibitors vs acetaminophen, p<or=0.035; rofecoxib 25 mg vs celecoxib, p=0.01). WOMAC response over the first 6 days was greater (p < 0.05) with both rofecoxib doses than acetaminophen and celecoxib. At Week 6, all COX-2 inhibitors provided significantly greater efficacy than acetaminophen. Good or excellent PGART was numerically, but not significantly, greater with rofecoxib 25 mg (55.4%) than celecoxib (50.6%) at Week 6; a significant difference was seen at Weeks 2 (6.9, p=0.022) and 4 (6.7, p=0.027) and over 6 weeks with analysis of all 5 PGART categories of response (p=0.035). Rofecoxib 25 mg provided greater response (p<0.05) than celecoxib on WOMAC subscales. Pooled analysis of VACT1/VACT2 demonstrated greater PGART (p=0.023) with rofecoxib 25 mg (56.1%) than celecoxib (49.8%) at 6 weeks and greater response to all other PGART and WOMAC endpoints, and confirmed superiority of COX-2 inhibitors to acetaminophen. Overall, tolerability of the study medications was generally good and similar. There was no significant difference between treatment groups in the percentage of patients who experienced a clinical adverse experience (AE). The incidence of discontinuations due to an AE was significantly lower with celecoxib (2.5%) compared to rofecoxib 25 mg (6.3%, p=0.004) or acetaminophen (7.8%, p< 0.001), and did not differ significantly from rofecoxib 12.5 mg (4.6%). Discontinuation rates due to edema and hypertension related AE were similar among all COX-2 inhibitors. CONCLUSION: Rofecoxib and celecoxib provided superior efficacy to acetaminophen. There was a more rapid and greater response with rofecoxib 25 mg than celecoxib 200 mg. Rofecoxib 12.5 mg demonstrated greater efficacy than celecoxib 200 mg over the first 6 days, and was similar over 6 weeks. All study medications were generally well tolerated.

Acetaminophen↗
PubMed2001

Efficacy and tolerability of celecoxib versus hydrocodone/acetaminophen in the treatment of pain after ambulatory orthopedic surgery in adults.

BACKGROUND: Current outpatient management of postoperative pain includes the use of oral opioid analgesics or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs; however, both types of medications are associated with side effects that can limit their usefulness in the outpatient setting. OBJECTIVE: Two studies with identical protocols assessed the single- and multiple-dose analgesic efficacy and tolerability of celecoxib, a specific cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor, in the treatment of acute pain after orthopedic surgery. METHODS: These were multicenter, randomized, placebo- and active-controlled, double-blind, parallel-group trials conducted between January and June 1998. Both consisted of a single-dose assessment period (SDAP) and a multiple-dose assessment period (MDAP). In the SDAP, patients who had undergone orthopedic surgery received a single oral dose of celecoxib 200 mg, hydrocodone 10 mg/acetaminophen 1000 mg, or placebo within 24 hours after the end of anesthesia, with pain assessments conducted over the following 8-hour period. In the MDAP, extending from 8 hours after the first dose of study medication up to 5 days, patients who had received < or =1 dose of rescue medication during the SDAP continued on study medication (placebo recipients were rerandomized to active treatment), which could be taken up to 3 times a day as needed. RESULTS: A total of 418 patients were enrolled in the 2 trials. During the SDAP, 141 patients received celecoxib, 136 received hydrocodone/acetaminophen, and 141 received placebo. During the MDAP, 185 patients received celecoxib and 181 received hydrocodone/acetaminophen. When the combined data were analyzed, mean pain intensity difference (PID) scores generally favored the active treatments over placebo from 1 to 6 hours (with the exception of 1.5 hours) after dosing (P < or = 0.016) and favored celecoxib over the other treatments at 7 and 8 hours after dosing (P < 0.001). The active treatments demonstrated superior summed PID scores through 8 hours (P < 0.001), significantly shorter median times to onset of analgesia (P < 0.05), and significantly longer median times to first use of rescue medication (P < 0.05). During the MDAP, more hydrocodone/acetaminophen-treated patients (20%) than celecoxib-treated patients (12%) required rescue medication (P < 0.05), and the celecoxib group had significantly lower maximum pain intensity scores (P < 0.001, days 2-5), required fewer doses of study medication (P < or = 0.01, days 3-5), and had superior scores on a modified American Pain Society Patient Outcome Questionnaire (P < or = 0.013). In addition, a significantly lower proportion of celecoxib-treated patients experienced adverse events (43%) compared with hydrocodone/acetaminophen-treated patients (89%; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Over 8 hours, patients with moderate to severe pain after orthopedic surgery experienced comparable analgesia with single doses of celecoxib and hydrocodone/acetaminophen. Over a 5-day period, oral doses of celecoxib 200 mg taken 3 times a day demonstrated superior analgesia and tolerability compared with hydrocodone 10 mg/acetaminophen 1000 mg taken 3 times a day. Most patients required no more than 2 daily doses of celecoxib 200 mg for the control of their postorthopedic surgical pain.

Acetaminophen↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Cell density influences the effect of celecoxib in two carcinoma cell lines.

It has been reported that when ovarian carcinoma cell lines are exposed to various concentrations of celecoxib, a COX-2 inhibitor, cell growth is decreased in a dose dependant manner. To examine further the effect of celecoxib, different cell densities of two carcinoma cell lines were exposed to various concentrations of celecoxib. LNCAP prostate and CAOV3 ovarian carcinoma cells were obtained from the American Type Culture Collection and maintained in Rosewell Park Memorial Institute 1640 and Dulbeceo's modified Eagle's medium, respectively. Each cell line was supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum, 2 mM L-glutamine, and antibiotic-antimycotic solution, and placed in a humidified atmosphere containing 5% CO2 at 37 degrees C. After each cell line reached a confluency of 70-80%, 1,000, 2,000, 3,000, 5,000, 7,000 and 10,000 cells/well were seeded in 96 well plates in 100 microl medium/per well for 24 h. Each cell line was exposed to the same concentrations of celecoxib (10-100 microM) at each cell density for 72 h. Cell growth was assessed using a tetrazolium conversion assay. A significant decrease compared to controls was observed in cell growth at each cell density of LNCAP and CAOV3 cells plated with >or=30 microM and >or=50 microM celecoxib, respectively. When the cell growth curves were compared for each cell density at the same concentration of celecoxib, a significant decrease in cell growth was observed when LNCAP cells were plated at 10,000 cells/well and exposed to 10-100 microM celecoxib. At a cell density >or= 5,000 LNCAP cells/well, the inhibitory effect of celecoxib was less. Similarly, a significant decrease in cell growth was observed in CAOV3 cells plated at 1,000 cells/well compared to other cell numbers plated at the same drug concentrations. At a cell density of > 5,000 CAOV3 cells/well, the inhibitory effect of celecoxib was significantly less compared to other cell densities at the same concentration. We observed a more sensitive decrease in cell growth in both carcinoma lines studied at a cell density of 1,000 cells/well with exposure to 10-100 microM celecoxib. Both carcinoma cell lines were less sensitive at a cell density of 5,000 cells/well. Our results suggest that the inhibitory effect of celecoxib may be affected by cell density. Therefore, careful attention must be paid to determining the appropriate cell density for cytotoxicity studies.

Carcinoma↗