Guest guest Posted December 3, 2004 Report Share Posted December 3, 2004 ibs show different molecular effects on lipids may explain different CV risks Rheumawire Nov 23, 2004 Zosia Chustecka Beverly, MA - New research shows that different COX-2 inhibitors vary in vitro in the molecular effect they have on lipoprotein oxidation, and this nonenzymatic effect may explain the differences in cardiovascular risk that have been seen with these drugs clinically, say the researchers [1]. However, a clinician questions the relevance of these findings and says that establishing a link between in vitro findings and cardiovascular risk will require much further work. The new findings, reported in the December 2004 issue of Atherosclerosis, come from a 2-year investigation carried out by Dr Preston Mason and colleagues at Elucida Research LLC (Beverly, MA), a private laboratory " dedicated to independent and innovative biomedical research, " it says in a press release highlighting the findings. No funding or impetus from the pharmaceutical industry was provided to initiate or conduct this study, it adds. The study involved an analysis of the effects of COX-2 inhibitors on human low-density lipoprotein (LDL) oxidation, an important contributor to atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, the researchers explain. " The essential finding of this study was that the sulfone COX-2 inhibitors, etoricoxib (Arcoxia, Merck & Co) and rofecoxib (Vioxx, Merck & Co), exhibited prooxidant activity in human plasma samples and isolated LDL. The prooxidant effects of these agents were unrelated to COX-2 inhibition, as they were reproduced in pure lipid vesicles enriched with arachidonic acid. Additionally, we did not observe changes in lipid peroxidation rates with sulfonamide COX-2 selective inhibitors (celecoxib [Celebrex, Pfizer] and valdecoxib [bextra, Pfizer]), other nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs; naproxen, ibuprofen, diclofenac) or even sulfone-containing compounds (methyl phenyl sulfone). " " The lack of activity for celecoxib was observed even at suprapharmacologic doses, " the researchers comment. " By contrast, the prooxidant effects of rofecoxib were dose-dependent. This is of particular interest as recent clinical investigations indicate an increase in cardiovascular risk associated with rofecoxib that also appears to be dose-related. " The prooxidant activity observed with rofecoxib and etoricoxib appear to be related to distinct physicochemical changes in lipid structure, independent of COX-2 inhibition, the researchers comment. This conclusion is based on small-angle X-ray diffraction analyses of drug-containing phospholipid bilayers that show a reduction in molecular packing constraints of acyl chains following treatment with sulfone agents (etoricoxib and rofecoxib), resulting in potentially increased permeability to free-radical ions and/or free-radical diffusion. " Vioxx interacts at a molecular level in a way that Celebrex and other NSAIDs do not, " Mason comments in the press release. " Abnormal changes in the structure or shape of lipids caused by Vioxx, especially in LDL, may explain why they are more susceptible to oxidative damage and therefore contribute to cardiovascular damage. Similar effects on susceptibility of lipids to oxidative damage have been observed with cigarette smoking, diabetes, and in patients who have had a recent heart attack. Interestingly, these adverse effects were independent of Vioxx's function as an inhibitor of the COX-2 enzymethus explaining why it could be different from other drugs in its class. " " This news should be reassuring to patients and doctors, " says Mason. " The cardiovascular issues associated with Vioxx should not be extrapolated to other COX-2 inhibitors. Having for the past 15 years studied these types of drug-lipid interactions, it was clear to us that the effects we observed with Vioxx were very unusual and needed to be reported to the medical community. " However, Dr Pisetsky (Duke University, Durham, NC), an editorial consultant to www.jointandbone.org, questions the relevance of these findings. He tells rheumawire: " While drugs of a class (eg, NSAIDs or coxibs) may share an action in common, these agents are chemically distinct and may have other effects, not related to their primary action, that may have an impact on either efficacy or side effects. There were, in fact, many studies on NSAIDs that demonstrated differences in the in vitro properties that potentially could affect their efficacy as anti-inflammatories. In the same way, coxibs may have differences in the in vitro properties that could affect their side effects. The question is whether any of these in vitro activities have relevance. " Also asked to comment on this research, cardiologist Dr Topol (Cleveland Clinic, OH), editor-in-chief of our sibling website, www.theheart.org, says the findings are " provocative, but only one possible explanation. " In their paper, Mason et al note that previous studies have shown that the COX-2 inhibitors also have distinct effects on endothelial function, a key indicator of vascular risk. Specifically, celecoxib, but not rofecoxib, effected an improvement in endothelial-dependent vasodilation [2,3,4]. However, there are also many similarities across the coxib class, and they all have the same mechanism of action, selective inhibition of the COX-2 cyclo-oxygenase enzyme. One theory explaining the cardiovascular side effects seen with rofecoxib, and now of concern with the other drugs in the coxib class, is that inhibition of this enzyme alters the balance between thromboxane and prostacyclin (prostaglandin PGI2), leading to prothrombotic effects. A research paper published in the November 18, 2004 issue of Science highlights the role of COX-2-derived prostacyclin in atherogenesis [5]. The study was carried out in mice and shows that deletion of the prostacyclin receptor removed the atheroprotective effect of estrogen in ovariectomized female mice. " This suggests that chronic treatment of patients with selective inhibitors of COX-2 could undermine protection from cardiovascular disease in premenopausal females, " say the researchers. " It raises concern about the use of COX-2 inhibitors in juvenile arthritis, a disease that predominantly affects females. " The research team is headed by Dr Garret FitzGerald (University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia), who recently reported the meta-analysis that he says shows an increased cardiovascular risk with valdecoxib but that has been criticized. The researchers comment: " Although extrapolation of results in mice to humans is performed with caution, the experience with rofecoxib has focused attention on the role of atherogenesis in transformation of cardiovascular risk during chronic treatment with selective inhibitors of COX-2. " In an article about this mouse study in the Wall Street Journal, Pfizer medical director Dr Gail Cawkwell says the study " makes for interesting science, but the author makes a quantum leap in assuming this has any relevance to humans or to patients. " And Dr Borer (Cornell University Weill Medical College, New York, NY) comments that " mechanism studies are very interesting, but they do not provide firm evidence of a clinical benefit or a clinical risk. " Sources Walter MF, RF, Day CA et al. Sulfone COX-2 inhibitors increase susceptibility of human LDL and plasma to oxidative modification: comparison to sulfonamide COX-2 inhibitors and NSAIDs Atherosclerosis 2004:177: 235-243. Chenevard R, Hurlimann D, Bechir M et al. Selective COX-2 inhibition improves endothelial function in coronary artery disease. Circulation 2003; 107:405-409. Hermann M, Camici G, Fratton A et al. Differential effects of selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors on endothelial function in salt-induced hypertension Circulation 2003; 108: 2308-2311. Monakier D, Mates M, Klutstein MW et al. Rofecoxib, a COX-2 inhibitor, lowers c-reactive protein and interleukin-6 levels in patients with acute coronary syndrome Chest 2004; 125:1610-1615. Egan KM, Lawson JA, Fries S et al COX-2 derived prostacyclin confers atheroprotection on female mice. Science; published online before print November 18, 2004. I'll tell you where to go! Mayo Clinic in Rochester http://www.mayoclinic.org/rochester s Hopkins Medicine http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.