Efficacy and safety of valdecoxib for treatment of osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis: systematic review of randomised controlled trials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our objective was to determine the efficacy and safety of valdecoxib (a cyclo-oxygenase 2 inhibitor) in the treatment of arthritis. Randomised, controlled trials comparing 10 or 20mg valdecoxib with placebo or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in patients with active osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis. The manufacturer provided clinical trial reports. Data were combined through meta-analysis. Main outcomes were patient global rating of arthritis, arthritis pain, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities indices for osteoarthritis, American College of Rheumatology indices for rheumatoid arthritis, discontinuation, endoscopic ulcers, clinically significant upper gastrointestinal or renal events. Nine trials (five in osteoarthritis, four in rheumatoid arthritis) were included with 5726 patients. Overall, valdecoxib 10 and 20mg were superior to placebo and equivalent in efficacy to maximum daily doses of NSAIDs. Significantly fewer discontinuations because of gastrointestinal adverse events (4% versus 8%), or endoscopic ulcers of 3mm or more (5% versus 13%) occurred with valdecoxib compared with NSAIDs. Clinically significant upper gastrointestinal events occurred in 2/2733 (0.1%) with valdecoxib compared with 8/1846 (0.4%) with NSAIDs. Rates of clinically significant renal events were the same (2-3%) for valdecoxib and NSAIDs. At an appropriate dose valdecoxib was as effective as NSAIDs in osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis. There were fewer gastrointestinal adverse event withdrawals and endoscopically detected ulcers. Convincing evidence of reduced major gastrointestinal adverse events could not be addressed by the trials.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.020 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.024 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".