throbber

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`The New England Journal of Medicine
`
`COMPARISON OF UPPER GASTROINTESTINAL TOXICITY OF ROFECOXIB
`AND NAPROXEN IN PATIENTS WITH RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS
`
`R
`UBEN
`
`.P.H.,
`, D
` S
`, M.D., D
` R
`, M.D., A
` L
`, M.D., L
` B
`C
`R
`HAPIRO
`EBORAH
`EICIN
`LISE
`AINE
`OREN
`OMBARDIER
`LAIRE
`-V
`, M.D., B
` D
`, M.D., P
`.D., R
` D
`, M.D., M
` B
` F
`, M.D., P
` B
`ERRAZ
`H
`ARRY
`ARGAS
`URGOS
`AVIS
`ICHARD
`AY
`ARCOS
`OSI
`H
`C
` J. H
`, M.D., M
` C. H
`, M.D., T
` K. K
`, M.D.,
`HRISTOPHER
`AWKEY
`ARC
`OCHBERG
`ORE
`VIEN
` T
` J. S
`, M.D., P
`.D.,
`
` VIGOR S
` G
`AND
`HOMAS
`CHNITZER
`H
`FOR
`THE
`TUDY
`ROUP
`
`.D.,
`
`A
`BSTRACT
`Background
`Each year, clinical upper gastrointes-
`tinal events occur in 2 to 4 percent of patients who
`are taking nonselective nonsteroidal antiinflammatory
`drugs (NSAIDs). We assessed whether rofecoxib, a
`selective inhibitor of cyclooxygenase-2, would be as-
`sociated with a lower incidence of clinically important
`upper gastrointestinal events than is the nonselective
`NSAID naproxen among patients with rheumatoid
`arthritis.
`Methods
`We randomly assigned 8076 patients who
`were at least 50 years of age (or at least 40 years of
`age and receiving long-term glucocorticoid therapy)
`and who had rheumatoid arthritis to receive either
`50 mg of rofecoxib daily or 500 mg of naproxen twice
`daily. The primary end point was confirmed clinical
`upper gastrointestinal events (gastroduodenal perfo-
`ration or obstruction, upper gastrointestinal bleeding,
`and symptomatic gastroduodenal ulcers).
`Results
`Rofecoxib and naproxen had similar effica-
`cy against rheumatoid arthritis. During a median fol-
`low-up of 9.0 months, 2.1 confirmed gastrointestinal
`events per 100 patient-years occurred with rofecoxib,
`as compared with 4.5 per 100 patient-years with na-
`proxen (relative risk, 0.5; 95 percent confidence inter-
`val, 0.3 to 0.6; P<0.001). The respective rates of com-
`plicated confirmed events (perforation, obstruction,
`and severe upper gastrointestinal bleeding) were 0.6
`per 100 patient-years and 1.4 per 100 patient-years
`(relative risk, 0.4; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.2
`to 0.8; P=0.005). The incidence of myocardial infarc-
`tion was lower among patients in the naproxen group
`than among those in the rofecoxib group (0.1 percent
`vs. 0.4 percent; relative risk, 0.2; 95 percent confidence
`interval, 0.1 to 0.7); the overall mortality rate and the
`rate of death from cardiovascular causes were simi-
`lar in the two groups.
`Conclusions
`In patients with rheumatoid arthritis,
`treatment with rofecoxib, a selective inhibitor of cy-
`clooxygenase-2, is associated with significantly fewer
`clinically important upper gastrointestinal events than
`treatment with naproxen, a nonselective inhibitor.
`(N Engl J Med 2000;343:1520-8.)
`©2000, Massachusetts Medical Society.
`
`1520
`

`
`November 23, 2000
`
`N
`
`ONSTEROIDAL antiinflammatory drugs
`(NSAIDs) are among the most common-
`ly used medications in the world.
` A major
`1
`factor limiting their use is gastrointesti-
`nal toxicity. Although endoscopic studies reveal that
`gastric or duodenal ulcers develop in 15 to 30 percent
` the chief con-
`of patients who regularly take NSAIDs,
`2
`cern is clinically important gastrointestinal problems,
`such as bleeding. It has been estimated that more than
`100,000 patients are hospitalized and 16,500 die each
`year in the United States as a result of NSAID-asso-
`ciated gastrointestinal events.
`3,4
`Most NSAIDs inhibit both cyclooxygenase-1 and
`cyclooxygenase-2, isoenzymes involved in the synthe-
`sis of prostaglandins.
` Cyclooxygenase-1 is constitu-
`5
`tively expressed and generates prostanoids involved in
`the maintenance of the integrity of gastrointestinal
`mucosa and platelet aggregation,
` whereas at sites of
`6
`inflammation, cyclooxygenase-2 is induced to generate
`prostaglandins that mediate inflammation and pain.
`7
`The antiinflammatory effects of nonselective NSAIDs
`(those that inhibit both cyclooxygenase-1 and cyclo-
`oxygenase-2) therefore appear to be mediated through
`the inhibition of cyclooxygenase-2,
` whereas their
`8
`harmful effects in the gastrointestinal tract as well as
`their antiplatelet effects are believed to occur primar-
`ily through the inhibition of cyclooxygenase-1.
`5
`Agents that selectively inhibit cyclooxygenase-2 have
`antiinflammatory and analgesic effects that are simi-
`
`From the Institute for Work and Health, Mount Sinai Hospital, and the
`University Health Network, Toronto (C.B.); the Gastrointestinal Division,
`Department of Medicine, University of Southern California School of
`Medicine, Los Angeles (L.L.); Merck, Rahway, N.J. (A.R., D.S.); the Fac-
`ulty of Medicine and Research Division, Universidad Nacional Autonoma
`de Mexico, and Hospital General de Mexico, Mexico City, Mexico (R.B.-V.);
`University of Texas–Houston School of Public Health, Houston (B.D.); the
`Department of Clinical Pharmacology, University of New South Wales
`and St. Vincent’s Hospital, Sydney, Australia (R.D.); the Division of Rheu-
`matology, Department of Medicine, Escola Paulista de Medicina, Univer-
`sidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil (M.B.F.); the Division of
`Gastroenterology, School of Medical and Surgical Sciences, University Hos-
`pital, Nottingham, United Kingdom (C.J.H.); the Division of Rheumatol-
`ogy and Clinical Immunology, University of Maryland, Baltimore (M.C.H.);
`Oslo City Department of Rheumatology, and Diakonhjemmet Hospital, Oslo,
`Norway (T.K.K.); and the Office of Clinical Research and Training, North-
`western University School of Medicine, Chicago (T.J.S.). Address reprint re-
`quests to Dr. Bombardier at the Institute for Work and Health, 250 Bloor
`St. E., Suite 702, Toronto, ON M4W 1E6, Canada, or at claire.bombardier@
`utoronto.ca.
`Arthur Weaver, M.D., Arthritis Center of Nebraska, Lincoln, was another
`author.
`
`The New England Journal of Medicine
`
`Downloaded from nejm.org on March 19, 2015. For personal use only. No other uses without permission.
`
` Copyright © 2000 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.
`
`Page 1 of 9
`
`Patent Owner Ex. 2045
`Mylan v. Pozen
`IPR2017-01995
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UPPER GASTROINTESTINAL TOXICITY OF ROFECOXIB AND NAPROXEN IN PATIENTS WITH RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS
`
` but they in-
`lar to those of nonselective NSAIDs,
`9-12
`duced significantly fewer ulcers in endoscopic tri-
` Whether such a decrease in the number of
`als.
`12-15
`ulcers translates into a similar decrease in the number
`of clinical gastrointestinal events is a matter of con-
`troversy. We performed a prospective, randomized,
`double-blind comparison of rofecoxib and naproxen
`in more than 8000 patients with rheumatoid arthritis.
`
`METHODS
`
`Study Population
`Patients with rheumatoid arthritis who were at least 50 years
`old (or at least 40 years old and receiving long-term glucocorticoid
`therapy) and who were expected to require NSAIDs for at least
`one year were eligible. Patients were excluded if they had a history
`of another type of inflammatory arthritis, upper gastrointestinal
`surgery, or inflammatory bowel disease; an estimated creatinine
`clearance of 30 ml or less per minute; a positive test for fecal occult
`blood (this test was performed at base line in all patients); an un-
`stable medical condition; a history of cancer or alcohol or drug
`abuse in the five years before the study; a history of cerebrovas-
`cular events in the two years before the study; or a history of my-
`ocardial infarction or coronary bypass in the year before the study.
`Patients with morbid obesity and those who required or who had
`been receiving treatment with aspirin, ticlopidine, anticoagulants,
`cyclosporine, misoprostol, sucralfate, or proton-pump inhibitors or
`treatment with histamine H
`–receptor antagonists in prescription-
`2
`strength doses were also excluded from the study. Patients enrolled
`in the study were not thought to require the use of these agents
`by their treating physicians.
`
`Study Design
`The study was conducted at 301 centers in 22 countries. Three
`to 14 days after discontinuing NSAIDs, eligible patients were ran-
`domly assigned to receive either 50 mg of rofecoxib (Vioxx, Merck,
`Whitehouse Station, N.J.) once daily or 500 mg of naproxen (No-
`vopharm Biotech, Toronto) twice daily. The groups were stratified
`according to the presence or absence of a history of gastroduode-
`nal ulcer, upper gastrointestinal bleeding, and gastroduodenal per-
`foration. Blinding was achieved through the use of a matching pla-
`cebo for each study medication.
`Patients were permitted to take acetaminophen, non-NSAID
`analgesic medications, glucocorticoids, and disease-modifying drugs
`(e.g., methotrexate) to control their rheumatoid arthritis. Patients
`were also allowed to take antacids and H
`-receptor antagonists in
`2
`the following maximal doses: ranitidine, 150 mg daily; famotidine,
`20 mg daily; cimetidine, 400 mg daily; and nizatidine, 150 mg
`daily. Nonstudy NSAIDs were not allowed. After randomization,
`the patients returned to the clinic at six weeks and at four months
`and every four months thereafter until the end of the study. Patients
`were contacted by telephone at week 10 and every four months
`thereafter. Compliance was assessed by pill counts at clinic visits
`and by questioning of patients during the scheduled telephone calls.
` test-
`Serum was obtained from all patients for
`Helicobacter pylori
`ing (HM-CAP, Enteric Products, Stonybrook, N.Y.). Investigators
`were not informed of the results of these tests during the study.
`The institutional review board or ethics review committee at
`each center approved the protocol, and all patients gave written in-
`formed consent. A steering committee oversaw the study design,
`conduct of the trial, analyses of data, and drafting of this report. This
`committee was composed of 14 members, 2 of whom were employ-
`ees of the sponsoring pharmaceutical company. An independent data
`and safety monitoring board monitored the patients’ safety. An in-
`dependent, external (end-point) committee whose members were
`unaware of the patients’ treatment assignments reviewed the data
`to determine which patients had reached the study end points. Be-
`cause highly selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors do not inhibit
`
`platelet aggregation, which is mediated by cyclooxygenase-1, there
`was a possibility that the incidence of thrombotic cardiovascular
`events would be lower among patients treated with nonselective
`cyclooxygenase inhibitors than among those treated with cyclooxy-
`genase-2–selective inhibitors. Therefore, cardiovascular events were
`also assessed for a future meta-analysis by independent committees
`whose members were unaware of the patients’ treatment assign-
`ments. A separate analysis of these events, however, was not spec-
`ified in the study design.
`
`Study End Points
`
`Patients who had potential clinical upper gastrointestinal events
`were evaluated and treated according to the standard practice of
`the physicians who were caring for them. Patients who stopped
`taking the study medication before the study ended were followed
`until the end of the study to determine whether an upper gastro-
`intestinal event had occurred. Only events that were confirmed by
`the end-point committee according to prespecified criteria (Table 1)
`and that occurred during treatment or within 14 days after the dis-
`continuation of treatment were included in the primary analysis.
`In addition, the protocol called for the analysis of all episodes
`of gastrointestinal bleeding, including confirmed and unconfirmed
`episodes of upper gastrointestinal bleeding, and bleeding from a
`site beyond the duodenum that resulted in hospitalization, dis-
`continuation of treatment, or a decrease in the hemoglobin level
`of at least 2 g per deciliter.
`
`Assessment of Efficacy
`
`For each patient both the investigator and the patient answered
`a Global Assessment of Disease Activity question at base line (af-
`ter the discontinuation of prestudy NSAIDs), 6 weeks, 4 months,
`and 12 months and at the end of the study or when treatment was
`discontinued. The score can range from 0 (“very well”) to 4 (“very
`poor”), and higher scores indicate more disease activity. The Mod-
`ified Health Assessment questionnaire was administered only to
`patients enrolled at centers in the United States at base line, at six
`weeks, and at the end of the study or when treatment was discon-
`tinued. This questionnaire evaluates the extent of functional dis-
`ability in eight types of tasks performed on a daily basis. The level
`of effort required to perform each task is assessed on a 4-point
`scale on which a score of 0 indicates no difficulty in performing the
`task and a score of 3 indicates an inability to perform the task.
`16
`Higher scores indicate more severe disability.
`
`Statistical Analysis
`
`The primary hypothesis was that the risk of confirmed upper
`gastrointestinal events (gastroduodenal perforation or obstruction,
`upper gastrointestinal bleeding, and symptomatic gastroduodenal
`ulcers) would be lower among patients who were taking rofecoxib
`than among those who were taking naproxen. Secondary hypoth-
`eses were that the risk of confirmed complicated events (perforation,
`obstruction, and severe upper gastrointestinal bleeding) and the
`risk of both confirmed and unconfirmed upper gastrointestinal
`events would be lower among patients who were taking rofecoxib.
`Cox proportional-hazards analysis was used to compare the ef-
`fect of treatment; the presence or absence of a history of gastro-
`intestinal events was a stratification factor in the analysis.
` The
`17,18
`scores for the Global Assessment of Disease Activity question and
`Modified Health Assessment questionnaire were analyzed in terms
`of the mean change from base line during the treatment period.
`The primary population for analysis comprised all randomized pa-
`tients. Subgroup analyses were conducted with use of Cox regres-
` Interactions between treatments and subgroups
`sion analysis.
`17,18
`were assessed to determine whether the effect of rofecoxib as com-
`pared with that of naproxen was consistent in the subgroups. We
`assessed data on general safety by evaluating 95 percent confidence
`intervals of the differences in the proportions of the treatment
` All statistical tests were two-sided.
`groups with each adverse event.
`19
`
`Volume 343 Number 21
`

`
`1521
`
`The New England Journal of Medicine
`
`Downloaded from nejm.org on March 19, 2015. For personal use only. No other uses without permission.
`
` Copyright © 2000 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.
`
`Page 2 of 9
`
`Patent Owner Ex. 2045
`Mylan v. Pozen
`IPR2017-01995
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`The New England Journal of Medicine
`
`T
`
`ABLE
`
` 1.
`
` C
`
`RITERIA
`
`
`
`FOR
`
` G
`
`ASTROINTESTINAL
`
` E
`
`VENTS
`
`.
`
`E
`VENT
`
`C
`RITERIA
`
` R
`EQUIRED
`
`
`
`FOR
`
` C
`ONFIRMATION
`
`
`
`OF
`
` E
`VENT
`
`Perforation due to nonmalignant
`gastric or duodenal ulcer
`Obstruction due to gastric or
`duodenal ulcer
`
`Upper gastrointestinal bleeding
`
`Gastric or duodenal ulcer
`
`Evidence of perforation on endoscopy, at surgery, on radiography (evidence of
`free intraabdominal air or extravasation of contrast medium), or at autopsy
`Occurrence of nausea and vomiting »24 hours postprandially and evidence of
`narrowing of distal portion of stomach or duodenum as a result of a nonmalig-
`nant ulcer on endoscopy, at surgery, on radiography, or at autopsy
`Episode of hematemesis or aspiration of bloody gastric fluid witnessed by health
`care provider; episode of melena witnessed by health care provider; evidence of
`active bleeding on endoscopy, at surgery, or on angiography; positive test for
`fecal occult blood with documented upper gastrointestinal lesion judged to be
`the source and associated with either clinically significant bleeding or decrease
`in volume* or evidence of visible vessel, clot, or pigmented spot on ulcer at
`endoscopy; or episode of hematemesis or melena reported by patient with up-
`per gastrointestinal lesion judged to be the source and associated with either
`clinically significant bleeding or decrease in volume* or evidence of visible ves-
`sel, clot, or pigmented spot on ulcer at endoscopy
`Evidence of gastric or duodenal ulcer on endoscopy, at surgery, on contrast-
`enhanced radiography of the upper gastrointestinal tract, or at autopsy
`
`*A decrease in volume was defined by the finding of a decrease in hemoglobin of at least 2 g per deciliter; by the
`finding of an orthostatically induced change in pulse of more than 20, change in systolic blood pressure of more than
`20 mm Hg, or change in diastolic blood pressure of more than 10 mm Hg; by the finding of other evidence of a clinically
`significant reduction in circulatory volume (e.g., clinically significant hypotension that is corrected by volume replace-
`ment); or by the need for blood transfusion.
`
`RESULTS
`Characteristics of the Patients
`Between January 1999 and July 1999, we screened
`9539 patients and enrolled 8076; 4047 were ran-
`domly assigned to receive rofecoxib, and 4029 to re-
`ceive naproxen. The major reasons for exclusion were
`a contraindication to prolonged NSAID therapy (in
`the case of 246 patients), a positive test for fecal oc-
`cult blood (203 patients), and a failure to meet in-
`clusion criteria (355 patients). The median follow-
`up was 9.0 months in both treatment groups (range,
`0.5 to 13). A total of 5742 patients (71.1 percent)
`continued to take their assigned medication until
`the end of the study. Rates of discontinuation were
`similar in the two groups: 29.3 percent in the rofe-
`coxib group (16.4 percent because of adverse events,
`6.3 percent because of a lack of efficacy, and 6.6 per-
`cent for other reasons) and 28.5 percent in the naprox-
`en group (16.1 percent because of adverse events,
`6.5 percent because of a lack of efficacy, and 5.9 per-
`cent for other reasons). Ninety-nine percent of the
`patients in both groups took their medication on at
`least 75 percent of the study days. The base-line char-
`acteristics were similar in the two groups (Table 2).
`
`Efficacy
`Rofecoxib and naproxen had similar efficacy against
`rheumatoid arthritis (Table 3). In addition, the rates
`of discontinuation of treatment owing to a lack of
`efficacy were low in both groups (6.3 percent in the
`rofecoxib group and 6.5 percent in the naproxen
`group).
`
`1522
`

`
`November 23, 2000
`
`Adverse Gastrointestinal Events
`Confirmed upper gastrointestinal events occurred
`in 177 patients. In 53 of these patients the event was
`complicated. An additional 13 patients had events that
`were reported by investigators but that were judged
`by the end-point committee to be unconfirmed.
`The time to the development of a confirmed up-
`per gastrointestinal event is shown in Figure 1. The
`rates per 100 patient-years and incidences of the pre-
`specified clinical events are shown in Tables 4 and 5,
`respectively. The relative risk of confirmed upper
`gastrointestinal events for patients in the rofecoxib
`group as compared with those in the naproxen group
`was 0.5 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.3 to 0.6;
`P<0.001), whereas the relative risk of complicated
`confirmed upper gastrointestinal events was 0.4 (95
`percent confidence interval, 0.2 to 0.8; P=0.005).
`The relative risk of complicated upper gastrointesti-
`nal bleeding for patients in the rofecoxib group as
`compared with those in the naproxen group was 0.4
`(95 percent confidence interval, 0.2 to 0.7; P=
`0.004), whereas the relative risk of bleeding beyond
`the duodenum was 0.5 (95 percent confidence in-
`terval, 0.2 to 0.9; P=0.03).
`A per-protocol analysis of the 7925 patients with-
`out substantial protocol violations demonstrated rel-
`ative risks of confirmed upper gastrointestinal events
`and complicated confirmed events of 0.4 (95 per-
`cent confidence interval, 0.3 to 0.6; P<0.001) and
`0.4 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.2 to 0.7; P=
`0.003), respectively. The results of an intention-to-
`treat analysis of all confirmed upper gastrointestinal
`
`The New England Journal of Medicine
`
`Downloaded from nejm.org on March 19, 2015. For personal use only. No other uses without permission.
`
` Copyright © 2000 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.
`
`Page 3 of 9
`
`Patent Owner Ex. 2045
`Mylan v. Pozen
`IPR2017-01995
`
`

`

`UPPER GASTROINTESTINAL TOXICITY OF ROFECOXIB AND NAPROXEN IN PATIENTS WITH RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`tients with glucocorticoid therapy at base line (rela-
`tive risk, 0.4; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.2 to
`0.6). The relative risks in these subgroups and the oth-
`er prespecified subgroups (defined according to sex,
`race or ethnic group, and location of study center)
`were not significantly different, indicating that there
`was no significant interaction between the treatments
`and the subgroups.
`Treatment with rofecoxib was associated with a
`significantly lower incidence of clinical gastrointestinal
`events regardless of the results of serologic tests for
`
`H. pylori. However, the relative risks of clinical events
`
`
`
`
`among H. pylori–negative patients and H. pylori–pos-
`itive patients were significantly different (P=0.04, data
`not shown). Finally, the relative risk of gastrointesti-
`nal events remained significantly lower (0.1; 95 per-
`cent confidence interval, 0.02 to 1.0) in the rofecoxib
`group than in the naproxen group even in a subgroup
`at very low risk (i.e., patients who were younger than
`65 years, who were negative for
`
`H. pylori, who had
`no history of a clinical gastrointestinal event, and who
`were not taking glucocorticoids at base line).
`
`General Safety
`The safety of both rofecoxib and naproxen was
` The
`similar to that reported in previous studies.
`20,21
`mortality rate was 0.5 percent in the rofecoxib group
`and 0.4 percent in the naproxen group. The rate of
`death from cardiovascular causes was 0.2 percent in
`both groups. Ischemic cerebrovascular events occurred
`in 0.2 percent of the patients in each group. Myo-
`cardial infarctions were less common in the naproxen
`group than in the rofecoxib group (0.1 percent vs.
`0.4 percent; 95 percent confidence interval for the
`difference, 0.1 to 0.6 percent; relative risk, 0.2; 95
`percent confidence interval, 0.1 to 0.7). Four percent
`of the study subjects met the criteria of the Food and
`Drug Administration (FDA) for the use of aspirin for
`secondary cardiovascular prophylaxis (presence of a
`history of myocardial infarction, angina, cerebrovas-
`cular accident, transient ischemic attack, angioplasty,
` but were not taking low-dose
`or coronary bypass)
`22
`aspirin therapy. These patients accounted for 38 per-
`cent of the patients in the study who had myocardial
`infarctions. In the other patients the difference in the
`rate of myocardial infarction between groups was not
`significant (0.2 percent in the rofecoxib group and
`0.1 percent in the naproxen group). When the data
`showing a reduction in the rate of myocardial infarc-
`tion in the naproxen group became available after the
`completion of this trial, Merck, the manufacturer of
`rofecoxib, notified all investigators in ongoing studies
`of a change in the exclusion criteria to allow patients
`to use low-dose aspirin. There was no association be-
`tween hypertension and myocardial infarction; only
`a single patient (in the rofecoxib group) had both
`hypertension and a myocardial infarction as adverse
`events.
`
`Volume 343 Number 21
`

`
`1523
`
`T
`
`ABLE
`
` 2.
`
` B
`
`ASE
`
`-L
`
`INE
`
` C
`
`HARACTERISTICS
`
`
`
`OF
`
`
`
`THE
`
` P
`
`ATIENTS
`
`.*
`
`R
`OFECOXIB
`G
`ROUP
`(N=4047)
`
`N
`APROXEN
`G
`ROUP
`(N=4029)
`
`58±10
`58±9
`3223 (79.6) 3215 (79.8)
`
`2761 (68.2)
`207 (5.1)
`101 (2.5)
`501 (12.4)
`477 (11.8)
`
`2750 (68.3)
`202 (5.0)
`85 (2.1)
`516 (12.8)
`476 (11.8)
`
`3 (0.1)
`6 (0.1)
`430 (10.6)
`455 (11.3)
`1991 (49.2)
`1996 (49.5)
`1623 (40.1)
`1572 (39.0)
`2946 (72.8) 2967 (73.6)
`
`3321 (82.1) 3331 (82.7)
`
`2260 (55.8)
`2263 (55.9)
`1847 (45.6)
`365 (9.0)
`
`2263 (56.2)
`2269 (56.3)
`1826 (45.3)
`335 (8.3)
`
`314 (7.7)
`
`316 (7.8)
`
`2.0±0.9
`1.9±0.8
`
`2.0±0.9
`1.9±0.8
`
`881 (21.8)
`2160 (53.4)
`928 (22.9)
`78 (1.9)
`
`830 (20.6)
`2199 (54.6)
`932 (23.1)
`68 (1.7)
`
`C
`HARACTERISTIC
`
`Age — yr
`Female sex — no. (%)
`Race or ethnic group — no. (%)
`White
`Black
`Asian
`Hispanic
`Other
`Duration of disease — no. (%)
`Unknown
`<2 yr
`2–10 yr
`>10 yr
`Positive test for rheumatoid
`factor — no. (%)
`Prior use of NSAIDs — no. (%)
`Treatment for rheumatoid arthritis — no. (%)
`Glucocorticoids
`Methotrexate
`Other disease-modifying drugs
`-receptor antagonists
`Low-dose H
`2
`— no. (%)†
`History of clinical gastrointestinal events
`Global Disease Activity score‡
`Patient’s assessment
`Investigator’s assessment
`American College of Rheumatology
`functional class — no. (%)§
`
`II
`
`I
`III
`IV
`
`*Plus–minus values are means ±SD. NSAIDs denotes nonselective non-
`steroidal antiinflammatory drugs.
`†A low dose was defined as a maximal daily dose of 150 mg of ranitidine,
`20 mg of famotidine, 400 mg of cimetidine, and 150 mg of nizatidine.
`‡Scores can range from 0 (“very well”) to 4 (“very poor”). Higher
`scores indicate more disease activity.
`§According to the American College of Rheumatology’s system of clas-
`sification, functional class I indicates complete ability to perform usual ac-
`tivities of daily living, and class IV indicates limited ability to perform usual
`activities of daily living.
`
`events throughout the study, including those that oc-
`curred at any time after the discontinuation of treat-
`ment, were similar and remained statistically signifi-
`cant (data not shown).
`Subgroup analyses showed the following relative
`risks of clinical gastrointestinal events among the
`patients in the rofecoxib group as compared with
`those in the naproxen group: patients with no prior
`gastrointestinal events (relative risk, 0.5; 95 percent
`confidence interval, 0.3 to 0.7), patients with prior
`gastrointestinal events (relative risk, 0.4; 95 percent
`confidence interval, 0.2 to 0.8), patients with no
`glucocorticoid therapy at base line (relative risk, 0.7;
`95 percent confidence interval, 0.4 to 1.2), and pa-
`
`The New England Journal of Medicine
`
`Downloaded from nejm.org on March 19, 2015. For personal use only. No other uses without permission.
`
` Copyright © 2000 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.
`
`Page 4 of 9
`
`Patent Owner Ex. 2045
`Mylan v. Pozen
`IPR2017-01995
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`The New England Journal of Medicine
`
`T
`
`ABLE
`
` 3.
`
`E
`
`FFECTIVENESS
`
`
`
`OF
`
` R
`
`OFECOXIB
`
`
`
`AND
`
` N
`
`APROXEN
`
`
`
`FOR
`
` R
`
`HEUMATOID
`
` A
`
`RTHRITIS
`
`.*
`
`
`
`IN
`
` S
`CORE
`
`
`
`DURING
`
`V
`ARIABLE
`
`B
`ASE
`
`-L
`INE
`
` S
`CORE
`
`C
`HANGE
`
`ROFECOXIB
`GROUP
`
`NAPROXEN
`GROUP
`
`
`
`ROFECOXIB
`GROUP
`
`NAPROXEN
`GROUP
`
` T
`REATMENT
`-SQUARES MEAN
`LEAST
`DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
`GROUPS (95% CI)†
`
`Global Disease Activity score‡
`Patient’s assessment
`Investigator’s assessment
`Modified Health Assessment
`score§
`
`1.96±0.93
`1.85±0.80
`0.59±0.49
`
`1.99±0.94
`1.87±0.78
`0.59±0.49
`
`¡0.53±0.94
`¡0.51±0.93
`¡0.52±0.85
`¡0.49±0.84
`¡0.11±0.37 ¡0.12±0.36
`
`0.00 (¡0.03 to 0.03)
`0.01 (¡0.02 to 0.04)
`0.01 (¡0.01 to 0.04)
`
`*Plus–minus values are means ±SD.
`†The values were calculated by analysis of variance in a model that included treatment assignment and presence or
`absence of a history of gastrointestinal events and the base-line value as covariates. CI denotes confidence interval.
`‡Scores can range from 0 (“very well”) to 4 (“very poor”). Higher scores indicate more disease activity.
`§Scores can range from 0 (no difficulty in performing a task) to 3 (unable to perform the task). Higher scores indicate
`more severe disability. The questionnaire was administered only to patients enrolled at centers in the United States (1735
`in the rofecoxib group and 1732 in the naproxen group).
`
`Naproxen
`
`Rofecoxib
`
`0
`
`2
`
`8
`6
`4
`Months of Follow-up
`
`10
`
`12
`
`5.0
`
`4.5
`
`4.0
`
`3.5
`
`3.0
`
`2.5
`
`2.0
`
`1.5
`
`1.0
`
`0.5
`
`0.0
`
`Cumulative Incidence (%)
`
`NO. AT RISK
`RofecoxibF
`Naproxen
`
`4047F
`4029
`
`3641F
`3644
`
`3402F
`3389
`
`3180F
`3163
`
`2806F
`2796
`
`1073F
`1071
`
`533F
`513
`
`Figure 1. Cumulative Incidence of the Primary End Point of a Confirmed Upper Gastrointestinal Event
`among All Randomized Patients.
`
`The most common adverse events leading to dis-
`continuation of treatment, excluding the gastroin-
`testinal end points, were dyspepsia, abdominal pain,
`epigastric discomfort, nausea, and heartburn. In the
`rofecoxib group, significantly fewer patients discon-
`tinued treatment as a result of any one of these five
`upper gastrointestinal symptoms than in the naprox-
`
`en group (3.5 percent vs. 4.9 percent). The rates of
`discontinuation for any gastrointestinal events, includ-
`ing gastrointestinal end points, were also significant-
`ly lower in the rofecoxib group than in the naproxen
`group (7.8 percent vs. 10.6 percent). The incidence of
`adverse effects related to renal function was low and
`was similar in the two groups (1.2 percent in the ro-
`
`1524
`

`
`November 23, 2000
`
`The New England Journal of Medicine
`
`Downloaded from nejm.org on March 19, 2015. For personal use only. No other uses without permission.
`
` Copyright © 2000 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.
`
`Page 5 of 9
`
`Patent Owner Ex. 2045
`Mylan v. Pozen
`IPR2017-01995
`
`

`

`UPPER GASTROINTESTINAL TOXICITY OF ROFECOXIB AND NAPROXEN IN PATIENTS WITH RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS
`
`TABLE 4. INCIDENCE OF GASTROINTESTINAL EVENTS IN THE TREATMENT GROUPS.
`
`TYPE OF EVENT
`
`ROFECOXIB
`GROUP
`(N=4047)
`
`NAPROXEN
`GROUP
`(N=4029)
`
`ROFECOXIB
`GROUP
`(N=4047)
`
`NAPROXEN
`GROUP
`(N=4029)
`
`RELATIVE RISK
`(95% CI)*
`
`P
`VALUE
`
`no. with event
`
`rate/100 patient-yr
`
`Confirmed upper gastrointestinal events
`Complicated confirmed upper gastrointes-
`tinal events
`Confirmed and unconfirmed upper
`gastrointestinal events†
`Complicated confirmed and unconfirmed
`upper gastrointestinal events‡
`All episodes of gastrointestinal bleeding
`
`56
`16
`
`58
`
`17
`
`31
`
`121
`37
`
`132
`
`42
`
`82
`
`2.1
`0.6
`
`2.2
`
`0.6
`
`1.1
`
`4.5
`1.4
`
`4.9
`
`1.6
`
`0.5 (0.3–0.6) <0.001
`0.4 (0.2–0.8)
`0.005
`
`0.4 (0.3–0.6) <0.001
`
`0.4 (0.2–0.7)
`
`0.002
`
`3.0
`
`0.4 (0.3–0.6) <0.001
`
`*CI denotes confidence interval.
`†The analysis includes 13 events that were reported by investigators but were considered to be unconfirmed by the
`end-point committee.
`‡The analysis includes six events that were reported by investigators but that were considered to be unconfirmed by
`the end-point committee.
`
`TABLE 5. INCIDENCE OF CONFIRMED UPPER GASTROINTESTINAL EVENTS.*
`
`TYPE OF UPPER
`GASTROINTESTINAL EVENT
`
`Perforations†
`Gastric ulcer
`Duodenal ulcer
`Obstruction†
`Bleeding
`Total
`
`ALL CONFIRMED UPPER
`GASTROINTESTINAL EVENTS
`ROFECOXIB
`NAPROXEN
`GROUP
`GROUP
`(N=4047)
`(N=4029)
`
`ALL COMPLICATED CONFIRMED
`UPPER GASTROINTESTINAL
`EVENTS
`ROFECOXIB
`GROUP
`(N=4047)
`
`NAPROXEN
`GROUP
`(N=4029)
`
`3 (0.1)‡
`28 (0.7)
`27 (0.7)
`1 (<0.1)
`14 (0.3)
`56 (1.4)
`
`number (percent)
`
`4 (0.1)
`81 (2.0)
`39 (1.0)
`0
`35 (0.9)
`121 (3.0)
`
`3 (0.1)
`1 (<0.1)
`3 (0.1)
`1 (<0.1)
`12 (0.3)§
`16 (0.4)
`
`4 (0.1)
`6 (0.1)
`5 (0.1)
`0
`32 (0.8)¶
`37 (0.9)
`
`*Patients may have been included in more than one column, but each is counted only once in the
`total.
`†Perforations and obstructions are complicated events by definition.
`‡Two confirmed upper gastrointestinal events occurred after only one dose of rofecoxib and most
`likely resulted from prior use of nonselective nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs.
`§The cause or source of bleeding was gastric ulcers in five patients, duodenal ulcers in five, and
`other upper gastrointestinal source in three. One patient in the rofecoxib group had both a gastric
`and a duodenal ulcer.
`¶The cause or source of bleeding was gastric ulcers in 16 patients, duodenal ulcers in 9, and other
`upper gastrointestinal sources in 7.
`
`fecoxib group and 0.9 percent in the naproxen group);
`only 0.2 percent of patients in each group discon-
`tinued treatment because of these adverse effects.
`
`DISCUSSION
`We found that, in patients with rheumatoid arthri-
`tis, treatment with rofecoxib at twice the maximal dose
`approved by the FDA for long-term use resulted in sig-
`
`nificantly lower rates of clinically important upper gas-
`trointestinal events and complicated upper gastrointes-
`tinal events than did treatment with a standard dose
`(1000 mg per day) of naproxen. We also found that
`the incidence of complicated upper gastrointestinal
`bleeding and bleeding from beyond the duodenum
`was significantly lower among patients who received
`rofecoxib. Only 41 patients would need to be treated
`
`Volume 343 Number 21
`
`· 1525
`
`The New England Journal of Medicine
`
`Downloaded from nejm.org on March 19, 2015.

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket