Evidence Hub

Efficacy and safety of celecoxib on the incidence of recurrent colorectal adenomas: a systematic review and meta-analysis

S. Veettil, S. Nathisuwan, S. Ching, P. Jinatongthai, Kean Ghee Lim, S. Kew, N. Chaiyakunapruk

Cancer Management and Research, 2019

4,420 participants · 22 citations

Abstract

Background Celecoxib has previously been shown to be effective in reducing recurrent colorectal adenomas, but its long-term effects are unknown. In addition, safety issues are of major concern. Therefore, we examined the efficacy and safety of celecoxib as a chemopreventive agent along with its posttreatment effect. Methods We performed a meta-analysis based on a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing celecoxib at various doses (400 mg once daily, 200 mg twice daily, and 400 mg twice daily) vs placebo in persons with history of colorectal adenomas. Several databases were searched from inception up to April 2018. Long-term follow-ups of RCTs were also included to evaluate posttreatment effect. Primary outcome was the incidence of recurrent colorectal adenomas. Various safety outcomes were evaluated, especially cardiovascular (CV) events. Risk–benefit integrated analyses were also performed. Results A total of three RCTs (4,420 patients) and three post-trial studies (2,159 patients) were included in the analysis. Use of celecoxib at any dose for 1–3 years significantly reduced the incidence of recurrent advanced adenomas (risk ratio, 0.42 [95% CI, 0.34–0.53]) and any adenomas (0.67 [95% CI, 0.62–0.72]) compared with placebo. Subgroup analysis on different dosing suggested a greater effect with 400 mg twice daily. However, celecoxib 400 mg twice daily significantly increased the risk of serious adverse (1.2 [95% CI, 1.0–1.5]) and CV events (3.42 [95%…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 4,420 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free