European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology

, Volume 64, Issue 8, pp 829–834

Was the thrombotic risk of rofecoxib predictible from the French Pharmacovigilance Database before 30 September 2004?

  • A. Sommet
  • S. Grolleau
  • H. Bagheri
  • M. Lapeyre-Mestre
  • J. L. Montastruc
  • French Network of Regional Pharmacovigilance Centres
Pharmacoepidemiology and Prescription



Rofecoxib was withdrawn from the market on 30 September 2004 following the results of a randomized controlled trial. Following this sudden decision, several controversies occurred in the literature to determine whether this adverse drug reaction (ADR) could have been detected earlier. The aim of this study was to investigate whether this kind of signal could have been seen using the French Pharmacovigilance Database before this date of rofecoxib withdrawal.


Using cases registered in the French Pharmacovigilance Database from May 2000 to December 2006, we applied the case–noncase method to “serious” thrombotic ADRs reported with oral formulations of rofecoxib or celecoxib in patients older than 15 years. Cases were all notifications of thrombotic ADRs [World Health Organization Adverse Reaction Terminology (WHO-ART) codes 1300] occurred under coxib (rofecoxib, celecoxib) and noncases all other reports registered in the database (whatever the drug). We calculated a cumulative odds ratio (OR) from 20 May 2000 to 31 December 2006, with a special interest for the period before the 30 September 2004.


Among the 50,087 “serious” ADRs registered in the database during this period, 1,127 were thrombotic ones. Rofecoxib exposure was significantly associated with high values of odds ratio (OR) [4.2 (95% CI 1.97–8.61)] for thrombotic ADRs as early as the end of 2001. The values of ADR reporting ORs remained high (3.0–3.5) until 2006. For celecoxib, a significant trend occurred only from September 2004.


Despite the compulsory limits of the case/noncase methodology, this study found an association between rofecoxib exposure and the occurrence of “serious” thrombotic ADRs as early as the end of the first year of rofecoxib marketing in France. The association between celecoxib and the occurrence of such ADRs appears less clear. Our work also shows the potential use of careful analysis of pharmacovigilance databases (investigating, for example, cumulative values of risk) in the early identification of new ADRs.


Rofecoxib Celecoxib Thrombotic adverse drug reaction Pharmacovigilance 


  1. 1.
    Hawkey CJ (1999) COX-2 inhibitors. Lancet 353:307–314PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bombardier C, Laine L, Reicin A, Shapiro D, Burgos-Vargas R, Davis B, Day R, Ferraz MB, Hawkey CJ, Hochberg MC, Kvien TK, Schnitzer TJ, VIGOR Study Group (2000) Comparison of upper gastrointestinal toxicity of rofecoxib and naproxen in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. N Engl J Med 343:1520–1528PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Silverstein FE, Faich G Goldstein JL, Simon LS, Pincus T, Whelton A, Makuch R, Eisen G, Agrawal NM, Stenson WF, Burr AM, Zhao WW, Kent JD, Lefkowith JB, Verburg KM, Geis GS (2000) Gastrointestinal toxicity with celecoxib vs nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis: the CLASS study: a randomized controlled trial. Celecoxib Long-term Arthritis Safety Study. JAMA 284:1247–1255PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bresalier RS, Sandler RS, Quan H, Bolognese JA, Oxenius B, Horgan K, Lines C, Riddell R, Morton D, Lanas A, Konstam MA, Baron JA, Adenomatous Polyp Prevention on Vioxx (APPROVe) Trial Investigators (2005) Cardiovascular events associated with rofecoxib in a colorectal adenoma chemoprevention trial. N Engl J Med 352:1092–1102PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Clark DWJ, Laton D, Shakir AW (2004) Do some inhibitors of COX-2 increase the risk of thromboembolic events ? Drug Saf 27:427–456PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Montastruc JL, Lapeyre-Mestre M, Gony M, Lugardon S, Bagheri H (2004) Coxibs, which real therapeutic advance? Recent pharmacoepidemiological data. Therapie 59:201–205PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Arellano FM (2005) The withdrawal of rofecoxib. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 14:213–217PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jüni P, Reichenbach S, Egger M (2005) COX 2 inhibitors, traditional NSAIDs and the heart. Br Med J 330:1342–1343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nissen SE (2006) Adverse cardiovascular effects of rofecoxib. N Engl J Med 355:203–204PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Graham D, Campen D, Hui R, Spence M, Cheetham C, Levy G, Shoor S, Ray WA (2005) Risk of acute myocardial infarction and sudden cardiac death in patients treated with cyclo-oxygenase 2 selective and bnon-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs: nested case-control study. Lancet 365:475–481PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Strand V (2007) Are COX-2 inhibitors preferable to non-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in patients with risk of cardiovascular events taking low-dose aspirin? Lancet 370:2138–2151PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Montastruc JL, Sommet A, Lacroix I, Olivier P, Durrieu G, Damase-Michel C, Lapeyre-Mestre M, Bagheri H (2006) Pharmacovigilance for evaluating adverse drug reactions: value, organization and methods. Joint Bone Spine 73:629–632PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Stricker BH, Tijssen JG (1992) Serum sickness-like reactions to cefaclor. J Clin Epidemiol 45:1177–1184PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Egberts AC, Meyboon RH, De Koning FH, Bakker A, Leufkens HG (1997) Nonpuerpueral lactation associated with antidepressant drug use. Br J Clin Pharmacol 44:277–281PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Moore N, Kreft-Jais C, Haramburu F, Noblet C, Andrejak M, Ollagnier M, Begaud B (1998) Reports of hypoglycaemia associated with the use of ACE inhibitors and other drugs: a case/noncase study in the French pharmacovigilance system database. Br J Clin Pharmacol 44:513–518CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Egberts AC, Meyboon RH, Van Puijenbroek EP (2002) Use of measures of disproportionality in pharmacovigilance: three dutch examples. Drug Saf 25:453–458PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lugardon S, Lapeyre-Mestre M, Montastruc JL, The French Network of Regional Pharmacovigilance Centres (2004) Upper gastrointestinal adverse drug reactions and cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors (celecoxib and rofecoxib): a case/noncase study from the French Pharmacovigilance Database. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 60:673–677PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    WHO (1992) International monitoring of adverse reactions to drugs: adverse reaction terminology. WHO collaborating Centre for International Drug Monitoring, UppsalaGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Begaud B, Evreux JC, Jouglard J, Lagier G (1985) Imputation of the unexpected or toxic effects of drugsActualization of the method used in France. Therapie 40:111–118PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Van der Heijden PG, van Puijenbroek EP, van Buuren S, van der Hofstede JW (2002) On the assessment of adverse drug reactions from spontaneous reporting systems: the influence of underreporting on odds ratio. Stat Med 21:2027–2044PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wilson AM, Thabane L, Holbrook A (2004) Application of data mining data in pharmacovigilance. Br J Clin Pharmacol 57:127–134PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Shakir SAW (2007) Thoughs on signal detection in Pharmacovigilance. Drug Saf 30:603–606PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hand DJ (2007) Principles of data mining. Drug Saf 30:621–622PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Topol EJ (2004) Failing the public health – Rofecoxib, Merck, and the FDA. New Engl J Med 351:1707–1709PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Mukherjee D, Nissen SE, Topol EL (2001) Risk of cardiovascular events associated with selective COX-2 inhibitors. JAMA 286:954–957PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Jüni P, Nartey L, Reichenbach S, Sterchi R, Dieppe PA, Egger M (2004) Risk of cardiovascular events and rofecoxib: cumulative meta-analysis. Lancet 364:2021–2029PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Prescrire Rédaction (2002) Effets indésirables cardiovasculaires des coxibs. Rev Prescr 22:596–597Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Zhao SZ, Reynolds MW, Lejkowith J, Whelton A, Arrelano FM (2001) A comparison of renal-related adverse drug reactions between rofecoxib and celecoxib, based on the World Health Organization/Uppsala Monitoring Centre Safety Database. Clin Ther 23:1478–1491PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Layton D, Hughes K, Harris S, Shakir SAW (2003) Comparison of the incidence rates of thromboembolic events reported in patients prescribed rofecoxib and meloxicam in general practice in England using prescription-event monitoring (PEM) data. Rheumatology 42:1342–1353PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Layton D, Heeley E, Hughes K, Shakir SAW (2003) Comparison of the incidence rates of thromboembolic events reported in patients prescribed celecoxib and meloxicam in general practice in England using prescription-event monitoring (PEM) data. Rheumatology 42:1354–1364PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kasliwal R, Layton D, Harris S, Wilton L, Shakir SA (2005) A comparison of reported gastrointestinal and thromboembolic events reported between rofecoxib and celecoxib using observational data. Drug Saf 28:803–816PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Vu D, Murty M, McMorran M (2002) Selective COX-2 inhibitors: suspected cardiovascular/cerebrovascular adverse drug reactions. Can Adv Reactions News 2:1–3Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Warmer TD, Mitchell JA (2008) COX-2 selectivity alone does not define the cardiovascular risks associated with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Lancet 371:270–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. Sommet
    • 1
    • 2
  • S. Grolleau
    • 1
  • H. Bagheri
    • 1
    • 2
  • M. Lapeyre-Mestre
    • 1
    • 2
  • J. L. Montastruc
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • French Network of Regional Pharmacovigilance Centres
  1. 1.Laboratoire de Pharmacologie Médicale et Clinique, Unité de Pharmacoépidémiologie, EA 3696Université de Toulouse, Faculté de MédecineToulouseFrance
  2. 2.Service de Pharmacologie CliniqueCentre Midi-Pyrénées de PharmacoVigilance, de Pharmacoépidémiologie et d’Informations sur le Médicament, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de ToulouseToulouseFrance
  3. 3.Laboratoire de Pharmacologie Médicale et CliniqueFaculté de MédecineToulouseFrance

Personalised recommendations