Background: The period of time during which a patient is exposed to a drug does not necessarily correspond to the period during which the drug produces the adverse effect under consideration. We propose the term Pharmacologically pertinent period of effect (PPPE) to address this time window. We explored the PPPE in light of the rofecoxib saga.
Methods: We identified the observational database studies of rofecoxib at doses 25 and 50 mg daily and thromboembolic events. We also obtained the Kaplan-Meier curves of Vioxx Gastrointestinal Outcomes Research trial (VIGOR) and Adenomatous Polyp Prevention on Vioxx (APPROVE) trials.
Results: We found seven observational studies with nine analyses. All the studies only looked at current exposure. At the dose of 25 mg, only three of nine analyses were barely statistically significant. At the dose of 50 mg, the risk ratios were much higher. The visual inspection of the Kaplan-Meier curves shows that in the APPROVE trial (25 mg), the placebo and rofecoxib curves start separating to become statistically significantly different only after 36 months. In contrast the VIGOR (50 mg), curves start separating very early and the divergence increases after 8 months.
Discussion: The 50 mg observational studies, looking at current exposure, correctively identified the almost immediate increase in risk evident in the VIGOR Kaplan-Meier curves. The absence of an immediate increase in risk shown by the APPROVE trial was also correctively identified by most observational 25 mg studies. To our knowledge no observational study was done on the long-term cardiac toxicity of the 25-mg dose. It would thus appear that the two doses of rofecoxib have different PPPEs.
Keywords: exposure; misclassification; myocardial infarction; pharmacoepidemiology; pharmacology; rofecoxib; time windows.
© 2019 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.