IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0320379.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing the efficacy and safety of different nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the treatment of osteoarthritis: A systematic review and network meta-analysis based on RCT trials

Author

Listed:
  • Pan JiaoYi
  • Sun YongQi
  • Guo KeChun
  • Li XingYu
  • Liu ZeZhong
  • Duan Jin Shuai
  • Gong YouJia
  • Xu Bing
  • Wang XiaoFeng

Abstract

Introduction: Osteoarthritis (OA) as a degenerative disease, has seen a continuous rise in incidence and prevalence globally since 1990, imposing a significant disease burden. NSAIDs (Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs) as symptomatic medications for OA treatment, hold an indispensable position in clinical practice. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of different NSAIDs in the treatment of OA through Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis (NMA). Methods: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on NSAIDs for OA treatment were retrieved from PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases. The search timeframe was from the inception of each database up to June 1, 2024. Outcome indicators for NMA were all conducted using a random-effects model. MetaInsight and Stata 14.0 software were used in R for calculations and plotting of NMA. Measurement data were represented by mean difference (MD), and count data by odds ratio (OR); a 95% confidence interval (CI) was also calculated for each effect size. Results: This study included 31 studies, involving 68,539 patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA) and 16 interventions. NMA results showed that compared to the placebo, Tiaprofenic reduced the VAS score (MD = -0.16, 95% CI: (-0.46 to 0.14), P > 0.05), albeit without significant difference; meanwhile, Diclofenac reduced the total WOMAC score in KOA patients (MD = -0.41, 95% CI: -1.05 to 0.24, P > 0.05). Compared to the placebo, Etoricoxib was the best medication for improving the WOMAC pain subscale score (MD = -0.44; 95% CI: -0.61 to -0.26); Naproxen significantly improved the WOMAC Function score in KOA patients after administration (MD = -0.43; 95% CI: -0.82 to -0.04); Diclofenac intervention significantly reduced the WOMAC Stiffness score in KOA patients (MD = -0.40; 95% CI: -0.67 to -0.13). In terms of adverse event rates, compared to the placebo, the use of Etoricoxib significantly increased the incidence of cardiovascular adverse events (OR = 0.56, 95% CI: 0.32–0.99); Ketoprofen had fewer gastrointestinal adverse events during the medication process (OR = 0.09, 95% CI: 0.04–0.20); Licofelone had a lower rate of other adverse events during the medication process (OR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.45–1.40, P > 0.05). Therefore, the results indicate that Etoricoxib, Tiaprofenic, Naproxen, Diclofenac, and Ketoprofen have better clinical efficacy and safety. Conclusion: Compared to other NSAIDs, Etoricoxib, Tiaprofenic, Naproxen, and Diclofenac play a more effective role in improving clinical symptoms of OA; in terms of reducing the incidence of adverse events, Ketoprofen has a lower chance of adverse events. However, the possibility of these results still needs further clinical and basic research for verification.

Suggested Citation

  • Pan JiaoYi & Sun YongQi & Guo KeChun & Li XingYu & Liu ZeZhong & Duan Jin Shuai & Gong YouJia & Xu Bing & Wang XiaoFeng, 2025. "Assessing the efficacy and safety of different nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the treatment of osteoarthritis: A systematic review and network meta-analysis based on RCT trials," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 20(5), pages 1-19, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0320379
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0320379
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0320379
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0320379&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0320379?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0320379. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.