Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Jay L. Goldstein is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Jay L. Goldstein.


Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology | 2005

Video capsule endoscopy to prospectively assess small bowel injury with celecoxib, naproxen plus omeprazole, and placebo

Jay L. Goldstein; Glenn M. Eisen; Blair S. Lewis; Ian M. Gralnek; Steve Zlotnick; John G. Fort

BACKGROUND & AIMS Data indicate that cyclooxygenase-2-specific inhibitors cause less gastroduodenal mucosal damage than nonspecific NSAIDS, but their effects on the small bowel mucosa are less well recognized. In a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with video capsule endoscopy (VCE) we prospectively evaluated the incidence of small bowel injury in healthy subjects treated with celecoxib compared to naproxen plus omeprazole. METHODS We randomly assigned subjects with normal baseline VCEs to celecoxib 200 mg twice daily (n = 120), naproxen 500 mg twice daily plus omeprazole 20 mg once daily (n = 118), or placebo (n = 118) for 2 weeks. The primary end point was the mean number of small bowel mucosal breaks per subject. RESULTS Baseline VCE found small bowel lesions in 13.8% (57/413) of screened subjects, who became ineligible for randomization. The mean number of small bowel mucosal breaks per subject and the percentage of subjects with these mucosal breaks were 2.99 +/- 0.51, 55% for naproxen/omeprazole compared to 0.32 +/- 0.10, 16% for celecoxib and 0.11 +/- 0.04, 7% for placebo (P < .001, both comparisons). The magnitude of the difference between celecoxib and placebo was small but statistically significant (P = .04). CONCLUSIONS Among healthy subjects with lesion-free baseline VCEs, celecoxib was associated with significantly fewer small bowel mucosal breaks than naproxen plus omeprazole. This study also showed that the background incidence of small bowel lesions in healthy adults is not insignificant and should be considered in future trials with VCE.


Gastrointestinal Endoscopy | 2002

Guideline for the management of ingested foreign bodies.

Glenn M. Eisen; Todd H. Baron; Jason A. Dominitz; Douglas O. Faigel; Jay L. Goldstein; John F. Johanson; J.Shawn Mallery; Hareth M. Raddawi; John J. Vargo; J. Patrick Waring; Robert D. Fanelli; Jo Wheeler-Harbough

This is one of a series of statements discussing the utilization of gastrointestinal endoscopy in common clinical situations. The Standards of Practice Committee of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy prepared this text. In preparing this guideline, a MEDLINE literature search was performed, and additional references were obtained from the bibliographies of the identified articles and from recommendations of expert consultants. When little or no data exist from well-designed prospective trials, emphasis is given to results from large series and reports from recognized experts. Guidelines for appropriate utilization of endoscopy are based on a critical review of the available data and expert consensus. Further controlled clinical studies are needed to clarify aspects of this statement, and revision may be necessary as new data appear. Clinical consideration may justify a course of action at variance to these recommendations.


Gastrointestinal Endoscopy | 2002

Guideline on the management of anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapy for endoscopic procedures

Glenn M. Eisen; Todd H. Baron; Jason A. Dominitz; Douglas O. Faigel; Jay L. Goldstein; John F. Johanson; J.Shawn Mallery; Hareth M. Raddawi; John J. Vargo; J. Patrick Waring; Robert D. Fanelli; Jo Wheeler-Harbough

This is one of a series of statements discussing the practice of gastrointestinal endoscopy in common clinical situations. It is intended to aid endoscopists in determining the appropriate use of endoscopic procedures in conjunction with anticoagulation and/or antiplatelet therapy. Guidelines for the appropriate practice of endoscopy are based on critical review of the available data and expert consensus. Controlled clinical studies would be beneficial to clarify some aspects of this statement and revision might be necessary as new data appear. Clinical consideration may justify a course of action at variance from these specific recommendations.


The American Journal of Gastroenterology | 2000

Reduced risk of upper gastrointestinal ulcer complications with celecoxib, a novel COX-2 inhibitor.

Jay L. Goldstein; Fred E. Silverstein; Naurang M. Agrawal; Richard C. Hubbard; June Kaiser; Clement J. Maurath; Kenneth M. Verburg; G. Steven Geis

OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to assess the rate of upper gastrointestinal (UGI) ulcer complications (bleeding, perforation, or gastric outlet obstruction) associated with celecoxib, a specific COX-2 inhibitor, compared with the rate associated with nonspecific, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs).METHODS:A pooled analysis was conducted of 14 multicenter, double-blind, randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) and a separate analysis of one long-term open label trial that assessed the efficacy and safety of celecoxib for symptomatic treatment of arthritis. The RCTs enrolled 11,008 patients with osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis treated for 2–24 wk; the long-term open label trial enrolled 5,155 patients receiving celecoxib for a maximum of 2 yr. In the RCTs, patients were randomly assigned to receive placebo (n = 1,864; 208 patient-years), celecoxib 25–400 mg b.i.d. (n = 6,376; 1,020 patient-years), or a comparator NSAID (n = 2,768; 535 patient-years); NSAIDs were naproxen 500 mg b.i.d., diclofenac 50 or 75 mg b.i.d., or ibuprofen 800 mg t.i.d.). In the long-term, open-label trial, patients received celecoxib 100–400 mg b.i.d. for up to 2 yr (n = 5,155; 5,002 patient-years). The principal outcome measure of this analysis was development of a UGI ulcer complication, which was prospectively defined as bleeding, perforation, or gastric outlet obstruction. Ulcer complications were assessed and adjudicated by persons blinded to the patients treatment assignment or the study in which the patient participated.RESULTS:In the RCTs, UGI ulcer complications occurred in no placebo patients (0 of 1,864 patients), in 2 of 6,376 celecoxib patients (0.03%), and in 9 of 2,768 patients receiving an NSAID (0.33%), corresponding to annual incidences of 0.20% for celecoxib (p > 0.05vs placebo) and 1.68% for NSAIDs (p = 0.002vs celecoxib and placebo). In the long-term open-label trial, nine UGI ulcer complications occurred, for an incidence of 0.17% and an annualized incidence of 0.18%.CONCLUSIONS:The incidence of UGI ulcer complications associated with celecoxib was 8-fold lower than with nonspecific NSAIDs. The incidence of ulcer complications observed in celecoxib-treated patients was similar to that in patients receiving placebo in the RCTs, and to that in non-NSAID users reported in the literature.


Gastrointestinal Endoscopy | 2003

Guidelines for Conscious Sedation and Monitoring During Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

J. Patrick Waring; Todd H. Baron; William K. Hirota; Jay L. Goldstein; Brian C. Jacobson; Jonathan A. Leighton; J.Shawn Mallery; Douglas O. Faigel

This is one of a series of statements discussing the utilization of GI endoscopy in common clinical situations. The Standards of Practice Committee of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy prepared this text. In preparing this guideline, a MEDLINE literature search was performed, and additional references were obtained from the bibliographies of the identified articles and from recommendations of expert consultants. When little or no data exist from well-designed prospective trials, emphasis is given to results from large series and reports from recognized experts. Guidelines for appropriate utilization of endoscopy are based on a critical review of the available data and expert consensus. Further controlled clinical studies are needed to clarify aspects of this statement, and revision may be necessary as new data appear. Clinical consideration may justify a course of action at variance to these recommendations.


The Lancet | 2010

Celecoxib versus omeprazole and diclofenac in patients with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis (CONDOR): a randomised trial

Francis K.L. Chan; Angel Lanas; James M. Scheiman; Manuela F. Berger; Ha Nguyen; Jay L. Goldstein

BACKGROUND Cyclo-oxygenase (COX)-2-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and non-selective NSAIDs plus a proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) have similar upper gastrointestinal outcomes, but risk of clinical outcomes across the entire gastrointestinal tract might be lower with selective drugs than with non-selective drugs. We aimed to compare risk of gastrointestinal events associated with celecoxib versus diclofenac slow release plus omeprazole. METHODS We undertook a 6-month, double-blind, randomised trial in patients with osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis at increased gastrointestinal risk at 196 centres in 32 countries or territories. Patients tested negative for Helicobacter pylori and were aged 60 years and older or 18 years and older with previous gastroduodenal ulceration. We used a computer-generated randomisation schedule to assign patients in a 1:1 ratio to receive celecoxib 200 mg twice a day or diclofenac slow release 75 mg twice a day plus omeprazole 20 mg once a day. Patients and investigators were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was a composite of clinically significant upper or lower gastrointestinal events adjudicated by an independent committee. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00141102. FINDINGS 4484 patients were randomly allocated to treatment (2238 celecoxib; 2246 diclofenac plus omeprazole) and were included in intention-to-treat analyses. 20 (0.9%) patients receiving celecoxib and 81 (3.8%) receiving diclofenac plus omeprazole met criteria for the primary endpoint (hazard ratio 4.3, 95% CI 2.6-7.0; p<0.0001). 114 (6%) patients taking celecoxib versus 167 (8%) taking diclofenac plus omeprazole withdrew early because of gastrointestinal adverse events (p=0.0006). INTERPRETATION Risk of clinical outcomes throughout the gastrointestinal tract was lower in patients treated with a COX-2-selective NSAID than in those receiving a non-selective NSAID plus a PPI. These findings should encourage review of approaches to reduce risk of NSAID treatment. FUNDING Pfizer Inc.


Gastrointestinal Endoscopy | 2003

Guidelines for Antibiotic Prophylaxis for GI Endoscopy

William K. Hirota; Kathryn Petersen; Todd H. Baron; Jay L. Goldstein; Brian C. Jacobson; Jonathan A. Leighton; J.Shawn Mallery; J. Patrick Waring; Robert D. Fanelli; Jo Wheeler-Harbough; Douglas O. Faigel

This is one of a series of statements discussing the utilization of GI endoscopy in common clinical situations. The Standards of Practice Committee of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy prepared this text. In preparing this guideline, a MEDLINE literature search was performed, and additional references were obtained from the bibliographies of the identified articles and from recommendations of expert consultants. When little or no data exist from well-designed prospective trials, emphasis is given to results from large series and reports from recognized experts. Guidelines for appropriate utilization of endoscopy are based on a critical review of the available data and expert consensus. Further controlled clinical studies are needed to clarify aspects of this statement, and revision may be necessary as new data appear. Clinical consideration may justify a course of action at variance to these recommendations.


Gastrointestinal Endoscopy | 2002

Complications of upper GI endoscopy

Glenn M. Eisen; Todd H. Baron; Jason A. Dominitz; Douglas O. Faigel; Jay L. Goldstein; John F. Johanson; J.Shawn Mallery; Hareth M. Raddawi; John J. Vargo; J. Patrick Waring; Robert D. Fanelli; Jo Wheeler-Harbough

This is one of a series of statements discussing the utilization of gastrointestinal endoscopy in common clinical situations. The Standards of Practice Committee of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy prepared this text. In preparing this guideline, a MEDLINE literature search was performed, and additional references were obtained from the bibliographies of the identified articles and from recommendations of expert consultants. When little or no data exist from well-designed prospective trials, emphasis is given to results from large series and reports from recognized experts. Guidelines for appropriate utilization of endoscopy are based on a critical review of the available data and expert consensus. Further controlled clinical studies are needed to clarify aspects of this statement, and revision may be necessary as new data appear. Clinical consideration may justify a course of action at variance to these recommendations.


The American Journal of Gastroenterology | 2001

Reduced incidence of gastroduodenal ulcers with celecoxib, a novel cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor, compared to naproxen in patients with arthritis

Jay L. Goldstein; P Correa; William W. Zhao; A.M Burr; Richard C. Hubbard; Kenneth M. Verburg; G.S Geis

OBJECTIVE:Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) block prostaglandin production by inhibiting cyclooxygenase (COX); they are believed to cause gastroduodenal damage by inhibiting the COX-1 isoform and to have analgesic and anti-inflammatory effects by inhibiting the COX-2 isoform. As compared to conventional NSAIDs, celecoxib, a COX-2 specific inhibitor, has been shown in previous single posttreatment endoscopy studies to be associated with lower gastroduodenal ulcer rates. In response to concerns that such studies may under-represent ulceration rates, the present serial endoscopy study was designed to compare cumulative gastroduodenal ulcer rates associated with the use of celecoxib to those of naproxen, a conventional NSAID.METHODS:In this double-blind, parallel-group, multicenter study, 537 patients with osteoarthritis (OA) or rheumatoid arthritis (RA) were randomized to treatment with celecoxib 200 mg b.i.d. (n = 270) or naproxen 500 mg b.i.d. (n = 267) for 12 wk. Gastroduodenal damage was determined from esophagogastroduodenoscopy after 4, 8, and 12 wk of therapy. Arthritis efficacy was evaluated with Patients and Physicians Global Assessments.RESULTS:Gastroduodenal ulcer rates after celecoxib and naproxen treatment were 4% versus 19% in the 0–4 wk interval (p < 0.001), 2% versus 14% in the 4–8 wk interval (p < 0.001), and 2% versus 10% in the 8–12 wk interval (p < 0.001), respectively. After 12 wk of treatment, the cumulative incidence of gastroduodenal ulcers was 9% with celecoxib and 41% with naproxen. In the celecoxib group, gastroduodenal ulcers were significantly associated with Helicobacter pylori status (p < 0.05), concurrent aspirin usage (p = 0.001), and a history of ulcer (p = 0.010), but not with disease type (OA/RA), age, gender, other relevant medical histories, or concurrent corticosteroid or disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs usage (p > 0.05). Celecoxib produced a significantly lower incidence rate of both gastric (p < 0.001) and duodenal (p < 0.030) ulcers. The two agents produced similar improvements in Patients and Physicians Global Assessments of arthritis efficacy. The incidence of adverse events and withdrawal rates did not differ significantly between treatments.CONCLUSIONS:As compared to naproxen (500 mg b.i.d.), use of celecoxib (200 mg b.i.d.), a COX-2 specific agent, at the recommended RA dose and twice the most frequently prescribed OA dose, was associated with lower rates of gastric, duodenal, and gastroduodenal ulcers but had comparable efficacy, in patients with OA and RA.


Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics | 2007

Small bowel mucosal injury is reduced in healthy subjects treated with celecoxib compared with ibuprofen plus omeprazole, as assessed by video capsule endoscopy

Jay L. Goldstein; Glenn M. Eisen; Basil S. Lewis; I. M. Gralnek; James Aisenberg; P. Bhadra; M. F. Berger

Background  Small bowel mucosal injury associated with non‐selective non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs is being increasingly recognized.

Collaboration


Dive into the Jay L. Goldstein's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

John F. Johanson

Medical College of Wisconsin

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge