ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2024
Celecoxib and rofecoxib have different effects on small intestinal ischemia/reperfusion injury in rats.
Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Pharmacological strategies for intestinal ischemia-reperfusion injury: mechanisms and therapeutic advances.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Intestinal ischemia/reperfusion (I/R) injury is associated with high mortality and there is an unmet need for novel therapies. The intestinal expression of cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) increases rapidly after mesenteric I/R, but it is still a question of debate whether selective COX-2 inhibitors can mitigate I/R-induced gut injury. Here we aimed to compare the effect of celecoxib and rofecoxib, two selective COX-2 inhibitors, on intestinal I/R-induced injury in rats. Methods: Wistar rats were treated with celecoxib (10 and 100 mg/kg), rofecoxib (5 and 50 mg/kg), or vehicle for 8 days via gavage and then were subjected to sham operation or mesenteric I/R. Small intestinal inflammation and tissue damage were assessed by histology and quantification of inflammatory and tight junction proteins. The intestinal activity of COX enzymes was determined by a COX activity assay. Results: The higher dose of celecoxib reduced the I/R-associated increase in inflammatory mediators (myeloperoxidase, pentraxin 3, COX-2, interleukin-1β) and loss of tight junction proteins (claudin-1, occludin), whereas the lower dose of celecoxib was only marginally effective. However, even high-dose celecoxib failed to prevent the histological injury of the mucosa. In contrast to celecoxib, rofecoxib did not affect intestinal inflammation and injury at any of the tested doses. Neither celecoxib nor rofecoxib affected the I/R-induced changes of HO-1 and PPAR-γ, known off-targets of COX-inhibitors, but celecoxib increased the I/R-induced elevation of Bax/Bcl-2, a marker of apoptosis, whereas rofecoxib reduced the elevation of phospho-Akt. Importantly, high-dose celecoxib, but not rofecoxib, has already reduced intestinal COX-1 activity. Conclusion: Our study provides evidence for the higher anti-inflammatory efficacy of celecoxib compared to rofecoxib in mesenteric I/R injury, which is likely due to its lower selectivity for COX-2. However, even high-dose celecoxib was unable to reduce the mucosal damage. Our results suggest that selective COX-2 inhibitors have only limited therapeutic value in intestinal I/R injury.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.