Double blind placebo controlled trial of pulse treatment with methylprednisolone combined with disease modifying drugs in rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE--To assess whether monthly treatment with intravenous methylprednisolone enhances or accelerates the effect of disease modifying drugs in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. DESIGN--A 12 month double blind, placebo controlled, multicentre trial in which patients with active rheumatoid arthritis were randomly allocated to receive pulses of either methylprednisolone or saline every four weeks for six months. At the start of the pulse treatment all patients were started on penicillamine or azathioprine. SETTING--Four rheumatology departments in Denmark. PATIENTS--97 Patients (71 women, 26 men) aged 23-84 (mean 60) who had active rheumatoid arthritis of at least four weeks'' duration despite treatment with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES--Monthly clinical recording of morning stiffness, number of tender and swollen joints, blinded observers'' evaluation of therapeutic effect, and patients'' self assessed condition. Concomitant laboratory measurements of erythrocyte sedimentation rate and concentrations of C reactive protein and haemoglobin. Radiography to determine the number of erosions at the start of treatment and after 12 months. RESULTS--57 Patients completed the trial, taking the same disease modifying drug throughout. Evaluation four weeks after each pulse treatment and at 12 month follow up showed no significant differences between the methylprednisolone and placebo groups in any of the clinical or laboratory variables. Radiography showed the same degree of progression of erosions in both groups. Evaluation of the total data on 97 patients and on the 57 who completed the trial showed the same lack of significance between the treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS--Intravenous pulse treatment with steroids can be recommended only for rapid temporary relief of flares of disease in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. The response is short lived. Repeated pulses of methylprednisolone at four week intervals do not improve the results of treatment with drugs that induce remission such as penicillamine and azathioprine.     

Sulphasalazine in rheumatoid arthritis: a double blind comparison of sulphasalazine with placebo and sodium aurothiomalate.

Uncontrolled studies have suggested that sulphasalazine may be an effective second line agent in rheumatoid arthritis. Sulphasalazine was therefore compared with placebo and intramuscular sodium aurothiomalate in 90 patients with active rheumatoid arthritis. After six months'' treatment both sulphasalazine and sodium aurothiomalate had produced significant clinical and laboratory benefit, whereas placebo had produced no significant change in any variable. Thirteen patients stopped taking the placebo because of lack of effect whereas only two patients stopped taking sulphasalazine and one sodium aurothiomalate for this reason. The major toxicity encountered in the group treated with sulphasalazine was nausea or vomiting, or both; this may be related to slow acetylator phenotype. Sulphasalazine appears to be an effective second line agent, and further pharmacokinetic studies might prove useful in diminishing gastrointestinal side effects.     

Sulphasalazine in ankylosing spondylitis: a double blind controlled study in 60 patients.

Sulphasalazine has been reported to be effective in ankylosing spondylitis with peripheral arthritis, but its efficacy in spondylitis is unknown. Thus 60 patients with active ankylosing spondylitis without peripheral arthritis or gastrointestinal symptoms were randomly allocated to one of two therapeutic groups. One group received 2 g sulphasalazine daily for six months and the other a placebo. Thirteen patients (six given placebo and seven given sulphasalazine) dropped out of the trial and were considered to be treatment failures. After six months'' follow up efficacy was rated as good or very good by 15 of the 30 patients given sulphasalazine and by only six of the 30 given placebo (p less than 0.02). Furthermore, in the patients given sulphasalazine the daily consumption of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, functional index, and plasma IgG concentrations had fallen significantly. These data suggest that sulphasalazine may be a safe and effective treatment for spondylitis in ankylosing spondylitis.     

Myasthenia gravis associated with penicillamine treatment for rheumatoid arthritis.

Four patients with rheumatoid arthritis (R.A.) developed myasthenia gravis after taking penicillamine. In one patient withdrawal of the drug was followed by spontaneous remission of the myasthenia, and in two the dose of anticholinesterase was subsequently reduced. In the fourth patient continuing penicillamine treatment was associated with increasingly severe myasthenic features, but on withdrawal of the drug these resolved. As myasthenia gravis rarely complicates R.A. its onset in these patients shortly after the start of penicillamine treatment suggested that penicillamine may have precipitated this condition.     

小剂量来氟米特治疗类风湿关节炎的临床研究

目的:前瞻性观察小剂量来氟米特治疗类风湿关节炎(RA)的临床疗效。方法:32例类风湿关节炎病例随机进入治疗组及对照组。治疗方案治疗组采用小剂量来氟米特(略去负荷剂量,每日剂量10mg维持),对照组使用柳氮磺胺吡啶治疗,1.5-2.0g/日。观察期6个月,观察指标为主要疗效指标:肿胀、压痛关节数、患者及医师对疾病状况总体评价;次要疗效指标疼痛视觉模拟评分、晨僵时间、美国风湿病学会疗效评价指标(ACR20、50)、健康评价问卷(HAQ)、C反应蛋白。结果:治疗6个月后,主要疗效指标压痛、肿胀关节数改善及医师总体评价,来氟米特均优于柳氮磺胺吡啶(p<0.05)。在次要疗效指标方面,来氟米特组HAQ评分及C反应蛋白改善优于柳氮磺胺吡啶组(p<0.05),两组在关节晨僵改善无明显差异。达到ACR20标准的病例,来氟米特组占56.3%,柳氮磺胺吡啶组占57.1%(p>0.05);达到ACR50标准分别为37.5%、35.7%(p>0.05)。研究中,来氟米特组胃肠道反应轻微,有2例出现血压升高。结论:小剂量来氟米特治疗类风湿关节炎治疗活动性类风湿关节炎,与柳氮磺胺吡啶疗效相当,耐受性好。     

Sulphasalazine in rheumatoid arthritis.

Seventy-four patients with rheumatoid arthritis were treated with sulphasalazine. There was a significant improvement in clinical score, with substantial falls in serum C-reactive protein concentrations and erythrocyte sedimentation rate four weeks after starting the drug. Improvement was maintained in the 38 patients who remained on the durg for one year. The mean Rose-Waaler titre did not change. There was little difference between the results in seropositive and seronegative patients. The commonest adverse effect was dyspepsia, but five patients developed a megaloblastic anaemia and one patient neutropenia; all made a complete recovery. The results suggest that the drug has a disease-modifying action not attributable to its "salicylate" content. The mode of action might be by an antibacterial effect on gut flora.     

小剂量来氟米特治疗类风湿关节炎的临床研究

目的：前瞻性观察小剂量来氟米特治疗类风湿关节炎（RA）的临床疗效。方法：32例类风湿关节炎病例随机进入治疗组及对照组。治疗方案治疗组采用小剂量来氟米特（略去负荷剂量,每日剂量10mg维持）,对照组使用柳氮磺胺吡啶治疗,1.5-2.0g/日。观察期6个月,观察指标为主要疗效指标：肿胀、压痛关节数、患者及医师对疾病状况总体评价;次要疗效指标疼痛视觉模拟评分、晨僵时间、美国风湿病学会疗效评价指标（ACR20、50）、健康评价问卷（HAQ）、C反应蛋白。结果：治疗6个月后,主要疗效指标压痛、肿胀关节数改善及医师总体评价,来氟米特均优于柳氮磺胺吡啶（p〈0.05）。在次要疗效指标方面,来氟米特组HAQ评分及C反应蛋白改善优于柳氮磺胺吡啶组（p〈0.05）,两组在关节晨僵改善无明显差异。达到ACR20标准的病例,来氟米特组占56.3%,柳氮磺胺吡啶组占57.1%（p〉0.05）;达到ACR50标准分别为37.5%、35.7%（p〉0.05）。研究中,来氟米特组胃肠道反应轻微,有2例出现血压升高。结论：小剂量来氟米特治疗类风湿关节炎治疗活动性类风湿关节炎,与柳氮磺胺吡啶疗效相当,耐受性好。     

Purine Metabolism and Clinical Status of Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis Treated with Dipyridamole

The anti-inflammatory activities of methotrexate and sulphasalazine may be mediated by increases in endogenous adenosine levels. Since the vascular protective drug dipyridamole inhibits the uptake and metabolism of adenosine we have now tested this compound in patients with rheumatoid arthritis to assess its effects on their symptoms. Forty patients (aged 18–75 years) received dipyridamole 400 mg/day or placebo. The levels of adenosine and its major metabolites were determined by high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) in blood samples taken at baseline and at monthly intervals during treatment for 6 months. After three months of treatment there was a significant reduction in the modified Health Assessment Questionnaire (mHAQ) score, but these effects were not maintained, and dipyridamole did not modify disease severity scores or the levels of adenosine and its metabolites. We conclude that the symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis were not modified by treatment with dipyridamole.     

Purine metabolism and clinical status of patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with dipyridamole

The anti-inflammatory activities of methotrexate and sulphasalazine may be mediated by increases in endogenous adenosine levels. Since the vascular protective drug dipyridamole inhibits the uptake and metabolism of adenosine we have now tested this compound in patients with rheumatoid arthritis to assess its effects on their symptoms. Forty patients (aged 18-75 years) received dipyridamole 400 mg/day or placebo. The levels of adenosine and its major metabolites were determined by high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) in blood samples taken at baseline and at monthly intervals during treatment for 6 months. After three months of treatment there was a significant reduction in the modified Health Assessment Questionnaire (mHAQ) score, but these effects were not maintained, and dipyridamole did not modify disease severity scores or the levels of adenosine and its metabolites. We conclude that the symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis were not modified by treatment with dipyridamole.     

Does the order of second-line treatment in rheumatoid arthritis matter?

In a prospective study 88 patients, with rheumatoid arthritis who had stopped taking gold, penicillamine, or levamisole were randomly allocated to one of the alternative drugs and followed up for a minimum of one year. Concurrent studies of the effects of gold, penicillamine, and levamisole prescribed in 123 patients as the first second-line drug were used for comparison. No difference in toxicity or efficacy between primary and secondary use of gold or penicillamine was identified. Variation in the toxicity of levamisole could in part be accounted for by changes in the dose regimen over the four years of study. The length of the treatment-free interval between drugs did not influence subsequent development of toxicity. These results suggest that an adverse reaction to one of the three second-line drugs studied should not prejudice the selection of another.     

Which component of sulphasalazine is active in rheumatoid arthritis?

Sulphasalazine is known to be effective as a second line agent in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. The two chemical constituents of sulphasalazine (sulphapyridine and 5-aminosalicylic acid) were assessed separately in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. Over 24 weeks sulphapyridine showed a pronounced second line effect comparable with sulphasalazine and with a similar toxicity profile, whereas 5-aminosalicylic acid showed only a weak first line effect. Thus sulphapyridine appears to be the active moiety responsible for the second line effect of sulphasalazine in rheumatoid arthritis. The efficacy of the antibacterial component of sulphasalazine yet again permits speculation about the role of a bacterial pathogen in the aetiopathogenesis of rheumatoid disease.     

Method for Assessing Therapeutic Potential of Anti-inflammatory Antirheumatic Drugs in Rheumatoid Arthritis

A 14-day, single-blind trial of prednisone, aspirin, and placebo was carried out in 128 patients suffering from rheumatoid arthritis, using subjective criteria only (severity of pain daily on a pain chart and assessment of the drug for effectiveness). The average treated pain rating, mean patient satisfaction rating, and mean number of days withdrawn from each drug all showed significant differences between prednisone, aspirin, and placebo. Of various pretreatment observations, only the initial pain score and articular index of joint tenderness were significantly related to the average treated pain rating.The trial method is simple and allows many patients to participate without being time consuming for patient or physician. The method seems to have potential in comparing the comparative effectiveness of anti-inflammatory analgesics used in the treatment of patients with rheumatoid arthritis.     

Penicillamine in Rheumatoid Disease: A Long-term Study

Eighty-five patients with rheumatoid disease were treated with penicillamine, and 69 completed more than one year''s treatment. The main reason for discontinuing penicillamine in the 16 patients who withdrew was adverse reaction. The number of adverse reactions, however, declined when patients were given lower maintenance doses of penicillamine. In those who tolerated the drug the results of treatment were good. To prevent side effects the drug should be introduced gradually and maintenance doses should be the lowest which produce a satisfactory response. Urine should be monitored for protein and blood for changes in platelet and white cell counts at frequent intervals throughout treatment.     

Sulphasalazine for rheumatoid arthritis: toxicity in 774 patients monitored for one to 11 years.

Sulphasalazine is being used increasingly to treat rheumatoid arthritis, though its long term safety profile has not been established in this condition. The incidence and nature of adverse effects occurring in 774 patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with sulphasalazine for periods ranging from one to 11 years were therefore noted. Altogether 205 of the patients stopped treatment permanently due to an adverse effect. One hundred and fifty six (76%) of these events occurred within three months and few beyond the first year. Most events were trivial and were self limiting after withdrawal of the drug; of the potentially more serious adverse effects, 33 (66%) occurred within three months of treatment. None of the patients died or suffered lasting ill effects. It is concluded that adverse effects of treatment with sulphasalazine are generally seen within three months; though regular monitoring is desirable during that period, thereafter few worrying problems occur.     

Further studies of sulphasalazine metabolism in the treatment of ulcerative colitis.

Sixty-four outpatients with ulcerative colitis receiving maintenance treatment with sulphasalazine were studied to relate disease activity to serum concentrations of sulphapyridine. Of 43 patients in remission, 32 had serum sulphapyridine levels over 20 microgram/ml. Ten of the 21 patients with active disease were for various reasons taking inadequate doses of sulphasalazine, as indicated by low serum sulphapyridine levels, and of the remaining 11 patients, who had serum levels over 20 microgram/ml, nine had faecal stasis proximal to active distal colitis and went into remission when treated with hydrophilic colloid or bran and an unchanged sulphasalazine dosage. This suggests that to be effective the metabolites of sulphasalazine must be delivered in the faeces to the lumen of the diseased distal segment of the colon. High serum concentrations of sulphapyridine produce side effects; therefore slow acetylators of sulphapyridine need lower doses of sulphasalazine. Estimations of serum sulphapyridine concentrations, as well as identifying the patient''s acetylation phenotype, can also be useful in assessing his compliance with treatment.     

Cytogenetic studies in patients treated with penicillamine.

Cytogenetic studies were performed on bone-marrow cells from 11 patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with penicillamine. One of the patients was studied while developing a granulocytopenia and thrombocytopenia. The findings show that penicillamine had no chromosome-damaging effect as estimated by the micronucleus test and by the number of structural chromosomal aberrations.     

Are biologics more effective than classical disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs?

Major achievements have been reached in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis during past decades due to the recognition of methotrexate as an anchor drug for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, due to the notion of a treatment window of opportunity in patients with recent-onset rheumatoid arthritis necessitating early aggressive therapy, due to the development of biologics and due to remission as a treatment target. Most biologics have a much faster onset of action than synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs, but presently there is no convincing evidence that biologic drugs have a superior clinical efficacy in comparison with the synthetic drugs. Biologics are, however, accompanied by less radiological deterioration.     

Remission makes its way to rheumatology

Remission was a rare event, even in the most advanced rheumatology clinics, until recent times. However, in the early 1990s, it was chosen as the treatment goal and the primary outcome measure for the Finnish Rheumatoid Arthritis Combination Therapy (FIN-RACo) trial, which can be considered the beginning of remission's way to rheumatology. In addition to remission in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, remission in patients with psoriatic arthritis is now being studied, although remission criteria for psoriatic arthritis have yet to be defined. Better treatment results with more active treatment strategies and availability of biologic agents motivate rheumatologists to monitor their patients as part of usual rheumatology care.     

Remission-inducing drugs in rheumatoid arthritis.

The administration of certain drugs to patients with established rheumatoid arthritis frequently results in improvement that is slow to appear but persists for long periods, even after the drug is discontinued. The three main drugs with this effect, whose efficacy and toxicity are reviewed in this paper, are gold salts, D-penicillamine and chloroquine. The cytotoxic agents used to treat rheumatoid arthritis, which likely have nonspecific anti-inflammatory actions and have serious long-term side effects, are also briefly reviewed. A new drug, levamisole, is currently being tested in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. It is suggested that the time for considering the introduction of a remission-inducing drug in patients with progressive rheumatoid arthritis is after an adequate trial of therapy with salicylates or other nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents, or both, and before the oral administration of steroids. It is difficult, however, on the basis of rigorous clinical comparisons, to recommend which of the three main remission-inducing drugs should be tried first, although gold salts have been used the most. Patients who have improved with 6 months of chrysotherapy may continue treatment for at least 3 years, during which time the frequency of mucocutaneous and renal toxic effects will steadily decrease. Some aspects of the medical economics of therapy with remission-inducing drugs for rheumatoid arthritis are discussed.     

Screening for antimalarial maculopathy in rheumatology clinics.

Ophthalmoscopy and three tests of visual function were undertaken in 39 patients with rheumatoid arthritis receiving treatment with antimalarial drugs and in a control group of 16 patients with rheumatoid arthritis who were not receiving such treatment. Visual contrast sensitivity, macular threshold to red light, and central visual fields to red targets were not significantly different in treated patients and controls. There were no abnormalities in visual acuity, but 11 of 76 eyes of treated patients showed minor macular abnormalities on ophthalmoscopy that were not seen in control patients, suggesting that ophthalmoscopy may be the most sensitive measure of early drug toxicity. Five rheumatologists were able to identify 52 of 65 minor changes detected by an ophthalmologist. These studies, and a critical review of published reports, suggest that in clinical practice antimalarial drugs can be administered safely to patients with rheumatoid arthritis without the need for repetitive routine examination by an ophthalmologist or the use of complicated physiological tests. Recording of visual acuity in each eye and ophthalmoscopy by the prescribing doctor may be all that are required to detect early antimalarial maculopathy.