Auranofin versus penicillamine in rheumatoid arthritis. One-year results from a prospective clinical investigation

Forty patients with definite or classical active rheumatoid arthritis were stratified by the minimization procedure to auranofin (6 mg/day) or penicillamine (go slow and low regime). This investigation is a prospective planned 3 year patient and 'doctor-open' as well as 'doctor-blind' clinical trial. This article describes the results after 12 months. Both drugs decreased disease activity and improved the functional capacity in a similar way. Two patients in the auranofin group and 5 in the penicillamine group stopped treatment due to major side effects. Four other patients in the auranofin group left treatment: 2 due to death from unrelated cause and 2 according to the Helsinki II Declaration. After one year a further patient in the auranofin group and 2 in the penicillamine group stopped treatment due to lack of clinical effect. Side effects due to auranofin were statistically more frequent distal in the gastrointestinal tract (loose stools/diarrhoea) than with penicillamine. In contrast, penicillamine produced significantly more side effects in the oral cavity (mainly taste disturbances) than auranofin. Other side effects were about equal in the two groups, but 2 cases of severe proteinuria and one with obstructive lung disease were observed in the penicillamine group. Only 3 patients did not complain of any untoward effect during the 12-month period. We conclude that on the basis of this one year investigation it is an open question whether one should select auranofin or penicillamine for the treatment of clinical active rheumatoid arthritis.     

Sulfasalazine in early rheumatoid arthritis. A 48-week double-blind,prospective, placebo-controlled study

Objective. To investigate the efficacy and tolerability of sulfasalazine (SSZ) in the treatment of early rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods. Eighty patients (symptomatic disease < 12 months) were randomly assigned to treatment with SSZ or placebo for 48 weeks. Clinical, laboratory, and scintigraphic data were used to determine the effects of treatment. Results. SSZ was superior to placebo in reducing the laboratory features of inflammation, the clinical parameters of disease activity, as well as the scintigraphic activity in the joints. Furthermore, fewer erosive changes developed in the joints of patients receiving active treatment, but the difference between treatment groups did not reach statistical significance. Conclusion. SSZ is effective in the treatment of RA, and its onset of action is rapid. The results support the view that SSZ retards the development of joint erosions. However, like other conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, its remission-inducing ability is insufficient.     

Treatment of rheumatoid arthritis with ornidazole: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

The aim of our study was to evaluate the clinical efficacy, safety, and tolerability of ornidazole in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This was 3 months, randomized, double-blind,placebo-controlled study. A total of 160 patients with active RA were randomly assigned to receive 1,000 mg ornidazole (n = 53), 500 mg ornidazole (n = 55), or placebo (n = 52). A significantly greater percentage of patients treated with 1,000 mg ornidazole met the American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement criteria (achieved an ACR20 response) at 3 months compared with patients who received placebo (62.0 vs. 32.4%; P < 0.001). Greater percentages of patients treated with 1,000 mg ornidazole also achieved ACR50 responses (38.3 vs. 10.9%; P < 0.001) and ACR70 responses (19.6 vs. 1.2%; P < 0.001) compared with patients who received placebo. Ornidazole treatment was also associated with significant reductions in pain and duration of morning stiffness, significant improvement in the quality of life and both the physician’s and patient’s global assessments, and significant reductions in disease activity as assessed by objective laboratory measures (erythrocyte sedimentation rate and C-reactive protein level). Ornidazole was well tolerated. There were no dose-limiting toxic effects. In this 3-month-trial ornidazole was safe, well tolerated, and associated with improvement in the inflammatory symptoms of RA.     

Modulation of CCR2 in rheumatoid arthritis: a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial

OBJECTIVE: CCR2 is a chemokine receptor expressed by monocytes, macrophages, and a subset of T cells. Its ligand, CCL2 (monocyte chemotactic protein 1), is abundantly present in the synovium of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Blocking CCR2 prevents CCL2-mediated chemotaxis in vitro and modulates arthritis in animal models of RA. In this study we examined the effects of CCR2 blockade on synovial inflammation in RA. METHODS: The study was designed as a phase IIa clinical trial with a human CCR2 blocking antibody (MLN1202) in patients with active RA. Thirty-two patients received 3 infusions, over a period of 6 weeks, with either placebo (n = 9) or anti-CCR2 monoclonal antibody at 0.5 mg/kg (n = 7), 1.5 mg/kg (n = 7), or 4.0 mg/kg (n = 9). Safety was monitored with laboratory tests, immunotoxicity assessments, and documenting of adverse events, and European League Against Rheumatism and American College of Rheumatology response criteria were used to assess clinical improvement. Synovial tissue was obtained at baseline and after 43 days of treatment, for pharmacodynamic analysis using immunohistochemistry and digital image analysis. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare groups, and the Wilcoxon signed rank test was used to assess changes within the groups. RESULTS: All patients completed the study. Treatment with CCR2 blocking antibody reduced the levels of free CCR2 on CD14+ monocytes by at least 57% and up to 94% (P < 0.001), demonstrating the biologic activity of the compound. However, there was no reduction in the levels or expression of any of the synovial biomarkers. Accordingly, no clinical improvement was observed. CONCLUSION: Treatment with anti-CCR2 blocking antibody did not result in amelioration of synovial inflammation in active RA. The results do not support the notion that blockade of CCR2 may be sufficient to induce clinical improvement in RA.     

Auranofin improves outcome in early rheumatoid arthritis. Results from a 2-year, double blind placebo controlled study

The effect of early initiation of auranofin (AF) therapy on outcome measures was studied in a controlled 24-month double blind trial in 138 patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) using an intent to treat approach. Patients were randomized to AF or placebo but in case of insufficient effect or intolerable adverse events, they switched to open disease modifying antirheumatic drug therapy. Patients who started AF fared significantly better in improved joint swelling. Stanford Health Assessment Questionnaire index, Keitel functional test, and mental depression, and furthermore, radiologic progression was significantly retarded. Our results support a disease modifying beneficial effect of AF in early active RA.se     

Sulfasalazine in rheumatoid arthritis. A double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Sulfasalazine (SSZ), 3 gm daily, was compared with placebo for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, in a 15-week randomized, parallel, double-blind trial. Joint tenderness and swelling, morning stiffness, grip strength, and pain score all showed significantly more improvement with SSZ than with placebo. Adverse effects, particularly gastrointestinal reactions, led to withdrawal from the study of 28% of the patients who had been receiving SSZ, but these effects were all readily reversible and not life-threatening. These results confirm previous findings that suppression of rheumatoid synovitis may be induced by SSZ, within 2 months after full maintenance doses are reached.     

阿达木单抗联合甲氨蝶呤治疗类风湿关节炎的多中心、随机、双盲、安慰剂对照临床研究

目的 评价阿达木单抗联合甲氨蝶呤(MTX)治疗类风湿关节炎(RA)的疗效与安全性.方法 随机、双盲、平行、安慰剂对照的多中心临床试验.302例入组前已经至少接受MTX 3个月治疗且剂量稳定≥28 d的活动性RA患者,随机分为40 mg阿达木单抗+MTX组(A组,121例)、80 mg阿达木单抗+MTX组(B组,121例)、安慰剂+MTX组(C组,60例).患者隔周皮下注射阿达木单抗或安慰剂,双盲治疗期为12周.完成双盲期的患者进入后12周开放期,3组患者均予隔周皮下注射40 mg阿达木单抗.在双盲期和开放期的患者同时继续接受研究前稳定剂量的MTX.观察主要疗效指标[双盲期治疗第12周修改的美国风湿病学会疗效标准提高20%(ACR20)有效率]、次要疗效指标[第24周ACR20有效率;第12周、第24周修改的美国风湿病学会疗效标准提高50%(ACR50)、修改的美国风湿病学会疗效标准提高70%(ACR70)有效率]、压痛关节数、肿胀关节数、疼痛视觉模拟评分,医生对疾病活动性整体评价、患者对疾病活动性整体评价、健康评价问卷(HAQ)评分、评估健康相关生活质量简表36(SF-36)评分及不良事件.结果 (1)双盲期,ACR20有效率C组为35.0%,A组为57.0%,B组为51.2%,A组、B组与C组比较,P<0.05;A组ACR50、ACR70有效率分别为32.2%、15.7%,与C组比较,P<0.05;A组压痛关节数、肿胀关节数、C反应蛋白水平的改善优于C组(P<0.05);B组肿胀关节数、C反应蛋白水平的改善优于C组(P<0.05).(2)开放期,A组、B组ACR20、ACR50、ACR70有效率仍维持或有所提高,而C组的ACR20、ACR50、ACR70有效率则升高至与A组、B组类似的水平.在压痛关节数、肿胀关节数、疼痛视觉模拟评分、HAQ、SF-36方面,3组均比基线、第12周时有更明显的好转.(3)双盲期与开放期中超过5%的患者有不良事件(上呼吸道感染、鼻咽炎和注射部位瘙痒),多数为轻～中度.有3例患者在研究期间出现结核病.在双盲期,有3例(1.2%)受试者出现了严重不良事件,但研究者判定与药物无关或可能无关.在开放期,有8例(2.7%)受试者出现了严重不良事件,其中3例判定与药物无关或可能无关.结论 阿达木单抗联合MTX治疗RA的疗效优于单用MTX,可显著提高治疗有效率并持续改善症状、体征、实验室炎性活动指标,减少功能障碍并提高整体生活质量,同时具有良好的安全性与耐受性.     

A randomized,double-blind,placebo-controlled study of cd4 monoclonal antibody therapy in early rheumatoid arthritis

Objective. To assess the efficacy of the CD4 monoclonal antibody (MAb) cM-T412 in the treatment of early rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods. Sixty patients were enrolled in a 6-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study investigating multiple dose regimens of cM-T412. Thirty patients subsequently were enrolled in a 9-month randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study investigating monthly single-dose administrations of cM-T412. Results. Analysis of clinical parameters revealed no changes in arthritis activity in the groups that received CD4 MAb or the placebo group, and no difference between the groups, in either in the first or the second part of the study. The number of circulating CD4+ cells decreased substantially in the patients treated with CD4 MAb. Conclusion. CD4 MAb treatment of patients with early RA induced no therapeutic effect.     

Treatment of rheumatoid arthritis with ornidazole. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

SIR, In many previous studies, rheumatoid arthritis (RA) hasbeen found at high frequencies in individuals with periodontitis,and RA resembles periodontitis in many pathological aspects[1, 2]. HLA-DR4 tissue antigens are found at high frequenciesboth in patients with periodontitis and in those with RA. HLA-DR4tissue antigens and their subtypes are directly associated witheach disease [3, 4]. High levels of oral anaerobic bacterial antibodies and heat-shockproteins have been found in the     

The relationship of serum infliximab concentrations to clinical improvement in rheumatoid arthritis: results from ATTRACT,a multicenter,randomized, double-blind,placebo-controlled trial

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the relationship between serum concentrations of infliximab, a monoclonal anti-tumor necrosis factor alpha antibody, and clinical improvement from infliximab therapy for rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Multiple blood samples were obtained from each of 428 subjects with active RA who were enrolled in a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (ATTRACT [Anti-Tumor Necrosis Factor Trial in Rheumatoid Arthritis with Concomitant Therapy]) evaluating the clinical efficacy and safety of infliximab therapy. Serum levels of infliximab were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Dose-response trends were analyzed using generalized logistic regression techniques. Pharmacokinetic modeling was used to predict the serum concentrations of infliximab after simulated infusions using doses and dosing intervals not evaluated in the trial. RESULTS: At week 54, 26% of the subjects receiving 3 mg/kg infliximab every 8 weeks had undetectable trough serum levels of infliximab, a significantly greater proportion than in the other 3 treatment groups (P < 0.001). Increased magnitude of American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response (measured by the ACR-N, a continuous measure of clinical improvement derived from the ACR 20% response criteria) and greater reduction from baseline in serum C-reactive protein level were both associated with higher trough serum concentrations of infliximab (P < 0.001), as was less progression of radiographic joint damage (P = 0.004), providing support for a dose-response relationship. Pharmacokinetic models predicted that decreasing the dosing interval from 8 weeks to 6 weeks would yield higher trough serum levels of infliximab than increasing the dose by 100 mg. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that some patients with RA may benefit from infliximab given at higher doses than 3 mg/kg or more frequently than every 8 weeks.     

IX 207-887 in rheumatoid arthritis. A double-blind placebo-controlled study.

OBJECTIVE. To determine the efficacy and the safety of IX 207-887 treatment in rheumatoid arthritis. The IX compound [10-methoxy-4H-benzo(4,5)cyclohepta-(1,2-b)thiophene-4-yliden acetic acid] is effective in several animal models of rheumatoid arthritis and has a mechanism of action involving the inhibition of interleukin-1 release. METHODS. A double-blind, controlled trial of 16 weeks' duration comparing placebo with IX at a daily dosage of 800 mg or 1,200 mg (20 patients/group) was conducted. RESULTS. Thirteen patients withdrew from the study, 3 because of lack of efficacy (all in the placebo group) and 10 because of side effects (1 in the placebo group [skin rash] and 9 in the IX groups [skin rash in 5, intestinal disturbances in 2, hepatitis in 1, meningitis in 1]). Intent-to-treat analysis showed a statistically significant difference in the variations of clinical and laboratory parameters between the 3 groups. Between-group comparisons showed an improvement in all these variables in the IX groups versus the placebo group. According to Paulus' criteria, 2 of the 20 placebo-treated patients (10%), 9 of the 20 IX 800 mg-treated patients (45%), and 11 of the 20 IX 1,200 mg-treated patients (55%) were considered responders (P = 0.008). CONCLUSION. The findings of this study suggest that the tolerability of IX is acceptable in rheumatoid arthritis patients, and that IX is an effective slow-acting drug for use in rheumatoid arthritis.     

Treatment of rheumatoid arthritis with L-histidine: a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial.

A randomized cooperative double-blind trial of oral L-histidine for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis was carried out. Patients were treated with either L-histidine 4.5 g daily, or placebo, for 30 weeks. None of the clinical measurements showed an advantage of histidine over placebo. A small decrease in rheumatoid factor titer and a small increase in hematocrit were found only in the histidine group. There was suggestive evidence of a beneficial effect of histidine in patients with more active and prolonged disease, based upon subjective doubld-blind evaluations by physicians and patients. No adverse effects of histidine therapy were noted. Histidine cannot be advocated as a therapeutic agent in rheumatoid arthritis, but further studies in certain groups of patients seem justified.     

Oral type II collagen treatment in early rheumatoid arthritis. A double-blind,placebo-controlled,randomized trial

Objective. To investigate the efficacy of oral type II collagen in the treatment of early rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods. Ninety patients with RA (disease duration ⩽3 years) were treated for 12 weeks with oral bovine type II collagen at 1 mg/day (n = 30) or 10 mg/day (n = 30) or with placebo (n = 30), in a double-blind randomized study. Results. There was no significant difference between the 3 groups in terms of response to treatment. However, we observed a higher prevalence of responders in the type II collagen-treated groups: 7 responders in the 10-mg type II collagen group and 6 in the 1-mg group, versus 4 in the placebo group. Furthermore, 3 patients in the 10-mg type II collagen group and 1 patient in the 1-mg type II collagen group, but no patients in the placebo group, had very good response. A total of 14 patients had to be withdrawn from the study: 2 because of side effects (nausea) and 12 because of lack of efficacy. Conclusion. Only a minority of patients responded to treatment with oral type II collagen. These results justify further efforts to identify which patients will have a good response to such therapy.     

Auranofin in juvenile rheumatoid arthritis. An open label,non-controlled study

Summary An open label, non-controlled trial of six-month duration was designed to determine the safety and efficacy of auranofin in the treatment of 13 children with polyarticular JRA. Adverse reactions were observed in 5 of the 13 patients (38%) but only in one was it serious enough to discontinue treatment. None of the patients developed diarrhea or hematologic abnormalities. Therapeutic response was evaluated in the 11 patients who completed the six-month treatment. According to the final overall assessment 9 of the 11 children had improved, one remained unchanged and one worsened. After four months of treatment serum gold levels in 11 patients ranged between 28 and 59g/dl, with a mean value of 34g/dl. There was no correlation between serum gold levels and the frequency and severity of side effects.     

Seatone in rheumatoid arthritis: a six-month placebo-controlled study.

Thirty-five patients with rheumatoid arthritis were randomly allocated to either Seatone (green-lipped mussel extract) or placebo in order to assess the former's claimed effectiveness in rheumatoid disease. After six months there was no significant improvement in any laboratory or clinical measurement of disease activity in the Seatone group. The patients on active drug fared no better than those on placebo. These results suggest that Seatone is not effective in rheumatoid arthritis.