Conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in early arthritis

This article reviews the use of conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) in the treatment of early rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The Finnish early RA cohorts are used as examples of how early and active treatment strategies have improved over time with increasing variety of available DMARDs. Therapy goals of early RA include remission to prevent severe long-term outcomes of RA. Remission can be achieved in a third of patients with early RA using a combination of conventional DMARDs, including methotrexate, sulfasalazine, hydroxychloroquine, and prednisolone. Of patients with early RA, 20% to 30% do not improve enough with conventional treatments and should be identified at early phases to consider institution of biologic agents.     

Therapy of rheumatoid arthritis: New developments and trends

The medical therapy of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has been influenced strongly during the past decade by the recognition that many patients develop joint damage within the first year of disease. This observation has motivated rheumatologists to initiate disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) early in the disease course. This trend has been matched by the increased use of combinatio DMARD therapy, with the aim to maximize control of the signs and symptoms of RA and limit the development of joint damage. The results from controlled clinical trials generally have supported the concept that early, aggressive treatment with DMARDs is superior to less intensive strategies. In addition, certain DMARD combinations are more effective than the individual components of these regimens, but the evidence is strong for only a few DMARD combinations such as methotrexate and cyclosporine A. Three new drugs have been recently approved for the treatment of RA. Celecoxib, a selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor, has similar clinical efficacy as conventional nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and in short-term studies causes no more gastric and duodenal ulcers and erosions than patients treated with placebo. Treatment with leflunomide, an inhibitor of pyrimidine synthesis, has been shown in controlled clinical trials to produce significant clinical improvement in 50% to 60% of patients with RA and delay radiologic progression of disease. The era of biologic therapy has dawned with the apparent success of tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-a blockade using etanercept, a recombinant TNF receptor:Fc fusion protein, and infliximab, a chimeric anti-TNF monoclonal antibody. These new agents expand our treatment options in RA and should lead to innovative and more effective treatment approaches.     

Strategies to control disease in rheumatoid arthritis with tumor necrosis factor antagonists-an opportunity to improve outcomes

Recent data have shown that disability and joint destruction in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) occur early on in the course of the disease and progress rapidly. It has been shown that in the early stages of RA, disability is attributed to increased disease activity, whereas later in the course of the disease, disability results from irreversible joint damage. These findings support the need to develop treatment strategies that will rapidly bring the disease under control, with the ultimate goal of alleviating symptoms and halting progressive joint damage. A number of such strategies have been evaluated, including the early administration of a biologic agent alone or in combination with high-dose methotrexate. Other, more recent treatment strategies include the tight control of disease activity by targeting specific outcomes necessary for decision making; the use of biologic agents for the treatment of moderate disease; and the induction of remission with a biologic agent early in the course of disease, followed by maintenance therapy using a conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drug. The substantial positive effect these strategies have on patient outcomes supports the concept that the optimal management of RA involves aggressive early therapy combined with close monitoring of disease progression and modification of ineffective therapeutic strategies.     

Therapeutic strategies in early rheumatoid arthritis

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) therapy rests primarily on the use of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). It has been unequivocally shown that DMARD therapy early in the course of RA retards progression of damage and disability to a larger degree compared with delayed institution; the most effective DMARD is methotrexate (MTX). Moreover, combination therapy including intermediate to high doses of glucocorticoids and combinations of MTX with tumour necrosis factor blockers are more effective than monotherapies. However, early DMARD treatment requires early referral of patients and early diagnosis. This is hampered by the current lack of classification criteria for early RA, since the aim is to prevent destruction from occurring, while RA is typically characterized by the presence of erosions. Novel treatment strategies and therapeutic agents allow us to aim for remission rather than improvement of disease activity. Whether a 'window of opportunity' exists during which effective therapy might lead to cure is still an open issue and will be the focus of clinical trials in the near future.     

Influence of cyclosporin A on radiological progression in early rheumatoid arthritis patients: a 42-month prospective study

The aim of this study was to evaluate whether cyclosporin A (CsA) influences the radiological disease progression in early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients in comparison with other disease-modifying drugs (DMARDs). A total of 103 early RA patients, without prior use of DMARDs, were randomized to receive CsA (3 mg/kg per day) or methotrexate (MTX) (0.15 mg/kg per week). In addition, all patients received prednisone (7.5 mg/day). After 42 months of treatment, pairs of hand and wrist radiographs of 41 patients treated with CsA and 42 treated with MTX were evaluated blindly and separately by two investigators, using reference radiographs for scoring. A scale scoring similar to Larsen's standard radiographs with minor modifications was used. The studied radiographs were obtained at the beginning and 42 months after therapy in both groups. Patients in both groups responded beneficially to the above treatment regimens. In the CsA group, 37 patients (71%) remained radiographically stable and 4 worsened, while in the MTX group 39 patients (76%) remained stable and 3 deteriorated. No significant radiological worsening was found in the CsA-treated patients as compared to those treated with MTX. Early immunointervention in RA patients appears to be crucial for the future development of joint damage. CsA can delay radiological disease progression and may inhibit joint damage deterioration in early RA patients. Received: 28 August 1999 / Accepted: 3 December 1999     

Methotrexate and leflunomide: biochemical basis for combination therapy in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: Methotrexate is currently one of the most widely prescribed disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Combination therapy of methotrexate with other DMARDs increases the clinical success of low-dose methotrexate treatment. Leflunomide is a new DMARD that may have a high potential for success in combination therapy with methotrexate. This review compares the mode of action of methotrexate and leflunomide and speculates on how this contributes to therapeutic efficacy in RA when these agents are used singly or in combination. METHODS: A literature review of the biochemical mechanisms considered to be the basis for the therapeutic efficacy of methotrexate and leflunomide in treating RA is presented. RESULTS: Low-dose methotrexate inhibits cytokine production, purine biosynthesis, and, in an animal model, causes the release of adenosine, a potent antiinflammatory agent. Leflunomide, through inhibition of de novo pyrimidine biosynthesis, can regulate lymphocyte proliferation. CONCLUSIONS: The biochemical mechanisms underlying the therapeutic efficacy of low-dose methotrexate and leflunomide in the treatment of RA are quite different. The potentially complementary mechanisms of action of these two effective DMARDs should provide a rationale for their use in combination therapy for patients whose condition no longer responds to methotrexate alone.     

Tumor necrosis factor inhibitors for rheumatoid arthritis.

Tumor necrosis factor antagonists such as infliximab and etanercept represent a new and powerful approach to managing RA. In studies published to date, TNF antagonists appear to be safe and effective agents for short-term therapeutic use in RA. Defining when in the course of RA to use TNF antagonists and determining the effectiveness of combinations of these biologic agents with DMARDs or other cytokine antagonists are areas of current and future studies. Other cytokine antagonists that may be promising subjects for further study are IL-1 antagonists. Like TNF, IL-1 is a member of the inflammatory cascade, but may play a different role in the development of inflammatory arthritis. In animal models, inhibition of TNF suppressed the inflammatory response while IL-1 antagonism prevented joint destruction (2). These results imply that combination therapy providing inhibition of both IL-1 and TNF might be an effective treatment in humans with RA, but clinical trials in humans have not yet been performed. Studies are underway in people with early RA to determine if the new TNF inhibitors are more effective or safer than currently available therapies, such as methotrexate. Other agents that inhibit TNF activity are also being tested at this time in people with RA.     

Philippine guidelines on the screening for tuberculosis prior to the use of biologic agents

Aim: To develop practice guidelines in tuberculosis screening of patients and their households and close contacts, prior to the use of biologic agents. Method: A technical research committee formulated an evidence‐based draft, based on existing literature regarding the tests used in tuberculosis screening among immunocompromised patients. The evidence‐based draft was then circulated to an expert panel. An en banc meeting of the panelists was held and a consensus was declared if more than 50% agreed on a recommendation. Issues not resolved by consensus were discussed by correspondence and voted upon. The guidelines were presented in a public forum and feedback by stakeholders were reviewed and integrated into the final draft. Recommendations: 1. Patients for biologic therapy should be screened for latent and active tuberculosis prior to initiating treatment. 2. All patients who are candidates for biologic agents should be screened by tuberculin skin test for latent TB, and a chest radiograph for active tuberculosis. 3. Household and close contacts of candidate patients should be screened for active tuberculosis. 4. All household and close contacts of candidate patients should be screened for active TB using chest radiograph. 5. Treat latent and active tuberculosis according to local guidelines. 6. Delay treatment with biologic agents in patients with latent or active tuberculosis. 7. Administer tuberculosis prophylaxis to the patient for biologic therapy exposed to household contacts with active tuberculosis. Conclusion: These recommendations emphasize the importance of screening patients, household and close contacts for latent and active tuberculosis prior to initiating biologic therapy.     

The therapeutic approach of early intervention for rheumatoid arthritis: what is the evidence?

OBJECTIVE: The concepts of early intervention and early arthritis clinics for the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) were introduced almost a decade ago. The evidence for these is diverse and the best therapeutic approach remains vehemently debated. This review addresses these issues. METHODS: The MEDLINE database was searched to identify relevant papers satisfying inclusion criteria for disease duration and no previous use of disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs). Where possible, evidence was obtained from randomized controlled trials. We selected the most relevant topics to best justify early therapeutic intervention in RA. RESULTS: The benefit of DMARDs over placebo and delayed therapy is unquestionable from the studies presented, with reduction in bone damage and preservation of function. Through prevention of disability, early treatment should be the most cost-effective approach. The evidence presented supports the use of DMARDs when the diagnosis of RA is first made. Delay in treatment may result in irreversible damage. There is insufficient evidence to recommend combination therapy for all patients at disease onset. Further research into newer therapies is required before their routine first-line use is recommended. CONCLUSIONS: Early therapeutic intervention in RA reduces long-term disability and joint damage. Optimal management appears to be the early identification of non-responders and targeted combination therapy. Biological therapies have the potential to revolutionize the treatment of early RA.     

Disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and bone mass in rheumatoid arthritis

This article reviews the effects of DMARDs (including biologic agents) on bone metabolism in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). At present there is no evidence that methotrexate, at least at dosages ranging from 5 to 20 mg/week, negatively affects bone mass as measured by DXA (BMD) as documented in both cross-sectional and longitudinal studies. Most studies of cyclosporine (CyA) use reporting a reduction in erosions and joint damage with no adverse effects on bone, did not measure BMD; CyA treatment is associated with a dose-dependent increase of bone turnover as well as a decrease in both animal and human studies; however, its use in RA setting at a dose < or =5 mg/Kg/ day has so far not been associated with clinical relevant adverse effects on bone metabolism. Anti-TNF-alpha agents, infliximab reduced markers of bone turnover in two longitudinal studies. Data on BMD are not available in RA; nevertheless, an increase in BMD has been documented in spondyloarthropathies with infliximab and etanercept. No clinical data concerning BMD are available on leflunomide as well as on the newer biologic agents (adalimumab, rituximab, anakinra).     

Recapitulation of the round-table discussion--assessing the role of anti-tumour necrosis factor therapy in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis

Clinical trials specifically targeting and neutralizing the cytokine, tumour necrosis factor (TNF), have recently provided evidence of efficacy and a promise of a novel approach for the treatment and management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). With the evolving emergence of anti-TNF therapeutics, several unresolved issues have come to light, including the assessment of safety and efficacy of current therapies, study design for new agents and cost-benefit issues. During an international meeting of leading rheumatologists and specialists, the majority opinion regarding the use of anti-TNF therapy was that these agents are most appropriate in patients with active disease who have insufficient response to methotrexate, which is presently considered the standard for RA treatment. Anti-TNF therapy was also recommended in patients with active disease unable to tolerate methotrexate therapy, or who have not responded to at least two other disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs). In patients with RA who have serious infection or malignancy, the use of anti-TNF therapies was not advised. Time, experience and clinical data from recently completed and currently ongoing studies of infliximab and etanercept, which will be available in the future, will help determine the ultimate role of such targeted therapeutics. Additional data on anti-TNF therapeutics as monotherapy or in various combinations are still needed to achieve maximum disease control safely with currently available DMARDs.     

Actualización del uso de los glucocorticoides en la artritis reumatoide

Corticosteroids are a mainstay in the therapy of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). In recent years, a number of high-quality controlled clinical trials have shown their effect as a disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD) and a favourable safety profile in recent-onset RA. Despite this, they are more frequently used as bridge therapy while other DMARDs initiate their action than as true disease-modifying agents. Low-dose corticosteroid use during the first two years of disease slows radiologic damage and reduces the need of biologic therapy aimed at reaching a state of clinical remission in recent-onset RA. Thus, their systematic use in this clinical scenario should be considered.     

Renal toxicity associated with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs used for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVE: To provide a review of the renal toxicity of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) currently used for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: Papers in American and European medical journals related to renal toxicity of DMARDs used for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis were reviewed. Specific DMARDs reviewed were cyclosporine, gold, D-penicillamine, methotrexate, azathioprine, antimalarials, sulfasalazine, leflunomide, etanercept, infliximab, and DMARD combination therapy. RESULTS: The renal toxicity of DMARDs varies widely. Cyclosporine, gold, and D-penicillamine all have a serious potential for renal side effects, particularly in the elderly or in patients with compromised renal function. Concomitant use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) increases the potential for renal damage. In contrast, methotrexate, azathioprine, antimalarials, sulfasalazine, leflunomide, etanercept, and infliximab have relatively little renal toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: The potential for renal toxicity should always be considered when determining which DMARD to use for RA therapy. DMARDs that combine efficacy with negligible renal adverse effects should be used for the treatment of patients susceptible to DMARD-associated renal damage.     

Evaluation of abatacept in biologic-naïve patients with active rheumatoid arthritis

This article reviews the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of abatacept plus methotrexate in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and an inadequate response to methotrexate who are naïve to biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). Data from the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled Abatacept in Inadequate Responders to Methotrexate, Abatacept or Infliximab vs Placebo, a Trial for Tolerability, Efficacy, and Safety in Treating Rheumatoid Arthritis, and phase IIb dose-finding trials and their long-term extensions are reviewed. Abatacept plus methotrexate significantly improved clinical responses, physical function, and health-related quality of life compared with methotrexate alone. More patients receiving abatacept plus methotrexate than methotrexate monotherapy achieved a low disease activity state or remission. Radiographic progression of the disease was significantly slowed in the abatacept plus methotrexate arms. Abatacept plus methotrexate was generally well tolerated with no clinically significant safety issues identified. The beneficial effects of abatacept plus methotrexate were sustained long term in extension studies, and no new tolerability or safety issues were evident. Abatacept in combination with methotrexate is an effective, safe, and well-tolerated long-term therapy in biologic-naïve patients with active RA and an inadequate response to methotrexate. Abatacept could be considered as a first-line biologic DMARD in the treatment of RA.     

Treatment of early rheumatoid arthritis

Recent advances in the understanding of the pathophysiology, aggressive treatment, and early detection of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have changed the clinical, pathologic, and functional outcomes in patients with RA. Early aggressive treatment of RA has now become the norm in clinical practice rather than the use of the traditional pyramid approach of the last half of the twentieth century. Early treatment with monotherapy of traditional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) or biologics, combination traditional DMARD therapy and, especially, combination of biologic therapy and methotrexate, have revolutionized the treatment of RA, producing significant improvement in clinical, radiographic, and functional outcomes not seen previously. For the individual patient, we still cannot determine which medication or combination of medications will give the most complete response. There have been a number of recent, well-designed clinical trials that have tried to answer this question. Herein we review the evidence-based medicine that addresses these issues.     

Development and evaluation of a novel ultrasound score for large joints in rheumatoid arthritis: one year of experience in daily clinical practice

Objective

To introduce and evaluate a new standardized ultrasound (US) score developed for large joints in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Methods

A US score was designed to determine the degree of inflammation in the shoulder, the elbow, the hip, and the knee joint in patients with RA (Sonography of Large Joints in Rheumatology [SOLAR] score). Synovitis and synovial vascularity were scored semiquantitatively (grade 0–3) by gray‐scale US (GSUS) and power Doppler US (PDUS). Patients with RA were examined at baseline and 3, 6, and 12 months after initiation of local or systemic therapy (disease‐modifying antirheumatic drugs [DMARDs]/biologic agents). Erythrocyte sedimentation rate, anti–cyclic citrullinated peptide antibodies, and the clinical Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28) were determined.

Results

A cohort of 199 patients were analyzed and followed up over 12 months. At baseline, before modification of the therapy, patients received either DMARDs (n = 131), DMARDs plus biologic agents (n = 46), biologic monotherapy (n = 8), or no DMARD therapy (n = 14). At baseline, the mean DAS28 score was 4.6 and decreased to 3.2 after 1 year of therapy (P < 0.001). All US scores demonstrated a statistically significant improvement except for the PDUS scores for the shoulder and the hip. In detail, the mean synovitis GSUS score for the knee decreased from 5.2 at baseline to 2.2 after 12 months of followup. The mean GSUS score for the shoulder fell from 2.6 to 1.6, for the elbow fell from 5.2 to 2.6, and for the hip fell from 2.2 to 0.4 (P < 0.05 for each).

Conclusion

The SOLAR score is a feasible tool for the qualitative and quantitative evaluation of large joint involvement in patients with RA using US.     

Kombination von BasistherapeutikaVon der individuellen Hoffnung zum gezielten Einsatz

Accumulating evidence suggests that treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with two or more disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) is more efficient than single agent therapy. Randomized clinical trials demonstrated the efficacy of various combinations such as methotrexate plus sulfasalazine plus hydroxychloroquine, methotrexate plus ciclosporine or methotrexate plus infliximab, respectively. In contrast to these data, however, most German rheumatologists use combination therapy in a small percentage of patients with active RA. Thus, consensus criteria should be defined when and how to use combination therapy in the treatment of active disease. We suggest that combination therapy should be started if active disease is still present after three months of treatment with a single standard DMARD, mostly methotrexate, plus low dose prednisolone and that combination DMARD therapy should be used before TNF blocking agents.     

Wie leitliniengerecht ist die rheumatologische Versorgung?

In 2005, the first evidence-based German guideline on the management of early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) was published. With data from the national database of the German Collaborative Arthritis Centres and other health care studies we evaluated to what extent current health care is in accordance with the guideline’s recommendations. A total of 66% of all newly referred RA patients seen at the national database centers in 2008 achieved the goal of seeing a rheumatologist within 3 months of symptom onset, while 75% were seen within 6 months. Before referral, 25% of the patients had DMARD therapy and 19% glucocorticoids. Of the patients in rheumatological care, 90% received DMARDs. The availability of early arthritis clinics determines the promptness of access to a rheumatologist. After 6 years of rheumatological care, around 80% of patients continuously seen were still under treatment with a conventional or biological DMARD. The highest continuation rates were seen for methotrexate monotherapy. Biologic agents were given in 2008 to 20% of patients. Of those with “severe” or “very severe” disease, 42% received biologics and 21% DMARD combination therapy. Low-dose glucocorticoids are the standard of care; of patients in rheumatological care, 88% received dosages up to 7.5 mg/d and 74% of up to 5 mg/d.