Literature DB >> 3094463

A three year follow up of patients allocated to placebo, or oral or injectable gold therapy for rheumatoid arthritis.

H A Capell, D Lewis, J Carey.   

Abstract

Ninety patients randomly allocated to receive auranofin, matching placebo, or sodium aurothiomalate have been followed up for three years. Inefficacy led to cessation of treatment in 14 patients receiving auranofin, 27 receiving placebo, and one receiving sodium aurothiomalate. Twenty seven of the patients receiving placebo were reallocated within the study and 16 continued therapy at three years. This group showed similar statistically significant improvement in clinical and laboratory parameters at one, two, and three years to those on an active drug from the outset. Patients who discontinued auranofin because of inefficacy were offered sodium aurothiomalate therapy--eight patients in this group completed three years of treatment on sodium aurothiomalate and showed significant improvement in some but not all parameters. A hand radiograph erosion score showed a deterioration in 80% of patients remaining on auranofin, 75% of those on sodium aurothiomalate, and 80% of the original placebo group who continued an active drug for three years. Although more patients discontinued auranofin over the study period because of inefficacy, no difference could be shown between the degree of improvement in the subgroup who remained on auranofin and those receiving sodium aurothiomalate. No disadvantage in outcome could be shown for patients originally assigned to placebo.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1986        PMID: 3094463      PMCID: PMC1001974          DOI: 10.1136/ard.45.9.705

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Rheum Dis        ISSN: 0003-4967            Impact factor:   19.103


  7 in total

1.  DIAGNOSTIC criteria for rheumatoid arthritis: 1958 revision by a committee of the American Rheumatism Association.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ann Rheum Dis       Date:  1959-03       Impact factor: 19.103

2.  Radiographic evaluation of erosion in rheumatoid arthritis: double blind study of auranofin vs placebo.

Authors:  J P Gofton; W M O'Brien; J N Hurley; B J Scheffler
Journal:  J Rheumatol       Date:  1984-12       Impact factor: 4.666

3.  Does second-line therapy affect the radiological progression of rheumatoid arthritis?

Authors:  T Pullar; J A Hunter; H A Capell
Journal:  Ann Rheum Dis       Date:  1984-02       Impact factor: 19.103

4.  Oral gold: a comparison with placebo and with intramuscular sodium aurothiomalate.

Authors:  D Lewis; H A Capell
Journal:  Clin Rheumatol       Date:  1984-03       Impact factor: 2.980

5.  Comparison of auranofin, gold sodium thiomalate, and placebo in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. A controlled clinical trial.

Authors:  J R Ward; H J Williams; M J Egger; J C Reading; E Boyce; M Altz-Smith; C O Samuelson; R F Willkens; M A Solsky; S P Hayes
Journal:  Arthritis Rheum       Date:  1983-11

6.  The assessment of disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis using a multivariate analysis.

Authors:  R K Mallya; B E Mace
Journal:  Rheumatol Rehabil       Date:  1981-02-01

7.  An analysis of worldwide safety experience with auranofin.

Authors:  M A Heuer; R G Pietrusko; R W Morris; B J Scheffler
Journal:  J Rheumatol       Date:  1985-08       Impact factor: 4.666

  7 in total
  8 in total

1.  A 10 year follow up of parenteral gold therapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

Authors:  G Bendix; A Bjelle
Journal:  Ann Rheum Dis       Date:  1996-03       Impact factor: 19.103

2.  A three year comparative study of auranofin and gold sodium thiomalate in rheumatoid arthritis.

Authors:  R Rau; M Schattenkirchner; H Muller-Fassbender; B Kaik; H Zeidler; B Missler
Journal:  Clin Rheumatol       Date:  1990-12       Impact factor: 2.980

Review 3.  Have traditional DMARDs had their day? Effectiveness of parenteral gold compared to biologic agents.

Authors:  Rolf Rau
Journal:  Clin Rheumatol       Date:  2004-07-24       Impact factor: 2.980

4.  Second line (disease modifying) treatment in rheumatoid arthritis: which drug for which patient?

Authors:  H A Capell; D R Porter; R Madhok; J A Hunter
Journal:  Ann Rheum Dis       Date:  1993-06       Impact factor: 19.103

5.  Functions of polymorphonuclear leukocytes in early rheumatoid arthritis.

Authors:  M Leirisalo-Repo; L Paimela; S Koskimies; H Repo
Journal:  Inflammation       Date:  1993-08       Impact factor: 4.092

6.  Prospective trial comparing the use of sulphasalazine and auranofin as second line drugs in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

Authors:  D Porter; R Madhok; J A Hunter; H A Capell
Journal:  Ann Rheum Dis       Date:  1992-04       Impact factor: 19.103

Review 7.  Slow-acting antirheumatic drugs. Drug interactions of clinical significance.

Authors:  R A Munro; R D Sturrock
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  1995-07       Impact factor: 5.606

8.  Outcome of second line therapy in rheumatoid arthritis.

Authors:  D R Porter; I McInnes; J Hunter; H A Capell
Journal:  Ann Rheum Dis       Date:  1994-12       Impact factor: 19.103

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.