Treatment Of Early Rheumatoid Arthritis Research Articles

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.

Infliximab for the treatment of early rheumatoid arthritis

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a systemic, chronic inflammatory disease characterised predominately by polyarthritis with frequent progression to permanent joint damage and disability. Evidence shows that starting treatment with disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) therapy early in the course of disease can slow radiographic progression of RA compared with a more delayed approach. Moreover, in the early stages of RA, treatment with a combination of methotrexate (MTX), a traditional DMARD, and a biologic with tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-α blocking activity has proven to be more effective than using MTX alone. Among the approved TNF-α inhibitors, infliximab is a chimeric monoclonal antibody with high affinity and specificity for its target cytokine. It binds to soluble TNF monomers and trimers, as well as membrane-bound TNF-α, forming a stable complex which prevents TNF-α from binding to its receptor and triggering a biological response. The combination of MTX and infliximab therapy has shown superior clinical outcomes compared with MTX monotherapy in early RA, as well as greater protection against joint damage and physical disability. Although infliximab therapy has been associated with side effects, including serious infections, this drug can be administered with an acceptable margin of safety for several years by appropriate selection of patients, screening for latent and active tuberculosis, and monitoring of patients for infection and other toxicities. The knowledge of the benefits of infliximab therapy for early RA affords groundwork for developing more effective treatment strategies that can minimise disease progression over the long term.

What are the goals and principles of management in the early treatment of rheumatoid arthritis?

The management of patients with new-onset rheumatoid arthritis (RA) requires an awareness of the potential issues and needs that are unique to each patient with regards to their perceptions of their disease, physical needs and nutritional issues. Arthritis specialists should have a clear approach to the goals of management that are specific to patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (ERA). In this chapter, evidence for the goals and principles of management in the early treatment of RA is discussed. Patient education, the role of self-management, physical therapies, exercise, diet and drug management are addressed. This chapter aims to provide clinicians with a clear understanding of which interventions have supporting evidence and where further research is required. Where evidence for patients with ERA is lacking, evidence from patients with established RA is reviewed.

Are early arthritis clinics necessary?

Landmark studies published in the 1980s were the first to reveal the long-term consequences of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Instead of the benign outcomes previously reported from early population studies, disability, deformity and excess mortality were evident. At this time, the conventional pyramid approach was the standard for therapeutic intervention. Patients were initially treated with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug with rest and splinting a approach. Disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs and corticosteroids were reserved for patients with joint damage and disability, who had 'earned their treatment' and the perceived risk of toxicity. Thus irreversible damage and disability occurred prior to effective therapy being instituted, with the consequences of poor outcomes. The late 1980s saw the introduction of the concept of early intervention in RA and, shortly after, the introduction of specialist clinics for early assessment of patients with inflammatory arthritis (IA), so-called 'early arthritis clinics' (EACs). Such clinics, initially in large research units, targeted patients with early RA or IA with the potential to evolve to RA, with the aim of early case definition and treatment. After all, the common sense approach to treatment of a chronic inflammatory, destructive condition would be to treat it effectively from its onset, prior to the development of irreversible damage. The detailed documentation undertaken in these clinics subsequently provided much information regarding persistence and prognosis in early IA. Since their initial introduction, EACs have become commonplace, not only in academic units, but also kas part of clinical service provision in many institutions. This review details what an EAC is, who should be referred and when, and the benefits and potential future benefits of their introduction.

The influence of genetic variation in the HLA-DRB1 and LTA-TNF regions on the response to treatment of early rheumatoid arthritis with methotrexate or etanercept.

To examine the roles of specific genetic polymorphisms as predictors of response to treatment of early rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Subjects included 457 patients with early RA (duration of < or =3 years) who participated in a randomized controlled trial comparing weekly methotrexate and 2 dosages of etanercept (10 mg twice weekly and 25 mg twice weekly). Our primary outcome measure was achievement of 50% improvement in disease activity according to the criteria of the American College of Rheumatology (ACR50 response) after 12 months of treatment. Subjects were genotyped for HLA-DRB1 alleles and polymorphisms in the following genes: TNF, LTA, TNFRSF1A, TNFRSF1B, FCGR2A, FCGR3A, and FCGR3B. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to define the impact of specific polymorphisms and haplotypes on response to treatment. Covariates for the multivariate analyses included sex, ethnicity, age, disease duration, and baseline values for rheumatoid factor and the tender and swollen joint counts. The presence of 2 HLA-DRB1 alleles encoding the shared epitope (SE) (compared with 1 or 0 copies) was associated with response to treatment with standard-dose etanercept (odds ratio [OR] 4.3, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.8-10.3). Among Caucasian patients, 2 extended haplotypes that included the HLA-DRB1 alleles *0404 and *0101 (both of which encode the SE) and 6 single-nucleotide polymorphisms in the LTA-TNF region were associated with response to treatment. In a multivariate model that included treatment received and the aforementioned covariates, the ORs for the association of these haplotypes with achievement of an ACR50 response at 12 months were 2.5 (95% CI 0.8-7.3) and 4.9 (95% CI 1.5-16.1) for the *0404- and *0101-containing haplotypes, respectively. Genetic variation in the HLA-DRB1 and the LTA-TNF regions is significantly associated with response to treatment of early RA. These findings may have clinical application through the identification of patients who are most likely to benefit from treatment with methotrexate or etanercept.

Disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: enhancing efficacy by combination

The debilitating effect of rheumatoid arthritis has short-term and long-term components. Early in the course of disease, functional impairment is mostly caused by the local and systemic effects of inflammation. In the long run, unopposed inflammation leads to structural and functional damage, most of which is irreversible even with current treatment. Although the pathophysiological relations between inflammation and destruction are incompletely understood, there is little doubt that patients remain at risk for irreversible damage as long as the inflammation stays active. 1 Emery P Evidence supporting the benefit of early intervention in rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol. 2002; 29: 3-8 PubMed Google Scholar Therapeutic effect of the combination of etanercept and methotrexate compared with each treatment alone in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: double-blind randomised controlled trialThe combination of etanercept and metho-trexate was significantly better in reduction of disease activity, improvement of functional disability, and retardation of radiographic progression compared with methotrexate or etanercept alone. These findings bring us closer to achievement of remission and repair of structural damage in rheumatoid arthritis. Full-Text PDF Department of ErrorSchnabel A. Disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: enhancing efficacy by combination. Lancet 2004; 363: 670–71. In this Commentary (Feb 28), the penultimate sentence of paragraph four should be: “80% of patients receiving combination treatment had no radiological progression during the first year of treatment, as opposed to 57% on methotrexate and 68% on etanercept.” Full-Text PDF

Rheumatoid arthritis in 2003: where are we now with treatment?

The treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has changed considerably over the course of the century. It is difficult to fathom that 100 years ago it was directed towards removing potential...

Treatment of early rheumatoid arthritis.

Increasing attention has focused on the early treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) because of the short time lag that can exist between the onset of synovitis and the development of joint damage and loss of function. For optimal benefit, treatment may need to begin in a theoretical 'window of opportunity' that exists within the first few weeks or months of disease onset. Current evidence suggests that early introduction of therapy with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) can slow the progression of joint damage and improve long-term outcomes. Moreover, results of several studies suggest that early treatment with two- and three-DMARD combinations can produce superior benefits compared with DMARD monotherapy. Although early DMARD therapy has proven ability to slow the pace of joint destruction, individual treatment decisions are problematic because of the difficulty in accurately predicting individual prognosis and differential responses to therapy. Controlled trials are needed in early disease to investigate these questions and to identify treatment strategies that can effectively induce sustained remission and prevent joint damage.

Early rheumatoid arthritis: toward tailor-made therapy.

Therapeutic possibilities for the treatment of early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have expanded largely. New treatment modalities appear very effective with respect to relevant outcomes, such as radiographic progression. At the same time, the costs of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) have exponentially increased so that--given the rather high prevalence of RA--cost may become a limiting factor in the treatment of patients with RA. Therefore, there is a need to define the profile of those patients that should be treated with the most effective, and, unfortunately, the most costly, DMARDs. The authors describe herewith the heterogeneity of RA with respect to its most important outcomes, as well as the inability to predict those outcomes appropriately at the individual patient level. This heterogeneity of RA is not acknowledged in the modern landmark clinical trials that the authors base therapeutic decisions on, and the external validity of those trials is at stake. In this article, the authors discuss the consequences of the heterogeneity of RA in light of the perceived lack of external validity of evidence-generating landmark trials. The authors propose the following solutions to overcome this discrepancy: 1) earlier recognition of RA, and 2) appropriate prediction of treatment efficacy, because the most challenging scientific efforts may be taken in the near future in order to arrive at a tailor-made therapy for every individual presenting with RA.

Paradigm Shifting to Early Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis

Paradigm Shifting to Early Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis

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

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. 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. 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. 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.

Factors predicting response to treatment in rheumatoid arthritis: the importance of disease duration.

To use individual patient data from rheumatoid arthritis (RA) clinical trials to identify factors that affect the response to treatment as defined by the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria for improvement (the "ACR response"). Primary trial data from 14 diverse, randomized, controlled trials of second-line drugs or devices in RA were analyzed. The trials included 11 methotrexate (MTX) trials (5 placebo controlled and 6 comparative, of which 2 were unpublished), 1 combination trial of cyclosporine plus MTX, 1 induction trial of a combination treatment in early RA (the COBRA trial), and 1 placebo-controlled trial of a new device (Prosorba). Both patient factors and disease activity measures (primarily, items from the ACR core criteria set) were available. A total of 1,435 patients (549 in placebo-controlled trials, 886 in comparative trials) were studied. In both active treatment and placebo groups, disease duration had a strong effect on the likelihood of patient response (e.g., with any active treatment, the response rate was 53% for patients with < or =1 year of disease, 43% for 1-2 years' disease duration, 44% for 2-5 years, 38% for 5-10 years, and 35% for > 10 years; P = 0.001). Decreasing response with greater disease duration was seen during treatment with most of the individual active drugs, as well as with placebo. Other factors decreasing the rate of response to treatment included any prior use of a disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD), higher disease functional class (according to the Steinbrocker criteria), low disease activity (according to patient's global assessment), and female sex. Each ACR core set variable exhibited a diminished response to treatment in patients with long-standing disease. The difference between active treatment and placebo response rates was not affected by disease duration nor by other factors associated with the ACR response. RA patients with longer disease duration do not respond as well to treatment compared with patients with early disease, and female sex, prior DMARD use, disease functional class, and disease activity also have effects on the likelihood of patient response to treatment. This has implications for trial interpretation and for the clinical expectations of RA patients.

Comparison of combination therapy with single-drug therapy in early rheumatoid arthritis: a randomised trial

The treatment of rheumatoid arthritis should aim at clinical remission. This multicentre, randomised trial with 2-year follow-up sought evidence on the efficacy and tolerability of combination therapy (sulphasalazine, methotrexate, hydroxychloroquine, and prednisolone) compared with treatment with a single disease-modifying antirheumatic drug, with or without prednisolone, in the treatment of early rheumatoid arthritis. 199 patients were randomly assigned to two treatment groups. 195 started the treatment (97 received combination and 98 single drug therapy). Single-drug therapy in all patients started with sulphasalazine; in 51 patients methotrexate was later substituted. Oral prednisolone was required by 63 patients. The primary outcome measure was induction of remission. Analyses were intention to treat. 87 patients in the combination group and 91 in the single-therapy group completed the trial. After a year, remission was achieved in 24 of 97 patients with combination therapy, and 11 of 98 with single-drug therapy (p=0.011). The remission frequencies at 2 years were 36 of 97 and 18 of 98 (p=0.003). Clinical improvement (American College of Rheumatology criteria of 50% clinical response) was achieved after 1 year in 68 (75%) patients with combination therapy, and in 56 (60%) using single-drug therapy (p=0.028), while at the 2-year visit 69 and 57 respectively (71% vs 58%, p=0.058) had clinically improved. The frequencies of adverse events were similar in both treatment groups. Combination therapy was better and not more hazardous than single treatment in induction of remission in early rheumatoid arthritis. The combination strategy as an initial therapy seems to increase the efficacy of the treatment in at least a proportion of patients with early rheumatoid arthritis.

Cyclosporin and Sulfasalazine Combination in the Treatment of Early Rheumatoid Arthritis

The aim of the study was to assess the efficacy of a new formulation of cyclosporin-A (CyA) and sulfasalazine (SASP) combination treatment in preventing disability and reducing inflammatory disease activity in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis, as well as to assess the tolerability, safety, and suitability for long-term treatment. Forty five patients with early, active rheumatoid arthritis, (RA) were treated with CyA and SASP combination therapy for 12 months. The patients were evaluated by disease activity and radiologic measurements. The combined CyA and SASP therapy seems to be effective. Disease activity parameters improved within 3 months. The individual treatment response rate according to EULAR response criteria was 78% after a one year treatment period. Five patients were withdrawn due to gastrointestinal side effect and two patients because of lack of efficacy. CyA and SASP combination treatment seems to be effective in early severe RA, and with careful monitoring, side effects can be kept under control.

The clinical features of rheumatoid arthritis

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic inflammatory disease characterized by progressive damage of synovial-lined joints and variable extra-articular manifestations. Tendon and bursal involvement are frequent and often clinically dominant in early disease. RA can affect any joint, but it is usually found in metacarpophalangeal, proximal interphalangeal and metatarsophalangeal joints, as well as in the wrists and knee. Articular and periarticular manifestations include joint swelling and tenderness to palpation, with morning stiffness and severe motion impairment in the involved joints. The clinical presentation of RA varies, but an insidious onset of pain with symmetric swelling of small joints is the most frequent finding. RA onset is acute or subacute in about 25% of patients, but its patterns of presentation also include palindromic onset, monoarticular presentation (both slow and acute forms), extra-articular synovitis (tenosynovitis, bursitis), polymyalgic-like onset, and general symptoms (malaise, fatigue, weight loss, fever). The palindromic onset is characterized by recurrent episodes of oligoarthritis with no residual radiologic damage, while the polymyalgic-like onset may be clinically indistinguishable from polymyalgia rheumatica in elderly subjects. RA is characteristically a symmetric erosive disease. Although any joint, including the cricoarytenoid joint, can be affected, the distal interphalangeal, the sacroiliac, and the lumbar spine joints are rarely involved. The clinical features of synovitis are particularly apparent in the morning. Morning stiffness in and around the joints, lasting at least 1 h before maximal improvement is a typical sign of RA. It is a subjective sign and the patient needs to be carefully informed as to the difference between pain and stiffness. Morning stiffness duration is related to disease activity. Hand involvement is the typical early manifestation of rheumatoid arthritis. Synovitis involving the metacarpophalangeal, proximal interphalangeal and wrist joints causes a characteristic tender swelling on palpation with early severe motion impairment and no radiologic evidence of bone damage. Fatigue, feveret, weight loss, and malaise are frequent clinical signs which can be associated with variable manifestations of extra-articular involvement such as rheumatoid nodules, vasculitis, hematologic abnormalities, Felty's syndrome, and visceral involvement. Although there is no laboratory test to exclude or prove the diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis, several laboratory abnormalities can be detected. Abnormal values of the tests for evaluation of systemic inflammation are the most typical humoral features of RA. These include: erythrocyte sedimentation rate, acute phase proteins and plasma viscosity. Erythrocyte sedimentation rate and C-reactive protein provide the best information about the acute phase response. The C-reactive protein is strictly correlated with clinical assessment and radiographic changes. Plain film radiography is the standard investigation to assess the extent of anatomic changes in rheumatoid arthritis patients. The radiographic features of the hand joints in early disease are characterized by soft tissue swelling and mild juxtaarticular osteoporosis. In the the past 10 years, ultrasonography has gained acceptance for studying joint, tendon and bursal involvement in RA. It may improve the early clinical assessment and the follow-up of these patients, showing such details as synovial thickening even within finger joints. Other imaging techniques, such as magnetic resonance, computed tomography and scintigraphy may provide useful information about both the features and the extent for anatomic damage in selected rheumatoid arthritis patients. The natural history of the disease is poorly defined; its clinical course is fluctuating and the prognosis unpredictable. RA is an epidemiologically relevant cause of disability. An adequate early treatment of RA may alter the disease course.

Randomised comparison of combined step-down prednisolone, methotrexate and sulphasalazine with sulphasalazine alone in early rheumatoid arthritis

The value of intensive combination therapy in early rheumatoid arthritis is unproven. In a multicentre, double-blind, randomised trial (COBRA), we compared the combination of sulphasalazine (2 g/day), methotrexate (7.5 mg/week), and prednisolone (initially 60 mg/day, tapered in 6 weekly steps to 7.5 mg/day) with sulphasalazine alone. 155 patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (median duration 4 months) were randomly assigned combined treatment (76) or sulphasalazine alone (79). Prednisolone and methotrexate were tapered and stopped after 28 and 40 weeks, respectively. The main outcomes were the pooled index (a weighted change score of five disease activity measures) and the Sharp/Van der Heijde radiographic damage score in hands and feet. Independent health-care professionals assessed the main outcomes without knowledge of treatment allocation. At week 28, the mean pooled index was 1.4 (95% CI 1.2-1.6) in the combined treatment group and 0.8 (0.6-1.0) in the sulphasalazine group (p < 0.0001). At this time, 55 (72%) and 39 (49%) patients, respectively, were improved according to American College of Rheumatology criteria. The clinical difference between the groups decreased and was no longer significant after prednisolone was stopped, and there were no further changes after methotrexate was stopped. At 28 weeks, the radiographic damage score had increased by a median of 1 (range 0-28) in the combined-therapy group and 4 (0-44) in the sulphasalazine group (p < 0.0001). The increases at week 56 (2 [0-43] vs 6 [0-54], p = 0.004), and at week 80 (4 [0-80] vs 12 [0-72], p = 0.01) were also significant. Further analysis suggests that combined therapy immediately suppressed damage progression, whereas sulphasalazine did so less effectively and with a lag of 6 to 12 months. There were fewer withdrawals in the combined therapy than the sulphasalazine group (6 [8%] vs 23 [29%]), and they occurred later. This combined-therapy regimen offers additional disease control over and above that of sulphasalazine alone that persists for up to a year after corticosteroids are stopped. Although confirmatory studies and long-term follow-up are needed, this approach may prove useful in the treatment of early rheumatoid arthritis.

Effects of Disease-modifying Antirheumatic Drugs on Macrophage Signal Transduction and the Induction of Proinflammatory Cytokines

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is probably the most common source of treatable disability in the Western world. There are several disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), which have proven to be of therapeutic efficacy in RA, but the lack of a potent, reliable treatment for early RA is a major problem in modern medicine. An obvious line of approach in the quest for better antirheumatic drugs is to determine, as closely as possible, the mechanisms of action of the existing DMARDs. In this thesis, several DMARDs have been tested using mouse macrophages. A system of assays has been used to determine their effects on some identified steps in macrophage signal transduction, like the receptor-mediated activation of phospholipase C, the activation of protein kinase C, the up-regulation of the macrophage high-molecular phospholipase A2 and the release of bioactive eicosanoids. The effects of these DMARDs on the induction and release of the key proinflammatory cytokines interleukin 1 (IL-1) and tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-alpha) has also been determined. The DMARDs auranofin, tenidap and antimalarials all inhibit arachidonate release induced by zymosan. Auranofin and tenidap also have multiple effects on protein phosphorylation. Among the drugs tested, auranofin is the most potent inhibitor of the induction of proinflammatory cytokines, irrespective of stimulus. Tenidap inhibits the zymosan-induced expression of IL-1 and TNF-alpha. It also inhibits the LPS-induced expression of IL-1, but potentiates the expression of TNF-alpha due to its cyclooxygenase inhibition. The antimalarial compounds, particularly quinacrine, also inhibit the induction of IL-1 and TNF-alpha. Hydrophilic gold compounds, D-penicillamine, methotrexate and sulfasalazine do not affect the induction of IL-1 of TNF-alpha in macrophages. Three drugs (auranofin, tenidap and quinacrine) that inhibit zymosan-induced phospholipase A2 activation also inhibit the zymosan-induced expression of IL-1 and TNF-alpha. It is interesting to speculate that there might be a common step in the MAP kinase cascade, leading to phospholipase A2 up-regulation and the activation of NK-kappaB and/or other transcription factors regulating the induction of IL-1 and TNF-alpha. Considering the pivotal importance of TNF-alpha and IL-1 in RA, it is interesting that several DMARDs act as inhibitors of the induction of these cytokines in macrophages.

Reduction of synovial inflammation after anti‐cd4 monoclonal antibody treatment in early rheumatoid arthritis

To study the effect of chimeric anti-CD4 monoclonal antibody (MAb) therapy on synovial inflammation, in order to interpret the clinical experience with anti-CD4 treatment. The immunohistologic features of synovial biopsy specimens before and 4 weeks after anti-CD4 MAb (cM-T412) therapy were studied in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. The patients received intravenous doses of either placebo (n = 1) or 10 mg (n = 4), 25 mg (n = 2), or 50 mg (n = 1) of cM-T412 daily for 5 consecutive days. Although the patients did not experience clinical improvement, significant decreases in the number of circulating CD4+ cells, the degree of synovial inflammatory infiltration, and the mean scores for expression of adhesion molecules were found in the 7 patients 4 weeks after receiving cM-T412. The scores for infiltration with CD4+ and other inflammatory cells were particularly reduced following treatment with either 25 mg or 50 mg cM-T412. Cytokines, such as interleukin-1 beta and tumor necrosis factor alpha, could still be detected in the synovial tissue after treatment. The decline in the numbers of inflammatory cells and adhesion molecules in synovial tissue after CD4+ cell depletion supports the view that CD4+ T cells orchestrate local cellular infiltration. The lack of clinical effect of anti-CD4 therapy might be explained by an insufficient decrease in the number of synovial CD4+ cells and by the persistence of cytokines. Determination of whether more adequate dosing would lead to a clinical improvement must await further study.

Disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, including methotrexate, gold, antimalarials, and D-penicillamine.

Recent literature continues to promote the early use of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), especially the less toxic agents such as hydroxychloroquine. Reports of combination DMARD treatments have been disappointing, and careful attention must be paid to clinical trial design if the efficacy of combination therapies is to be established. Methotrexate retains its prominent role, and its mechanism of action has been the subject of many reports; its toxicity remains the most common reason for treatment termination. Guidelines for monitoring hepatic toxicity of methotrexate have been published and may help reduce the need for invasive biopsy procedures. Significant risk factors for methotrexate pulmonary toxicity remain difficult to identify. Large placebo-controlled studies of both sulfasalazine and hydroxychloroquine have been reported and have demonstrated the efficacy of these agents in the treatment of early rheumatoid arthritis. Awareness of drug-toxicity profiles is important for physicians who prescribe these agents.

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

To investigate the efficacy and tolerability of sulfasalazine (SSZ) in the treatment of early rheumatoid arthritis (RA). 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. 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. 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.