Maddison P, Kiely P, Kirkham B, Lawson T, Moots R, Proudfoot D, Reece R, Scott D, Sword R, Taggart A, Thwaites C, Williams E
Department of Rheumatology, Ysbyty Gwynedd Hospital, University of Wales, Bangor LL57 2PW, UK.
Rheumatology (Oxford). 2005 Mar;44(3):280-6. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/keh500. Epub 2005 Jan 18.
To determine, by consensus, the optimal use of leflunomide in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), using a multidisciplinary panel of experts and performing meta-analyses of available data.
A multidisciplinary panel of experts in RA was convened. Important questions, pertinent to the use of leflunomide in the treatment of RA, were defined by consensus at an initial meeting. Each question was allocated to subgroups of two or three members, who worked separately to prepare a balanced opinion, based on published literature, data from individual patients taking part in phase II and phase III clinical trials provided by Aventis, and data from a USA-based medical claims database (AETNA). The full group then reconvened to agree on an overall consensus statement. Recommendations concerning efficacy and tolerability versus comparator drugs and placebo were derived from two new meta-analyses.
Leflunomide was at least as effective as sulphasalazine and methotrexate, and equally well tolerated on meta-analysis of trial data. Overall withdrawal rates for all adverse events were similar for all three drugs. Avoidance of the loading dose reduces 'nuisance' side-effects (e.g. nausea), but probably delays the onset of action. Adverse events could usually be managed by dose reduction and/or symptomatic therapy.
On the basis of efficacy, safety and cost, leflunomide should be considered in patients with RA who have failed first-line DMARD drug therapy. In refractory cases, leflunomide may be used in combination with, for example, methotrexate before biological agents. Therapy should be initiated by a specialist, but repeat prescribing in general practice on a shared care basis is acceptable using agreed protocols. Clear mechanisms are required to monitor toxicity, with good communication between the patient and rheumatologist to manage nuisance side-effects and avoid unnecessary discontinuation of leflunomide.
通过多学科专家小组达成共识,确定来氟米特在类风湿关节炎(RA)中的最佳应用,并对现有数据进行荟萃分析。
召集了一个RA多学科专家小组。在首次会议上通过共识确定了与来氟米特治疗RA相关的重要问题。每个问题分配给由两三名成员组成的小组,他们各自根据已发表的文献、安万特公司提供的参与II期和III期临床试验的个体患者数据以及美国医疗索赔数据库(AETNA)的数据,编写一份平衡的意见。然后全体成员再次开会,就总体共识声明达成一致。关于与对照药物和安慰剂相比的疗效和耐受性的建议来自两项新的荟萃分析。
在试验数据的荟萃分析中,来氟米特至少与柳氮磺胺吡啶和甲氨蝶呤一样有效,耐受性也相同。三种药物所有不良事件的总体停药率相似。避免负荷剂量可减少“烦扰性”副作用(如恶心),但可能会延迟起效。不良事件通常可通过减少剂量和/或对症治疗来处理。
基于疗效、安全性和成本,对于一线缓解病情抗风湿药物(DMARD)治疗失败的RA患者,应考虑使用来氟米特。在难治性病例中,在使用生物制剂之前,来氟米特可与例如甲氨蝶呤联合使用。治疗应由专科医生启动,但在共同照护的基础上,按照商定的方案在全科医疗中重复开处方是可以接受的。需要有明确的机制来监测毒性,患者和风湿病学家之间要有良好的沟通,以处理烦扰性副作用并避免不必要地停用 来氟米特。