Suppr超能文献

传统的改善病情抗风湿药(DMARDs)是否已过时?与生物制剂相比,胃肠外使用金制剂的有效性。

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

作者信息

Rau Rolf

机构信息

Department of Rheumatology, Evangelisches Fachkrankenhaus, Rosenstrasse 2, 40882, Ratingen, Germany.

出版信息

Clin Rheumatol. 2005 Jun;24(3):189-202. doi: 10.1007/s10067-004-0869-8. Epub 2004 Jul 24.

Abstract

This review tries to answer the question of whether in the face of the recently introduced biologics conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) can still be recommended in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We start with an overview of the oldest conventional DMARD, injectable gold (Au), which was introduced in the treatment of RA in the 1920s. The effect of gold is directed at a number of different sites of the immune system. A significant improvement of clinical and biochemical disease activity parameters as well as an inhibition of X-ray progression has been shown in many studies. Head-to-head comparisons between gold and high-dose methotrexate (MTX) demonstrated no significant difference but some advantages for gold. Since trials comparing biologics with gold will never be performed, an indirect comparison was done by analyzing the results of trials with gold with those with biologics. Conclusions from such comparisons have to be drawn with caution especially since the methodology for performing trials has changed with time. We selected four trials with gold (two open, one placebo-controlled, and one comparison with MTX) and five trials with biologics (three placebo-controlled, one dose escalation study, and one comparison with MTX). In all these trials baseline data regarding swollen joint count (SJC), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and C-reactive protein (CRP) were roughly comparable and, with the exception of interleukin (IL)-1 RA, demonstrated a similar improvement of over 50% already after 6 months [with faster onset with tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-alpha blockade]. American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response data were not available for the older gold trials. European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) response criteria could be calculated for the Au/MTX trial and were-for these compounds-only slightly inferior to the results with adalimumab. X-ray response is especially difficult to compare across studies. Although an inhibition with Au and MTX could be demonstrated, this occurred-similar to corticosteroid treatment-earlier and more pronounced with TNF-alpha blockers. We confirm the statement of Weinblatt that the most modern DMARDs do not appear to be much better than the oldest one indicating that conventional DMARDs are not outdated. Therefore, a sufficient trial of conventional DMARDs should precede the introduction of treatment with the very expensive biologics.

摘要

本综述试图回答在面对最近引入的生物制剂时,传统的改善病情抗风湿药物(DMARDs)是否仍可推荐用于类风湿关节炎(RA)的治疗这一问题。我们首先概述最古老的传统DMARD——注射用金(Au),它于20世纪20年代被引入RA的治疗。金的作用针对免疫系统的多个不同部位。许多研究表明,其可显著改善临床和生化疾病活动参数,并抑制X线进展。金与高剂量甲氨蝶呤(MTX)的直接比较显示无显著差异,但金有一些优势。由于永远不会进行生物制剂与金的对比试验,因此通过分析金制剂试验结果与生物制剂试验结果进行了间接比较。进行此类比较得出的结论必须谨慎,特别是因为进行试验的方法已随时间而改变。我们选择了四项金制剂试验(两项开放试验、一项安慰剂对照试验和一项与MTX的对比试验)以及五项生物制剂试验(三项安慰剂对照试验、一项剂量递增研究和一项与MTX的对比试验)。在所有这些试验中,关于肿胀关节计数(SJC)、红细胞沉降率(ESR)和C反应蛋白(CRP)的基线数据大致可比,除白细胞介素(IL)-1 RA外,6个月后均显示出超过50%的类似改善[肿瘤坏死因子(TNF)-α阻断起效更快]。较老的金制剂试验没有美国风湿病学会(ACR)反应数据。欧洲抗风湿病联盟(EULAR)反应标准可用于Au/MTX试验的计算,对于这些化合物而言,其结果仅略逊于阿达木单抗。不同研究间的X线反应尤其难以比较。虽然Au和MTX均可显示出抑制作用,但与皮质类固醇治疗类似,TNF-α阻滞剂的抑制作用出现得更早且更明显。我们证实了温布拉特的观点,即最现代的DMARDs似乎并不比最古老的DMARDs好多少,这表明传统DMARDs并未过时。因此,在引入非常昂贵的生物制剂治疗之前,应先对传统DMARDs进行充分试验。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验