Bezerra Elaine Lira Medeiros, Vilar Maria José Pereira, da Trindade Neto Pedro Bezerra, Sato Emília Inoue
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, Brazil.
Arthritis Rheum. 2005 Oct;52(10):3073-8. doi: 10.1002/art.21358.
To evaluate the efficacy of clofazimine (CFZ) compared with chloroquine diphosphate (CDP) for the treatment of cutaneous involvement in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE).
A prospective, randomized, controlled, double-blind clinical trial was carried out in SLE patients with active cutaneous lesions, of whom 16 were randomized to receive CFZ at 100 mg/day and 17 received CDP at 250 mg/day for 6 months. All drugs had a similar appearance to avoid identification. Both groups received broad-spectrum sunscreens twice a day and the prednisone dose was kept stable during the study. Cutaneous lesions were evaluated by 2 blinded observers at baseline and at months 1, 2, 4, and 6.
Thirty-three patients were randomized to a treatment group, of whom 27 completed 6 months of treatment. The groups were homogeneous and comparable in terms of demographic and clinical characteristics. Five CFZ-treated patients and 1 CDP-treated patient (P = 0.15) dropped out due to development of severe lupus flare. At the end of the study, 12 CFZ-treated patients (75%) and 14 CDP-treated patients (82.4%) had complete or near-complete remission of skin lesions; intention-to-treat analysis showed no significant difference in the response rates between groups. Side effects, mainly skin and gastrointestinal events, were frequent in both groups, but no patients had to discontinue their treatment.
These findings suggest that CFZ is equally as effective as CDP in controlling cutaneous lesions in SLE patients. However, we cannot exclude the possibility that the CFZ itself could be the cause of systemic lupus flare.
评估氯法齐明(CFZ)与磷酸氯喹(CDP)治疗系统性红斑狼疮(SLE)皮肤受累的疗效。
对有活动性皮肤损害的SLE患者进行一项前瞻性、随机、对照、双盲临床试验,其中16例随机接受CFZ 100mg/天治疗,17例接受CDP 250mg/天治疗,为期6个月。所有药物外观相似以避免识别。两组均每天两次使用广谱防晒霜,研究期间泼尼松剂量保持稳定。由2名盲法观察者在基线及第1、2、4和6个月时对皮肤损害进行评估。
33例患者被随机分入治疗组,其中27例完成了6个月的治疗。两组在人口统计学和临床特征方面具有同质性和可比性。5例接受CFZ治疗的患者和1例接受CDP治疗的患者(P = 0.15)因严重狼疮发作而退出。研究结束时,12例接受CFZ治疗的患者(75%)和14例接受CDP治疗的患者(82.4%)皮肤损害完全或接近完全缓解;意向性分析显示两组缓解率无显著差异。两组副作用均常见,主要为皮肤和胃肠道事件,但无患者不得不停止治疗。
这些结果表明,CFZ在控制SLE患者皮肤损害方面与CDP同样有效。然而,我们不能排除CFZ本身可能是系统性狼疮发作原因的可能性。