Etanercept and sulfasalazine, alone and combined, in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis despite receiving sulfasalazine: a double-blind comparison

被引:92
|
作者
Combe, B.
Codreanu, C.
Fiocco, U.
Gaubitz, M.
Geusens, P. P.
Kvien, T. K.
Pavelka, K.
Sambrook, P. N.
Smolen, J. S.
Wajdula, J.
Fatenejad, S.
机构
[1] Wyeth Ayerst Res, Clin Res & Dev, Collegeville, PA 19426 USA
[2] Hop Lapeyronie, Serv Immunorhumatol, F-34059 Montpellier, France
[3] Ctr Metodol Reumatol, Bucharest, Romania
[4] Univ Padua Polyclin, Cattedra & Div Reumatol, Padua, Italy
[5] Univ Munster, Med Clin B, D-4400 Munster, Germany
[6] Hasselt Univ, Biomed Res Ctr, Diepenbeek, Belgium
[7] Diakonhjemmet Hosp Oslo, Dept Rheumatol, Oslo, Norway
[8] Inst Rheumatol, Prague, Czech Republic
[9] Royal N Shore Hosp, Dept Rheumatol, St Leonards, NSW 2065, Australia
[10] Krankenhaus Lainz, Dept Med 2, Linz, Austria
关键词
D O I
10.1136/ard.2005.049650
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of etanercept and sulfasalazine, alone and in combination, in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis despite sulfasalazine treatment. Methods: A double-blind, randomised study in adult patients with active rheumatoid arthritis despite stable sulfasalazine (2-3 g/day) treatment. The primary end point was a 20% response by the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria at 24 weeks. Results: At baseline, the three treatment groups (sulfasalazine, n = 50; etanercept, n = 103; etanercept and sulfasalazine, n = 101) were comparable for demographic variables and disease activity. Lack of efficacy was the primary reason for discontinuation (sulfasalazine, n = 12; etanercept, n = 1; etanercept and sulfasalazine, n=4; p < 0.001). Significantly more patients receiving etanercept, alone or in combination (74% for each), achieved ACR 20 responses at 24 weeks than those receiving sulfasalazine (28%; p < 0.01). Similarly, more patients in the etanercept groups achieved ACR 50 and ACR 70 responses than those in the sulfasalazine group (p < 0.01). In the groups receiving etanercept, significant differences in the ACR core components were observed by week 2 compared with those receiving sulfasalazine alone (p < 0.01). The incidences of several common adverse events (headache, nausea, asthenia) were lower with etanercept alone than with the combination (p < 0.05), but infections and injection site reactions were higher with etanercept alone (p < 0.05). The safety profiles of both etanercept treatment groups were comparable with previous experience of etanercept. Conclusions: For all efficacy variables assessed, etanercept alone or in combination with sulfasalazine resulted in substantial and similar improvement in disease activity from baseline to week 24 compared with sulfasalazine alone in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis despite their sulfasalazine treatment. All three treatments were generally well tolerated.
引用
收藏
页码:1357 / 1362
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] PROSPECTIVE, RANDOMIZED, DOUBLE-BLIND COMPARISON OF BENZALAZINE AND SULFASALAZINE IN THE TREATMENT OF ACTIVE ULCERATIVE-COLITIS
    FLEIG, WE
    LAUDAGE, G
    SOMMER, H
    WELLMANN, W
    STANGE, EF
    RIEMANN, J
    DIGESTION, 1988, 40 (03) : 173 - 180
  • [22] SULFASALAZINE IN PSORIATIC-ARTHRITIS - A DOUBLE-BLIND PLACEBO-CONTROLLED STUDY
    FARR, M
    KITAS, GD
    WATERHOUSE, L
    JUBB, R
    FELIXDAVIES, D
    BACON, PA
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF RHEUMATOLOGY, 1990, 29 (01): : 46 - 49
  • [23] Assessment of functional status among patients with active rheumatoid arthritis in a double-blind trial of etanercept and methotrexate, alone and combined (year 3 tempo trial results)
    Van der Heijde, D
    Klareskog, L
    Pedersen, R
    Fatenejad, S
    Singh, A
    ANNALS OF THE RHEUMATIC DISEASES, 2005, 64 : 408 - 408
  • [24] Leflunomide vs sulfasalazine in rheumatoid arthritis: 24-month update of a randomized, double-blind study.
    Kalden, JR
    Schattenkirchner, M
    Smolen, JS
    Scott, DL
    Loew-Friedrich, I
    Oed, C
    Rosenburg, R
    ARTHRITIS AND RHEUMATISM, 1999, 42 (09): : S271 - S271
  • [25] A double-blind, randomized, phase III trial of leflunomide vs placebo vs sulfasalazine in rheumatoid arthritis.
    Smolen, JS
    Kalden, JR
    Rozman, B
    Scott, DL
    Loew-Friedrich, I
    Rosenburg, R
    ARTHRITIS AND RHEUMATISM, 1998, 41 (09): : S131 - S131
  • [26] A DOUBLE-BLIND CONTROLLED-STUDY COMPARING SULFASALAZINE WITH PLACEBO IN RHEUMATOID-FACTOR (RF)-NEGATIVE RHEUMATOID-ARTHRITIS
    FARR, M
    WATERHOUSE, L
    JOHNSON, AE
    KITAS, GD
    JUBB, RW
    BACON, PA
    CLINICAL RHEUMATOLOGY, 1995, 14 (05) : 531 - 536
  • [27] RANDOMIZED, DOUBLE-BLIND STUDY COMPARING CHS-0214 WITH ETANERCEPT IN PATIENTS WITH ACTIVE RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS (RA) DESPITE METHOTREXATE (MTX) THERAPY
    O'Dell, J.
    Takeuchi, T.
    Tanaka, Y.
    Louw, I.
    Tiabut, T.
    Kai, M.
    Oribe, M.
    Nakashima, S.
    Finck, B.
    ANNALS OF THE RHEUMATIC DISEASES, 2016, 75 : 143 - 143
  • [28] A RANDOMIZED DOUBLE-BLIND CONTROLLED TRIAL (RCT) OF SULFASALAZINE (SSZ) COMBINED WITH PULSES OF METHYLPREDNISOLONE (MP) OR PLACEBO IN THE TREATMENT OF RHEUMATOID-ARTHRITIS (RA)
    FERRAZ, MB
    CICONELLI, RM
    ATRA, E
    ARTHRITIS AND RHEUMATISM, 1993, 36 (09): : S268 - S268
  • [29] DOUBLE-BLIND COMPARATIVE STUDY OF RADIOGRAPHIC PROGRESSION OF ETANERCEPT (E) AND METHOTREXATE (MTX), ALONE AND COMBINED (E plus MTX), IN PATIENTS WITH ACTIVE RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS (TEMPO TRIAL)
    van der Heijde, D.
    Klareskog, L.
    DeJager, J.
    Gough, A.
    Kalden, J.
    Malaise, M.
    Mola, E. Martin
    Pavelka, K.
    Sany, J.
    Settas, L.
    Wajdula, J.
    Pedersen, R.
    Fatenejad, S.
    Sanda, M.
    Singh, A.
    RHEUMATOLOGY, 2004, 43 : 37 - 37
  • [30] DOUBLE-BLIND CONTROLLED COMPARISON OF BALSALAZIDE AND SULFASALAZINE IN MAINTENANCE THERAPY OF PATIENTS WITH ULCERATIVE-COLITIS
    MCINTYRE, PB
    RODRIGUES, CA
    LENNARDJONES, JE
    BARRISON, IG
    WALKER, JG
    BARON, JH
    GUT, 1986, 27 (10) : 1271 - 1272