Introduction. Combinations of disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) are increasingly used to treat rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Early trials showed their toxicity while recent trials suggest superior efficacy. Trials of DMARD combinations have enrolled different types of patient (early or established RA), used different designs (step-up, parallel or step-down) and utilized a range of outcome measures. We undertook a systematic review of combination DMARD therapy for RA and carried out a meta-analysis to evaluate the evidence for efficacy and toxicity.Method. Medline, PubMed and EmBase were searched using MESH headlines 'arthritis, rheumatoid', 'drug therapy, combination' and 'randomized controlled trial' (RCT) for papers published from 1975 to April 2004. References from published articles were also searched. Three independent assessors evaluated abstracts and selected trials for detailed examination. Trials were excluded if their quality was poor, were not published in English or studied DMARDs not licensed to treat RA. Two independent assessors extracted data. Efficacy was assessed by the numbers of patients withdrawn due to lack of efficacy. Toxicity was assessed by the numbers of patients withdrawn due to adverse events. Risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated and meta-analysis was carried out based on a random effects model. Sensitivity analyses evaluated different treatment combinations, trial designs, study populations and outcome measures.Results. Fifty-three potentially relevant RCTs were identified. Twelve were excluded due to: using unlicensed DMARDs (n = 3); reporting in journal supplements of RCTs already included (n = 2); follow-up of an earlier RCT, report of biological outcomes or pharmacokinetics (n = 5); and non-English language publications (n = 2). Forty-one RCTs were evaluated in detail and another five excluded (three open-labelled studies and two with high patient attrition); 36 studies were included in the meta-analysis. These comprised 13 step-up, 16 parallel and 7 step-down trials. Nine assessed early RA and 27 established RA. Seven added steroids to DMARD monotherapy and one study added steroids to DMARD combinations. Six assessed methotrexate (MTX) plus tumour necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors. Overall, combination DMARD therapy was more effective than monotherapy (RR 0.35; 95% CI 0.28, 0.45) although the risk of toxicity was also slightly higher (RR 1.37; 95% CI 1.16, 1.62). Combinations of MTX with TNF inhibitors and MTX with sulphasalazine or anti-malarials showed good efficacy/toxicity ratios.Conclusions. DMARD combinations vary in their efficacy/toxicity ratio. MTX plus sulphasalazine and/or anti-malarials and MTX plus TNF inhibitors have particularly favourable benefit/risk ratios.

BACKGROUND:Current disease management in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has moved towards "inverting the therapeutic pyramid" by introducing disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) early. Despite the logic of early DMARD therapy, there is a dearth of supportive evidence for this approach. We report a randomised controlled trial comparing sulphasalazine monotherapy with diclofenac monotherapy in early RA. The primary aim was to provide unequivocal evidence that early DMARDs prevent erosive damage. The secondary aim was to evaluate if sulphasalazine used alone has comparable symptomatic benefits to NSAIDs.METHODS:117 patients with RA for under 12 months of diagnosis (mean 2 months) were randomised (62 sulphasalazine; 55 diclofenac). Sulphasalazine patients comprised 76% women, and 58% were rheumatoidfactor positive. Diclofenac patients comprised 74% women, and 54% were seropositive. 36% completed 12 months of therapy (16 sulphasalazine; 26 diclofenac); sulphasalazine was given for a mean period of 21 weeks and diclofenac for a mean period of 33 weeks. Results were analysed on an intention to treat basis.RESULTS:After 12 months the mean number of new erosions in patients randomised to receive sulphasalazine was 2.0 (95%CI 0.9, 3.1) and in patients randomised to receive diclofenac was 7.5 (95%CI 4.1, 10.9; p = 0.002 by Student's unpaired t-test). An analysis of valid compliant completers showed the mean number of new erosions in patients who received 12 months therapy with sulphasalazine was 2.3 (95%CI 0.6, 4.0) and in patients who received 12 months diclofenac was 10.5 (95%CI 5.0, 15.9; p = 0.018 by Student's unpaired t-test). The Ritchie articular index, swollen joint counts and pain scores decreased with both sulphasalazine and diclofenac, with mean falls in both groups of 15-20% at 2 weeks and 30-40% at 4 and 8 weeks. There were no differences between treatments. Disease activity scores showed similar highly significant mean decreases within both treatment groups (P < 0.001 in all cases) of 0.5 at 2 weeks and 1.0 at 4 weeks; at 12 and 26 weeks they were significantly lower with sulphasalazine (p = 0.036 and 0.045). 75% of the patients given sulphasalazine and 65% of those given diclofenac had one or more adverse events with no major differences between treatments.CONCLUSIONS:These results show that an accelerated dosing schedule of sulphasalazine has identical effects to diclofenac in reducing symptoms, indicating it is a rapidly effective DMARD. They also provide unequivocal evidence, analysed on an intention to treat basis, that early treatment with sulphasalazine significantly reduces the extent of radiological progression in active RA.

Objective. To investigate the safety and efficacy of MRA, a recombinant human anti-interleukin-6 (anti-IL-6) receptor monoclonal antibody of the IgG1 subclass that inhibits the function of IL-6, in patients with established rheumatoid arthritis (RA).Methods. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-escalation trial was conducted in 45 patients with active RA, as defined by the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) revised criteria. Patients were sequentially allocated to receive a single intravenous dose of either 0.1, 1, 5, or 10 mg/kg of MRA or placebo. The primary efficacy end point was meeting the ACR 20% response criteria at week 2 after treatment.Results. Demographic features were similar between treatment groups. At week 2, a significant treatment difference was observed between the 5 mg/kg of MRA and placebo, with 5 patients (55.6%) in the MRA cohort and none in the placebo cohort achieving ACR 20% improvement. There was no statistically significant difference in the ACR 20% response between the other 3 MRA cohorts and placebo at week 2. The mean disease activity score at week 2 in those who received 5 mg/kg and 10 mg/kg of MRA was 4.8 and 4.7 (P < 0.001 and P < 0.001 by analysis of variance), respectively. These mean scores were statistically significantly lower than those in the 0.1- and 1-mg/kg MRA and the placebo cohorts (6.4, 6.2, and 7.0, respectively). The erythrocyte sedimentation rate and C-reactive protein values fell significantly in the 5- and 10-mg/kg MRA cohorts and normalized 2 weeks after treatment. Seventeen patients (5, 4, 6, 2, and 0 patients in the placebo, 0.1-, 1-, 5-, and 10-mg/kg MRA cohorts, respectively) required corticosteroid or disease-modifying antirheumatic drug treatment because of active disease before study end. They were regarded as nonresponders from the time they received these treatments. Diarrhea was the most common adverse event, occurring in 8% of patients. Seven patients (15.6%) reported a severe adverse event (3, 1, 2, and 2 patients in the placebo, 0.1-, 1-, and 10-mg/kg MRA cohorts). There were no serious adverse events that were thought to be related to the study drug.Conclusion. This is the first randomized controlled trial showing that inhibition of IL-6 significantly improved the signs and symptoms of RA and normalized the acute-phase reactants. Further research with multiple dosing is necessary to define the most appropriate therapeutic regimen of MRA in RA.

OBJECTIVE:Results of an earlier open-label pilot study showed that 4162W94 was a relatively non-depleting anti-CD4 monoclonal antibody that induced >80% down-modulation of CD4 molecules from the surface of T lymphocytes. This placebo-controlled repeat-cycle study was conducted in active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients to determine the duration of CD4 blockade required to achieve lasting clinical benefit.METHODS:Following DMARD washout, 48 patients (i.e. three cohorts of 16 patients) with ACR-defined RA were to be dosed with 1 (cohort 1), 2 (cohort 2) or 3 (cohort 3) cycles of 5x300 mg 4162W94 or placebo (12 and 4 patients per cohort respectively) at monthly intervals. There was at least 3 months of follow-up after dosing. Clinical outcome was assessed in evaluable patients (receiving at least 80% of each dose course) using ACR20 criteria (required on two consecutive visits). CD4 lymphocyte counts and adverse events were also monitored.RESULTS:Sixteen patients were dosed in each of the first two cohorts; however, the dose was reduced in cohort 3 after five patients had received up to two dose cycles due to accumulating evidence of a high frequency of skin rash. These patients were analysed according to the number of cycles received. A further eight patients received 5x100 mg for one to three cycles prior to stopping the study for administrative reasons. Four of 13 (P=0.119 vs placebo) and 7/13 (P=0.015 vs placebo) in cohorts 1 and 2 respectively achieved ACR20 response on at least two consecutive occasions. No patient receiving 5x100 mg/day or placebo achieved ACR20. Four patients were still responding at the end of the 3-month follow-up period. CD4 lymphocyte suppression (<0.2x10(9)/l on at least two successive occasions) occurred in 11/34 patients who received 4162W94 vs none on placebo. Rash occurred in 21/34 monoclonal antibody-treated patients, including one case of biopsy-confirmed cutaneous vasculitis and 1/11 placebo patients.CONCLUSION:4162W94 demonstrated significant clinical efficacy in this study. However, because of unacceptable CD4 lymphopenia and rash, the original hypothesis that prolonged CD4 blockade would give lasting clinical benefit was not tested.

Since idiopathic inflammatory myositis is relatively uncommon, randomized placebo controlled trials are rare. Although corticosteroids have not been tested in randomized controlled trials, general clinical consensus among physicians has accepted it as effective therapy. However, corticosteroid toxicity leads to significant disability in many patients. For patients with refractory dermatomyositis, intravenous immunoglobulin is an effective short-term treatment but its long-term effect remains unknown. Immunosuppressants are commonly used in refractory inflammatory myositis; evidence for their efficacy, with very few exceptions, has been derived from case reports and open studies with small numbers of patients. Even in randomized trials, the lack of validated and generally accepted outcome measures makes it difficult to compare the effect of interventions in different studies. Although the balance of evidence suggests that immunosuppressants are equally effective in dermatomyositis and polymyositis, there are no randomized controlled trials to show if any of these drugs, individually or in combination, is best. For uncommon diseases, such as inflammatory myositis, only multicentre randomized controlled trials involving rheumatologists and neurologists will define the optimal therapy.

OBJECTIVE Biological products that neutralize tumour necrosis factor alpha (TNF-alpha) are beneficial in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We studied the effects of CDP870, a novel anti-TNF-alpha antibody fragment modified to obtain a prolonged plasma half-life ( approximately 14 days). METHODS Thirty-six patients were randomized in a double-blind, ascending-dose group study to a single intravenous infusion of placebo (n = 12) or 1, 5 or 20 mg/kg CDP870 (each n = 8). The patients were predominantly female (30/36), had a mean age of 56 yr and a mean duration of RA of 13 years. They had received a mean of five DMARDs or experimental therapies (with 1 month washout before the study started) and had active disease. Continuation of NSAIDs and up to 7.5 mg prednisolone daily was allowed. Following the blinded dosing period, 32 patients received a single open-label infusion of either 5 or 20 mg/kg CDP870. RESULTS In the blinded dosing period, 6/12 placebo patients withdrew from the study (for deteriorating RA < or =4 weeks after dosing). Two of 24 CDP870-treated patients withdrew, both in the 1 mg/kg group (for deteriorating RA or lost to follow up >4 weeks after dosing). The proportion of patients with ACR20 improvement for the per-protocol population with the last observation carried forward was 16.7, 50, 87.5 and 62.5% after 0, 1, 5 and 20 mg/kg CDP870 respectively (combined treatment effect, P = 0.012, primary analysis) at 4 weeks and 16.7, 25, 75 and 75% (P = 0.032) at 8 weeks. The proportion of patients with ACR50 improvement for the per-protocol population with the last observation carried forward was 0, 12.5, 12.5 and 50% after 0, 1, 5 and 20 mg/kg CDP870 respectively (combined treatment effect, P = 0.079) at 4 weeks and 0, 12.5, 12.5 and 50% (P = 0.079) at 8 weeks. Following the open-label dose of CDP870, similar beneficial effects were achieved. CONCLUSION CDP870 is effective, was very well tolerated in this small study, and has an extended duration of action following one or more intravenous doses.

OBJECTIVE Previous randomized controlled trials for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with acid-soluble chicken and bovine type II collagen (CII) have produced conflicting results. This randomized, double-blind, controlled trial examined the therapeutic effect of bovine CII tablets in RA. METHODS CII tablets were prepared by adsorption onto a lactose base. Patients with a duration of RA of > or = 2 years and who had failed treatment with at least 1 slow-acting drug were recruited, provided that they had active arthritis. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either 0.05 mg, 0.5 mg, or 5 mg of CII or placebo daily for 6 months. All slow-acting drugs were stopped at least 4 weeks before starting CII, although prednisolone was permitted at dosages < 10 mg/day. Clinical assessments were performed at screening and at 0, 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 weeks of treatment. RESULTS Fifty-five patients were recruited. Initially, there were no significant differences in mean Disease Activity Scores between groups. At 24 weeks, there was a significant difference (P = 0.041, by Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance); the major components of this difference were attributable to relatively large decreases in the 0.5 mg CII group (19% of initial values) and to minimal decreases in patients receiving placebo (3% of initial values). Twenty patients had American College of Rheumatology 20% responses; 11 of these were in the 0.5 mg CII group and 3 were in each of the other groups, a significant difference (chi2 = 14.6, P = 0.002). There was no significant difference in any clinical measure between the placebo, 0.05 mg CII, and 5 mg CII groups. There were no side effects associated with CII treatment. CONCLUSION Treatment with 0.5 mg/day of bovine CII is well tolerated and produces small, but significant, disease improvement in RA. However, the therapeutic window is narrow. The difference between our results and those of other trials may relate to the dose, species, and formulation of the CII.

Rheumatoid arthritis is a common chronic inflammatory and destructive arthropathy that cannot be cured and that has substantial personal, social, and economic costs. The long-term prognosis is poor: 80 percent of affected patients are disabled after 20 years,1 and life expectancy is reduced by an average of 3 to 18 years.2 The medical cost of rheumatoid arthritis averages $5,919 per case per year in the United States3 and approximately £2,600 per case per year in the United Kingdom.4 Current slow-acting antirheumatic drugs have limited efficacy and many side effects. Moreover, they do not improve the long-term prognosis of rheumatoid arthritis. . . .

Synovial fluid proteins from microliter volumes of synovial fluid were resolved by two-dimensional polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis and detected by silver staining to investigate the feasibility of using two-dimensional (2D) electrophoresis in the clinical research setting and provide global disease information of disease progression. Several hundred proteins could be resolved as spots, many of which displayed the characteristic pattern of plasma-derived glycoproteins. The lowest level of detection was approximately 0.2 ng from a total of 50 microg of protein loaded. Most of the proteins could be identified on the basis of pI and molecular weight when compared with plasma protein maps on the World Wide Web. Unknown proteins were characterized by mass spectrometry of tryptic digests and by comparison with peptide databases. Synovial fluids from patients with rheumatoid arthritis were analyzed using this technique. Each subject received a fixed dose of antibody to CD4 as part of a phase II clinical trial to determine the efficacy of this immunosuppressive treatment in modifying disease activity. Synovial fluid was removed at day 0, followed by administration of antibody. Subsequent removal of synovial fluid and additional administration of antibody were carried out at different times thereafter. Changes in levels of acute-phase proteins were quantified by densitometry of silver-stained 2D polyacrylamide gels. Other parameters of disease progression such as serum C-reactive protein and physician's global assessment of clinical condition were used for comparison. In this way, changes in acute-phase proteins towards normal levels, as measured by 2D polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis, could be correlated with clinical improvement and conventional clinical chemistry measurements. Thus, the system can be used for quantitative analysis of protein expression in sites of autoimmune disease activity such as the synovial fluid of rheumatoid arthritis patients.

BACKGROUNDCD4(+) T cells are important mediators in the pathogenesis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). In this open-label, dose-escalating study, we examined the pharmacokinetic (PK), clinical, biological and immunological effects of a humanized IgG1 anti-CD4 monoclonal antibody (mAb), 4162W94, in the peripheral blood (PB) and synovial fluid (SF) of RA patients.METHODTwenty-four patients in four cohorts (six patients in each cohort) were allocated to be treated with five consecutive daily doses of 4162W94 (10, 30, 100 or 300 mg i.v.). Disease activity was measured by the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria and disease activity score (DAS). We also measured 4162W94 concentration, the percentage of 4162W94-coated CD4(+) lymphocytes, percentage down-modulation of CD4, interleukin-6 (IL-6) and tumour necrosis factor alpha (TNFalpha) levels in the PB and SF.RESULTSA direct relationship between 4162W94 dose, biological response and clinical outcome was seen. Treatment with 10 and 30 mg of 4162W94 for 5 consecutive days resulted in transient coating and down-modulation of CD4(+) lymphocytes, with little effect observed beyond the final dose. However, treatment with 100 and 300 mg resulted in sustained coating and/or down-modulation for 3 weeks and 4 weeks, respectively, in PB and >4 weeks in SF in one patient from the 300 mg cohort. There was a dose-related moderate but transient depression in the CD4(+) lymphocyte count in most patients, with all but three returning to >0.40 x 10(9)/l or >75% baseline by the end of the study period. Significant clinical improvement (ACR 20%) was seen in only 1/6 patients in each of the 10- and 30-mg cohorts; however, 3/6 and 5/5 patients in the 100 and 300-mg cohorts, respectively, were ACR 20% responders. In addition, there were significant reductions in PB acute phase reactants as well as SF IL-6 and TNFalpha concentrations in parallel to clinical improvement.CONCLUSIONData from this pilot study suggest that 4162W94 is a clinically active novel immunotherapeutic agent that may suppress inflammation in RA.

OBJECTIVE:We investigated the effect of an engineered human anti-tumor necrosis factor-alpha antibody, CDP571, on immune functions as well as bone and cartilage turnover in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in a placebo controlled trial. We also assessed the effects of repeated treatment with CDP571 in an open label continuation study.METHOD:Thirty-six patients were treated with either placebo or 0.1, 1, or 10 mg/kg of CDP571 given as an intravenous infusion. The followup period was 8 weeks. Lymphocyte phenotype, soluble CD4 (sCD4), soluble interleukin 2 receptor (sIL-2R), IL-6, and stromelysin levels in the blood were measured before and after treatment; bone and cartilage markers (pyridinoline, deoxypyridinoline, N-terminal telopeptide) were similarly assessed in the urine. Patients who completed a placebo controlled trial of CDP571 were offered further treatment with CDP571. They received a maximum of 2 further doses of 1 mg/kg (7 patients) or 10 mg/kg (9 patients) in an open study.RESULTS:Plasma IL-6 level was statistically significantly reduced in the 1 and 10 mg/kg groups. In the 10 mg/kg group, there were also reductions in plasma stromelysin and urine bone markers, although there was no change in sCD4 and sIL-2R levels. Repeat doses of CDP571 were well tolerated and continued to suppress the acute phase response and disease activity.CONCLUSION:Treatment with 10 mg/kg of CDP571 reduced IL-6 and surrogate markers of bone turnover in RA, suggesting that CDP571 might prevent joint damage in RA. Since there was no effect on lymphocyte markers despite the marked reduction in inflammation, CDP571 appears to have no effect on ongoing CD4 T cell activation.

Monoclonal antibodies bind to their targets with high specificity and therefore have excellent potential as therapeutic agents. Biotechnological advances have allowed the production of large quantities of engineered monoclonal antibodies for therapeutic use. Recent research in rheumatoid arthritis has identified important mediators of synovitis. Monoclonal antibodies targeting these have been tested in clinical trials over the last decade. Anti-cytokine therapies, in particular anti-tumour necrosis factor alpha monoclonal antibodies, suppressed inflammation and produced rapid symptomatic improvement. Anti-lymphocyte monoclonal antibodies produced long-lasting disease suppression in animal models of rheumatoid arthritis. The use of depleting anti-lymphocyte monoclonal antibodies in rheumatoid arthritis had been disappointing as they did not penetrate the synovial joint in sufficient quantity to suppress disease without producing severe and protracted peripheral blood lymphopenia. Consequently, their use in rheumatoid arthritis had been abandoned. In contrast, clinical trials of non-depleting anti-CD4 monoclonal antibodies in rheumatoid arthritis showed that they could suppress synovitis. However, it remains unclear whether they could lead to prolonged disease improvement.