Peripheral lymphocyte depletion in gold sodium thiomalate-treated rheumatoid arthritis patients

Auranofin versus placebo in rheumatoid arthritis

BACKGROUND

Auranofin is an oral gold compound used for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis RA. The use of auranofin has declined in the past few years, perhaps due in part to conflicting results from different studies.

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the short-term efficacy and toxicity of auranofin for the treatment of (RA) SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE up to December 1998, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (CCTR) version 4, 1998, and the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group Specialized Register. A hand search was also done of the reference lists of the trials retrieved from the electronic search.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) comparing auranofin against placebo in patients with RA DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The methodological quality of the trials was assessed using a validated assessment tool (Jadad 1996). Rheumatoid arthritis outcome measures were extracted from the publications for the 6-month endpoint. The pooled analysis was performed using standardized mean differences (SMDs) for joint counts, pain and global assessments. The weighted mean difference (WMD) was used for ESR. Toxicity was evaluated with pooled odds ratios for withdrawals and adverse reactions. A chi-square test was used to assess heterogeneity among trials. In the presence of heterogeneity, random effects models were used. Otherwise, the data was pooled assuming fixed effects.

MAIN RESULTS

A statistically significant benefit was observed for auranofin when compared to placebo for tender joint scores, pain, patient and physician global assessments and ESR. The SMD between treatment and placebo was -0.39 (95% CI -0.54, -0.25) for tender joint scores, -0.08 (95% CI -0.22, -0.07) for swollen joint scores, and the WMD was -4.68 (95% CI -6.59, -2.77) for pain scores and -9.85mm (95% CI -16.46, -3.25) for ESR. Withdrawals from adverse reactions were 1.5 times higher in the auranofin group OR = 1.52 (95% CI 0.94, 2.46) but this result was not statistically significant. Patients receiving placebo were three times more likely to discontinue treatment because of lack of efficacy than patients receiving auranofin: OR=0.31 (95% CI: 0.21, 0.44).

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Auranofin appears to have a small clinically and statistically significant benefit on the disease activity of patients with RA. The beneficial effects appear to be modest compared to drugs such as methotrexate or parenteral gold. Its effects on long term health status and radiological progression are not clear at this time.

Double-blind trial of recombinant gamma-interferon versus placebo in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis

One hundred five patients were enrolled in a 12-week, randomized, prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of recombinant human gamma-interferon (rHu gamma-IFN) for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. Fifty-four patients received rHu gamma-IFN and 51 received placebo. Forty-two patients in each group completed the 12-week trial. Some clinical improvement occurred in both groups of patients. Although the improvement with rHu gamma-IFN was greater than that with placebo, the differences were generally not statistically significant.

Changes in lymphocyte infiltration of the synovial membrane and the clinical course of rheumatoid arthritis

Multiple samples of synovial membrane were obtained by needle biopsy from 24 patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) before, and 1 year after, standard antirheumatic drug therapy was given. Changes in the immunohistologic features of the synovial membrane (read blindly) were compared with the clinical course of RA in each patient. A composite clinical index of disease activity (IDA) and spontaneous in vitro synthesis of IgM rheumatoid factor (IgM-RF) by blood mononuclear cells were also measured before and after treatment. In 16 patients (group A), the IDA indicated 26-69% improvement, and the values for spontaneous IgM-RF decreased substantially. In 8 patients (group B), the IDA indicated deterioration or no improvement, and the values for spontaneous IgM-RF were unchanged. In group A patients, the intensity of the T cell infiltrate decreased from a mean score of 1.3 to a mean score of 0.8 (P = 0.025). The ratio of T helper cells to T suppressor/cytotoxic cells was greater than or equal to 2:1 in 90% of group A patients before treatment, compared with 20% of these patients after treatment (P = 0.016), and the number of biopsy samples that contained identifiable B cells decreased from 36% before treatment to 7% after treatment. In group B patients, there were no changes in the intensity of T cell infiltration, the ratio of T helper cells to T suppressor/cytotoxic cells, or the number of biopsy samples with identifiable B cells.