来氟米特与甲氨蝶呤:欧洲和美国经验的比较。

M H Schiff
{"title":"来氟米特与甲氨蝶呤:欧洲和美国经验的比较。","authors":"M H Schiff","doi":"10.1080/030097499750042263","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This paper compares and contrasts the results of two major Phase III clinical trials that compared the efficacy and safety of leflunomide, a new disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD), and methotrexate. In both the American trial (US301) and the multinational trial (MN302), patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) were given either leflunomide (20 mg/day after a loading dose of 100 mg/day for 3 days) or methotrexate (7.5-15 mg/week) for 52 weeks. US301 was also placebo-controlled. Folate supplementation was mandatory in US301 but was given to < 10% of the patients in MN302. In US301, American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20% response rates and improvement in tender and swollen joints were significantly better than placebo in both treatment groups, but were not significantly different from each other. Both treatments significantly retarded radiographically assessed progression of RA compared to placebo, but the degree of retardation was significantly greater with leflunomide. In MN302, the ACR response rate and improvement in tender and swollen joints with leflunomide were similar to those seen in US301. The ACR response rate and improvements in all efficacy variables with methotrexate were significantly greater than with leflunomide, however. Radiographically assessed disease progression was not statistically different with the two treatments. Use of methotrexate without folate in MN302 was associated with a higher incidence of clinically significant elevations of liver enzyme levels. These results indicate that both leflunomide and methotrexate are effective DMARDs. The symptomatic relief provided by both drugs is similar when they are given with folate supplementation.</p>","PeriodicalId":21501,"journal":{"name":"Scandinavian journal of rheumatology. Supplement","volume":"112 ","pages":"31-5"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1999-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/030097499750042263","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Leflunomide versus methotrexate: a comparison of the European and American experience.\",\"authors\":\"M H Schiff\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/030097499750042263\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This paper compares and contrasts the results of two major Phase III clinical trials that compared the efficacy and safety of leflunomide, a new disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD), and methotrexate. In both the American trial (US301) and the multinational trial (MN302), patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) were given either leflunomide (20 mg/day after a loading dose of 100 mg/day for 3 days) or methotrexate (7.5-15 mg/week) for 52 weeks. US301 was also placebo-controlled. Folate supplementation was mandatory in US301 but was given to < 10% of the patients in MN302. In US301, American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20% response rates and improvement in tender and swollen joints were significantly better than placebo in both treatment groups, but were not significantly different from each other. Both treatments significantly retarded radiographically assessed progression of RA compared to placebo, but the degree of retardation was significantly greater with leflunomide. In MN302, the ACR response rate and improvement in tender and swollen joints with leflunomide were similar to those seen in US301. The ACR response rate and improvements in all efficacy variables with methotrexate were significantly greater than with leflunomide, however. Radiographically assessed disease progression was not statistically different with the two treatments. Use of methotrexate without folate in MN302 was associated with a higher incidence of clinically significant elevations of liver enzyme levels. These results indicate that both leflunomide and methotrexate are effective DMARDs. The symptomatic relief provided by both drugs is similar when they are given with folate supplementation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21501,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Scandinavian journal of rheumatology. Supplement\",\"volume\":\"112 \",\"pages\":\"31-5\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1999-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/030097499750042263\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Scandinavian journal of rheumatology. Supplement\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/030097499750042263\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scandinavian journal of rheumatology. Supplement","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/030097499750042263","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

本文比较了两项主要的III期临床试验的结果,比较了来氟米特和甲氨蝶呤的疗效和安全性。来氟米特是一种新的改善疾病的抗风湿病药物(DMARD)。在美国试验(US301)和多国试验(MN302)中,患有活动性类风湿关节炎(RA)的患者给予来氟米特(在100mg /天的负荷剂量后20mg /天,持续3天)或甲氨蝶呤(7.5- 15mg /周),持续52周。US301也是安慰剂对照。在US301中,叶酸补充剂是强制性的,但在MN302中,只有不到10%的患者服用叶酸补充剂。在US301中,美国风湿病学会(American College of Rheumatology, ACR) 20%的缓解率和关节疼痛和肿胀的改善在两个治疗组中都明显优于安慰剂,但彼此之间没有显著差异。与安慰剂相比,两种治疗均显著延缓了放射学评估的RA进展,但来氟米特的延缓程度显著更大。在MN302中,来氟米特对疼痛和肿胀关节的ACR缓解率和改善与US301相似。然而,甲氨蝶呤的ACR反应率和所有疗效变量的改善都明显大于来氟米特。放射学评估的疾病进展在两种治疗中没有统计学差异。在MN302中使用不含叶酸的甲氨蝶呤与肝酶水平临床显著升高的发生率较高相关。这些结果表明来氟米特和甲氨蝶呤都是有效的DMARDs。当这两种药物与叶酸补充剂一起服用时,提供的症状缓解是相似的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Leflunomide versus methotrexate: a comparison of the European and American experience.

This paper compares and contrasts the results of two major Phase III clinical trials that compared the efficacy and safety of leflunomide, a new disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD), and methotrexate. In both the American trial (US301) and the multinational trial (MN302), patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) were given either leflunomide (20 mg/day after a loading dose of 100 mg/day for 3 days) or methotrexate (7.5-15 mg/week) for 52 weeks. US301 was also placebo-controlled. Folate supplementation was mandatory in US301 but was given to < 10% of the patients in MN302. In US301, American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20% response rates and improvement in tender and swollen joints were significantly better than placebo in both treatment groups, but were not significantly different from each other. Both treatments significantly retarded radiographically assessed progression of RA compared to placebo, but the degree of retardation was significantly greater with leflunomide. In MN302, the ACR response rate and improvement in tender and swollen joints with leflunomide were similar to those seen in US301. The ACR response rate and improvements in all efficacy variables with methotrexate were significantly greater than with leflunomide, however. Radiographically assessed disease progression was not statistically different with the two treatments. Use of methotrexate without folate in MN302 was associated with a higher incidence of clinically significant elevations of liver enzyme levels. These results indicate that both leflunomide and methotrexate are effective DMARDs. The symptomatic relief provided by both drugs is similar when they are given with folate supplementation.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Abstract of the 35th Scandinavian Congress of Rheumatology, September 20-23, 2014, Stockholm, Sweden. Abstracts of the 34th Scandinavian Congress of Rheumatology. Copenhagen, Denmark. September 2-5, 2012. How should impaired morning function in rheumatoid arthritis be treated? Morning symptoms in rheumatoid arthritis: a defining characteristic and marker of active disease. Impact of impaired morning function on the lives and well-being of patients with rheumatoid arthritis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1