Advertisement

Clinical Rheumatology

, Volume 5, Issue 3, pp 359–364 | Cite as

Effects of aurothioglucose and auranofin on radiographic progression in rheumatoid arthritis

  • P. L. C. M. Van Riel
  • A. Larsen
  • L. B. A. Van De Putte
  • F. W. J. Gribnau
Originals

Summary

Radiographic films of 40 patients participating in a single centre patient blind study of auranofin versus aurothioglucose were evaluated in a random order by one reader. The two treatment groups were comparable with respect to number of erosions and total radiographic score at the start of the study. Only in the auranofin-treated patients was a statistically significant increase in the mean number of new erosions (p<0.001 at 6 months and p<0.01 at 12 months treatment, paired t-test) as well as in the total radiographic score (p<0.01 at 6 and 12 months treatment, paired t-test) observed. Results of this study confirm that parenteral gold compounds do retard radiographic progression of joint destruction in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. The effects on radiographic progression shown in this study are in agreement with other reports which, based on clinical and biochemical parameters, have shown that auranofin is somewhat less effective than the injectible gold salts.

Key words

Auranofin Aurothioglucose Rheumatoid Arthritis Radiographic Progression 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Sigler, J.W., Bluhm, G.B., Duncan, H. et al. Gold salts in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: a double blind study. Ann Intern Med 1974, 80, 21–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Luukkainen, R. Chrysotherapy in rheumatoid arthritis: with particular emphasis on the effect of chrysotherapy on radiographic changes and on the optimal time of initiation of therapy. Scand J Rheumatol (suppl) 1980, 34, 1–56.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cooperating Clinics Committee of the American Rheumatism Association. A controlled trial of gold salt therapy in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 1973, 16, 353–8.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cooperating Clinics Committee of the American Rheumatism Association. A controlled trial of cyclophosphamide in rheumatoid arthritis. N Engl J Med 1970, 283, 883–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lewis, D., Capell, H.A. Oral gold: A comparison with placebo and with intramuscular sodium aurothiomalate. Clin Rheumatol 1984, 3 (suppl 1), 83–95.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Van Riel, P.L.C.M., Van de Putte, L.B.A., Gribnau, F.W.J., et al. Comparison of auranofin and aurothioglucose in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: a single blind study, Clin Rheumatol 1984, 3 (suppl 1), 51–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ward, J.R., Williams, H.J., Egger, M.J., et al. Comparison of auranofin, gold sodium thiomalate and placebo in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. A controlled clinical trial. Arthritis Rheum, 1983, 26, 1303–15.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gofton, J.P., O'Brien, W.M., Hurley, J.N., et al. Radiographic evaluation of erosions in rheumatoid arthritis: double-blind study of auranofin vs placebo. J Rheumatol 1984, 11, 768–71.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Larsen, A., Horton, J., Osborne, C. Auranofin compared with intramuscular gold in the long-term treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: an X-ray analysis. In: Auranofin Proceedings of a Smith, Kline & French International Symposium. Editors: Capell, A., Cole, D.S., Manghani, K.K., Morris, R.W. Amsterdam. Excerpta Medica 1983, 264–74.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ropes, M.W. Diagnostic criteria for rheumatoid arthritis 1958 revision. Ann Rheum Dis 1959, 18, 49–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Larsen, A. Radiographic evaluation of rheumatoid arthritis in therapeutic trials. In: Controversies in the Clinical Evaluation of Analgesic — Anti-inflammatory — Antirheumatic drugs. Editors: Paulus, H.E., Ehrlich, G.E., Lindenlaub, E. Lindenlaub, F.K. Schatteurer Verlag, Stuttgart 1981, 323–9.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Larsen, A., Dale, K. Standardized radiological evaluation of rheumatoid arthritis in therapeutic trials. In: Recognition of Antirheumatic Drugs. Editors: Dumonde, D.C., Jasani, J.K. MTP-Press, Lancaster 1978, 285–92.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Larsen, A., Dale, K., Eek, M. Radiographic evaluation of rheumatoid arthritis and related conditions by standard reference films. Acta Radiol Diagn 1977, 18, 481–91.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Forestier, J. Rheumatoid arthritis and its treatment by gold salts. J Lab Clin Med 1935, 20, 827–9.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Amos, R.S., Constable, T.J., Crockson, R.A., et al. Rheumatoid arthritis: relation of serum C-reactive protein and erythrocyte sedimentation rates to radiographic changes. Br Med J 1977, 1, 195–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sjöblom, K.G., Saxne, T., Pettersson, H., et al. Factors related to the progression of joint destruction in rheumatoid arthritis. Scand J Rheumatol 1984, 13, 21–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1986

Authors and Affiliations

  • P. L. C. M. Van Riel
    • 1
  • A. Larsen
    • 3
  • L. B. A. Van De Putte
    • 1
  • F. W. J. Gribnau
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of RheumatologyUniversity Hospital St. RadboudHB NijmegenThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Department of PharmacologyUniversity Hospital St. RadboudNijmegenThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Spenshults Reumatiker-sjukhusOskarstromSweden

Personalised recommendations