, Volume 45, Supplement 1, pp 1–6


A Review of the Major Clinical Trials Evaluating its Clinical Efficacy and Upper Gastrointestinal Tolerability in Rheumatoid Arthritis and Osteoarthritis
  • W. Wilson Downie


The results of 4 pivotal multicentre double-blind trials demonstrating the clinical efficacy of diclofenac/misoprostol in the treatment of rheumatoid and Osteoarthritis are reviewed. In each study, diclofenac 50mg and diclofenac/misoprostol 50mg/200μg 2 or 3 times daily were of similar therapeutic efficacy. Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy performed at baseline (day 0) and at study completion, in one study in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and one study in patients with Osteoarthritis, indicated that fewer patients receiving diclofenac/misoprostol than those receiving diclofenac alone had significant erosions or ulcers at study completion. Thus, the antiarthritic efficacy of diclofenac/misoprostol was similar to that of diclofenac in the treatment of the signs and symptoms of rheumatoid and Osteoarthritis, and, in addition, was associated with significantly fewer gastroduodenal mucosal erosions and ulcers than diclofenac.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Arnett FC, Edworthy SM, Bloch DA, et al. The American Rheumatism Association 1987 revised criteria for the classification of rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis and Rheumatism 31: 315–324, 1988PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Gagnier P. Review of the safety of diclofenac/misoprostol. Drugs 45(Suppl. 1): 39–43, 1993Google Scholar
  3. Graham DY, Agrawal NM, Roth SH. Prevention of NSAID-induced gastric ulcer with misoprostol: multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet 2: 1277–1280, 1988PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Lequesne MG, Mery C, Samsom M, Gerard P. Indexes of severity for Osteoarthritis of the hip and knee. Scandinavian Journal of Rheumatology (Suppl. 65): 85–89, 1987Google Scholar
  5. Monk JP, Clissold SP. Misoprostol. A preliminary review of its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties, and therapeutic efficacy in the treatment of peptic ulcer disease. Drugs 33: 1–30, 1987PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Steinbrocker O, Traeger EH, Batterman RC. Therapeutic criteria in rheumatoid arthritis. Journal of the American Medical Association 140: 659–662, 1949PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Stromatt SC, Moreland LW, Brown J. Efficacy of misoprostol in the prevention of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug induced duodenal ulcers. Hungarian Rheumatology 32 (Suppl.): 280, 1991Google Scholar
  8. Todd PA, Sorkin EM. Diclofenac sodium. A reappraisal of its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties, and therapeutic efficacy. Drugs 35: 244–285, 1988PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Verdickt W, Moran C, Hantzschel H, Fraga AM, Stead H, et al. A double-blind comparison of the gastroduodenal safety and efficacy of diclofenac and a fixed dose combination of diclofenac and misoprostol in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. Scandinavian Journal of Rheumatology 21: 85–91, 1992PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Wilkens RF. Worldwide clinical safety experience with diclofenac. Seminars in Arthritis and Rheumatism 15(Suppl. 1): 105–110, 1985CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis International Limited 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • W. Wilson Downie
    • 1
  1. 1.International Medical OperationsG.D. Searle and CompanySkokieUSA

Personalised recommendations