Clinical pharmacology of antirheumatic drugs

Czech version

Authors: D. Suchý; M. Hromádka
Authors‘ workplace: Oddělení klinické farmakologie, FN PlzeňKardiologické oddělení, FN Plzeň
Published in: Kardiol Rev Int Med 2015, 17(1): 82-86
Category: Internal Medicine

Overview

The paper aims to briefly describe the pharmacotherapy of inflammatory rheumatic diseases. The goal of pharmacotherapy is to affect the underlying inflammatory and immunopathological processes to achieve remission or low disease activity with a decrease in the clinical and laboratory activity of the disease, slowing down or stopping radiological structural progression and associated functional decline (disability). Such disease‑modifying effect is associated with the use of basal disease‑modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs).The term has been used to indicate drugs that reduce the rate of damage to bone and cartilage, but in combination with corticosteroids they are also able to influence the organ complications of rheumatic diseases. DMARDs can be further subdivided into conventional drugs synthesized chemically (csDMARDs) and newer 'biological' agents produced through genetic engineering (bo DMARDs). This paper is focused mainly on pharmacological treatment of rheumatic diseases with conventional DMARDs (hydroxychloroquine, methotrexate, leflunomide and others), glucocorticoids and nonsteroidal inflammatory drugs.

Keywords:
rheumatic diseases – nonsteroidal anti‑inflammatory drugs – glucocorticoids – disease modifying antirheumatic drugs – biological therapy

Sources

1. Šteňová E. Základy vyšetrovania v reumatológii. Bratislava: Univerzita Komenskeho 2012: 70.

2. Svobodová R. Přehled farmakoterapie zánětlivých revmatických onemocnění. Prakt Lékaren 2008; 4: 282– 285.

3. Geročová T. Farmakoterapia zánětlivých revmatických ochorení. Prakt Lékáren 2014; 4: 42– 49.

4. Lanas A, García‑Rodríguez LA, Arroyo MT et al. Risk of upper gastrointestinal ulcer bleeding associated with selective cyclo‑oxygenase‑2 inhibitors, traditional non‑aspirin non‑steroidal anti‑inflammatory drugs, aspirin and combinations. Gut 2006; 55: 1731– 1738.

5. Suchý D, Hromádka M. Racionální léčba COX‑2 preferenčními nesteroidními antirevmatiky. Medicína po promoci 2011; 12 (Suppl 3): 9– 14.

6. Garcia‑Rodríguez LA, Varas‑Lorenzo C, Maguire Aet al. Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs and the risc of myocardial infarction in the general population. Circulation 2004; 109: 3000– 3006.

7. Graham DJ, Campen D, Hui R et al. Risc of acute myocardial infarction and sudden cardiac death in patients treated with cyclooxygenase‑2 selective and nonselective non steroidal antiinflammatory drugs: Nested case control study. Lancet 2005; 365: 475– 481.

8. Johnsen A, Larsson H, Tarone RE et al. Risk of hospitalization for myocardial infarction among users of rofecoxib, celecoxib, and other NSAIDs. Arch Intern Med 2005; 165: 978– 984.

9. Garcia‑Rodríguez LA, Williams R, Derby LE et al. Acute liver injury associated with nonsteroidal anti‑inflammatory drugs and the role of risk factors. Arch Intern Med 1994; 154: 311– 316.

10. Bečvář R, Vencovský J, Němec P et al. Doporučení České revmatologické společnosti pro léčbu revmatoidní artritidy. Účinnost a strategie léčby. Čes Revmatol 2007; 15: 16– 32.

11. Conn DL, Lim SS. New role for an old friend: prednisone is a disease modifying agent in early rheumatoid arthritis. Curr Opin Rheumatol 2003; 125: 193– 196.

12. Saag KG, Criswell LA, Sems KM et al. Low‑dose corticosteroids in rheumatoid arthritis: a meta‑analysis of their moderate‑term effectiveness. Arthritis Rheum 1996; 39: 1818– 1825.

13. Bijlsma JW, Boers M, Saag KG et al. Glucocorticoids in the treatment of early and late RA. Ann Rheum Dis 2003; 62: 1033– 1037.

14. Horák P. Tegzová D, Závada Z et al. Doporučení ČRS pro léčbu nemocných se SLE. Čes Revmatol 2013; 21: 110– 122.

15. Suchý D, Pavelka K. Hydroxychlorochin a jeho postavení ve farmakoterapii revmatických onemocnění. Farmakoterapie 2007; 1: 77– 82.

16. Felson D, Anderson JJ, Meenan RF. The comparative efficacy and toxicity of second‑line drugs in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 1990; 33: 1449– 1461.

17. Shinjo SK, Bonfa E, Wojdyla D et al. Antimalarial treatment may have a time‑dependent effect on lupus survival. Data from a multinational Latin American inception cohort. Arthritis Rheum 2010; 62: 855– 862. doi: 10.1002/ art.27300.

18. Bootsma H, Spronk P, Derksen R et al. Prevention of relapses in systemic lupus erythematosus. Lancet 1995; 345: 1595– 1599.

19. van der Heijde DM, van Riel PLCM, Nuver‑Zwart IHet al. Effects of hydroxychloroquine and sulfasalazine on progression of joint damage in rheumatoid arthritis. Lancet 1989; 1: 1036– 1038.

20. Scott DL, Smolen JS, Kalden JR et al. Treatment of active rheumatoid arthritis with leflunomide: two‑year follow‑up of a double blind, placebo controlled trial versus sulfasalazine. Ann Rheum Dis 2001; 60: 913– 923.

21. Rau R, Hernom G, Kargen T et al. A double blind, randomized parallel trial of intramuscular methotrexate and gold sodium thiomalate in early erosive rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol 1991; 18: 328– 333.

22. Kremer JM, Phelps CT. Long‑term prospective study of use of methotrexate in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis – update after a mean of 90 months. Arthritis Rheum 1992; 35: 138– 145.

23. Tugwell P, Bennet K, Bell M et al. Methotrexate in RA. Ann Intern Med 1989; 110: 581– 583.

24. Bathon JM, Martin RW, Fleischmann RM et al. A comparison of etanercept and methotrexate in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis. N Engl J Med 2000; 343: 1586– 1593.

25. Carneiro JR, Sato EI. Double blind, randomized, placebo controlled clinical trial of methotrexate in systemic lupus erythematosus. J Rheumatol 1999; 26: 1275– 1279.

26. Strand V, Cohen S, Shiff M et al. Treatment of active rheumatoid arthritis with leflunomide compared with placebo and methotrexate. Arch Intern Med 1999; 159: 2542– 2550.

27. Smolen JS, Kalden JR, Scott DL et al. Efficacy and safety of leflunomide compared with placebo and sulfasalazine in active rheumatoid arthritis: a double blind, randomized, multicenter study. Lancet 1999; 353: 259– 266.

28. Gerards AH, Landewe RB, Prins AP et al. Cyclosporin A monotherapy versus cyclosporin A and methotrexate combination therapy in patiens with early rheumatoid arthritis: a double blind randomised placebo controlled trial. Ann Rheum Dis 2003; 62: 291– 296.

29. Tugwell P, Pincus T, Yocum D et al. Combination therapy with cyclosporine and methotrexate in severe rheumatoid arthritis. N Engl J Med 1995; 333: 137– 141.

30. Spadaro A, Riccieri V, Silli‑Scavalli A et al. Comparison of cyclosporin A and methotrexate in the treatment of psoriatic arthritis: a one‑year prospective study. Clin Exp Rheumatol 1995; 13: 589– 593.

31. Závada L, Pešičková S, Ryšavá R et al. Cyclosporine A or intravenous cyclophosphamide for lupus nephritis: the Cyclofa‑Lune study. Lupus 2010; 19: 1281– 1289. doi: 10.1177/ 0961203310371155.

32. Suchý D, Grundmann M. Cyklosporin A: farmakokinetika, monitorování a jeho použití v revmatologii. Klin Farmakol Farm 2009; 23: 187– 193.

33. Woodland J, Chapuit de Saintonge DM, Evans SJet al. Azathioprine in rheumatoid arthritis: double‑blind study of full versus half doses versus placebo. Ann Rheum Dis 1981; 40: 355– 359.

34. Nossent HC, Koldingsnes W. Long‑term efficacy of azathioprine treatment for proliferative lupus nephritis. Rheumatology 2000; 39: 969– 974.

35. Svobodová R, Sokalská Jurkiewicz M, Hořínková J.Mykofenolát mofetil v léčbě systémového lupus erytematodes. Čes Revmatol 2013; 21: 140– 146.

36. Appel GB, Contreras G, Dooley MA et al. Mycophenolate mofetil versus cyclophosphamide for induction treatment of lupus nephritis. J Am Soc Nephrol 2009; 20: 1103– 1112. doi: 10.1681/ ASN.2008101028.