Efficacy of pantoprazole in the prevention of peptic ulcers, induced by non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs: a prospective, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel-group study.

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy of pantoprazole in preventing gastrointestinal lesions in patients with rheumatic diseases receiving continuous, long-term treatment with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. MATERIAL: This was a prospective, randomised, double-blind, unbalanced, placebo-controlled, parallel group study. Outpatients (n= 104, age range 22-80 years, mean age 59.5) with rheumatoid arthritis or osteoarthritis, requiring chronic intake of NSAIDs (at least 8 weeks prior to the start of the study), were randomised and enrolled to receive either 40 mg pantoprazole (n=70) or placebo (n=34) once daily, for 12 weeks. Patients had endoscopically confirmed gastric and duodenal lesions grade 0, 1 or 2 (Lanza classification grade 0: normal to hyperaemic mucosa; grade 1: 1 to 3 erosions, submucosal haemorrhage or petechiae, grade 2: 4 to 10 erosions, submucosal haemorrhages or petechiae). Clinical and endoscopic evaluations were performed at baseline, after 4, and 12 weeks. The primary end-point of the study was the incidence of gastric or duodenal ulcers after 4 and 12 weeks of treatment. RESULTS: Patients (n=95) were evaluated: 65 in the pantoprazole group and 30 in the placebo group. When considering all patients (those with Lanza score grade 0, 1, 2 at baseline), the overall proportion of patients in remission was 82% and 77% after 4 weeks, and 72% and 59% after 12 weeks in pantoprazole and placebo groups, respectively (cumulative survival analysis according to Kaplan-Meier). The difference between the treatment groups was even more marked when only those patients with normal mucosa at baseline (grade 0) were considered. After 12 weeks, the proportion of patients in remission was 82% (95% confidence limits 70% - 94% in the pantoprazole and 55% (95% confidence limits 33% - 77%) in the placebo treatment group, p=O.036. Adverse events were reported in 4% and 6% of patients in pantoprazole and placebo treatment groups, respectively CONCLUSIONS: Pantoprazole 40 mg once daily was well tolerated and is more effective than placebo in the prevention of peptic ulcers in patients with rheumatic diseases who require continuous, long-term, treatment with NSAIDs.

Amtolmetin guacyl versus piroxicam in patients with osteoarthritis.

The efficacy and tolerability of amtolmetin guacyl (AMG), a new non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug, were compared with piroxicam, in patients with osteoarthritis. In a randomized double-blind study patients with arthritis (n = 99) received either 600 mg AMG on an empty stomach or 20 mg of piroxicam on a full stomach, once daily for 30 days. All clinical parameters improved significantly with both drugs; there were no significant differences between the two treatments. Tolerability, assessed by the patients, was significantly better in the AMG group. In the piroxicam group nine of 50 patients withdrew because of side-effects (gastrointestinal) compared with two of 49 (nausea and headache) in the AMG group. There were three cases of perforation, ulcer and bleeding in the piroxicam group but no serious side-effects with AMG. Total numbers of side-effects were similar in the two groups, but epigastric and abdominal pain were more frequent and more intense with piroxicam. AMG was as effective as piroxicam in controlling the symptoms of osteoarthritis, but showed better gastrointestinal tolerability.

Clinical and gastroscopic evaluation of amtolmetin guacyl versus diclofenac in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

AIM: Amtolmetin guacyl (2-[2[1-methyl-5-(4-methylbenzoyl) pyrrol-2-yl] acetamido] acetic acid 2-methoxyphenyl ester) is a recently developed drug which, in preliminary studies, has shown effective anti-inflammatory properties with improved gastrointestinal safety. Our study was designed to investigate the efficacy and tolerability of amtolmetin guacyl 600 mg bid when compared to diclofenac 50 mg tid for 4 weeks. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 64 patients aged 18-80 years, suffering from rheumatoid arthritis for more than 6 months and American Rheumatism Association functional class I, II or III were randomized in a double blind manner to amtolmetin guacyl or diclofenac for 4 weeks. Clinical and endoscopic evaluation were performed at baseline and at the end of the treatment. The mucosa was graded by means of a rating system emphasizing mucosal erosions. Only patients with endoscopy grade 0-1 entered the trial. RESULTS: The median post-treatment endoscopy injury scores were 0 (range 0-4) in the amtolmetin guacyl-treated patients and 2 (range 0-4) in the diclofenac-treated patients (p = 0.005). There were nine gastric ulcers: 1/32 (3%) in the amtolmetin guacyl group and 8/32 (25%) in the diclofenac group (p < 0.05; 95% confidence interval, -30-5%). 16/32 (50%) patients in amtolmetin guacyl group and 8/32 (25%) in diclofenac group had normal gastroduodenal findings (score = 0) (p < 0.05; 95% confidence interval, 5-50%). In patients with a history of peptic ulcer, a recurrence of gastric damage (score 3-4) was observed in 18% in the amtolmetin guacyl and in 53% in the diclofenac group (p < 0.05). The incidence of gastrointestinal symptoms did not differ in the two groups. Amtolmetin guacyl significantly reduced the number of swollen and painful joints, and the functional disability index; diclofenac significantly reduced the number of painful joints and the functional disability index score (p = ns). CONCLUSIONS: Amtolmetin guacyl effectively controlled the symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis, with very limited gastric toxicity. If these findings are confirmed on a wider scale, the drug might become a valid alternative to current therapies, especially for patients at risk, such as those with rheumatoid arthritis simultaneously requiring steroids and second-line drugs, or those with a history of peptic ulcer.

Peptic ulcer therapy with cimetidine versus tripotassium dicitrato bismuthate in rheumatoid arthritis patients undergoing chronic NSAID treatment.

AIM: To compare the efficacy of cimetidine and tripotassium dicitrato bismuthate (TDB) in arthritic patients who had developed gastric (GU) or duodenal (DU) ulceration while taking non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). METHODS: Eighty-six rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients affected by endoscopically proven DU (n = 44) or GU (n = 42), and on chronic NSAID therapy which was not suspended during anti-ulcer therapy, were randomized to cimetidine (400 mg t.d.s.) or TDB (120 mg q.d.s.). A repeat endoscopy was planned after 4 weeks (and 8 weeks, in case of failed healing). The patients who were unhealed after 8 weeks of therapy were allocated to the alternative anti-ulcer drug for a further 8 weeks without interrupting the anti-inflammatory therapy. RESULTS: At week 4 of therapy. 14/24 (58%) DU and 9/20 (45%) GU patients treated with cimetidine were healed, compared with 12/20 (60%) and 10/22 (45%) TDB-treated patients (N.S.). At week 8 of therapy, the DU healing rates were 15/24 (63%) with cimetidine and 14/20 (70%) for TDB. The corresponding GU healing rates were 12/20 (60%) with cimetidine and 13/22 (60%) for TDB (N.S.). At week 16, complete healing with cimetidine was observed in 67% of DU and 57% of GU patients unhealed with TDB; the corresponding figures in the patients crossed to TDB were 83% for DU and 63% for GU patients (N.S. vs. cimetidine). CONCLUSIONS: No statistically significant difference was found between the healing activities of cimetidine and TDB in rheumatoid arthritis patients with peptic ulcer who did not interrupt their NSAID treatment for arthritis. This trial showed that the continued consumption of NSAIDs appears to slow the ulcer healing process, especially in GU patients.

Prevention of gastroduodenal damage with omeprazole in patients receiving continuous NSAIDs treatment. A double blind placebo controlled study.

AIM: The aim of this study was to compare omeprazole (20 mg once daily) with placebo in the long-term prevention of gastroduodenal lesions induced by indomethacin, diclofenac and ketoprofen. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 114 patients with arthritic disorders and requiring indomethacin, diclofenac or ketoprofen were randomized in a double blind manner to receive omeprazole-20 mg once daily- or identical placebo for three weeks. The gastroduodenal mucosa damage was scored according to a 0-4 point endoscopic scale. RESULTS: Of the 114 patients, 103 (50 in the omeprazole group, 53 in the placebo group) were submitted to endoscopy, while 11 patients dropped out for non-medical reasons. At the final endoscopy, 26/57 (46%) of omeprazole group, and 20/57 (35%) of the placebo group had normal gastroduodenal mucosa (score = 0) (p ns; 95% IC -0.073 + 0.284). A gastric ulcer was observed in 7/57 (12%) patients, all in the placebo group (p < 0.01 vs omeprazole); 2 patients (1 in the omeprazole group and 1 in the placebo group) developed a duodenal ulcer. Dyspeptic symptoms developed in 10% of the patients treated with omeprazole and 29% of those receiving placebo (p ns). CONCLUSIONS: Omeprazole, 20 mg once daily, provides effective prophylactic therapy in patients at risk of developing NSAID-associated gastric and duodenal ulcer.

Sympathetic use of latanoprost 0.005% in 30 eyes.

In this study, the authors report their experience with latanoprost after a year's treatment of patients with various forms of glaucoma at various stages of progression. The new drug was associated also with different beta-blockers. The case file reported includes 30 eyes of 18 patients treated with latanoprost once a day in the evening. Follow-up varied from 6 months to 1 year. Except for 2 patients (3 eyes) receiving only latanoprost therapy, all the others received latanoprost in association with their on-going therapy. Results are equivalent to those described in the literature. The authors also consider the results in two groups; chronic simple glaucoma and other forms of glaucoma. From their own experience and from what is reported in the literature, the authors conclude by stressing the pressure reducing efficacy of this drug.

Prevention with sucralfate gel of NSAID-induced gastroduodenal damage in arthritic patients.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy of a new formulation of sucralfate as gel (Gastrogel) in the short-term prevention of gastroduodenal lesions in arthritic patients receiving nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. METHODS: One hundred seven patients with arthritis (M/F 18/89, mean age 55.2 +/- 9.7 yr) enrolled in two centers were considered eligible for the study if initial endoscopy showed the absence of any relevant mucosal damage. Patients were randomly allocated to receive diclofenac 200 mg/day or naproxen 1 g/day plus either sucralfate gel 1 g b.i.d. (N = 53) or identical placebo (N = 54) for 14 days in a randomized double-blind study. Repeated assessment of GI symptoms and endoscopy were performed at the end of the study period. RESULTS: At final endoscopy the incidence of erosion and the mean endoscopic score for both stomach and duodenum were significantly lower in the sucralfate gel group compared with placebo group (p < 0.05). Both heartburn and epigastric pain were significantly less frequent in patients receiving sucralfate gel than placebo (51 vs 30% and 49 vs 28% for heartburn and epigastric pain, respectively, p < 0.05). No differences were observed in the incidence or in the mean score for nausea. An unexplained difference in the incidence of ulcers was found between the two centers, but in both a similar reduction in the incidence of ulcers was observed between patients receiving sucralfate gel compared with those receiving placebo. The overall difference (8% in sucralfate-treated patients, 28% in patients receiving placebo) of gastroduodenal ulcers was statistically significant (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Sucralfate gel reduces both the incidence of acute gastroduodenal mucosal lesions and symptoms in patients with arthritis receiving short-term nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.

Role of Helicobacter pylori in ulcer healing and recurrence of gastric and duodenal ulcers in longterm NSAID users. Response to omeprazole dual therapy.

BACKGROUND: The relation between Helicobacter pylori infection and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-associated peptic ulcers remains unclear; in particular, it is not known whether H pylori plays a part in the healing and recurrence of these ulcers. AIMS: To evaluate prospectively in a consecutive series of arthritis patients receiving longterm NSAID treatment the prevalence of peptic ulcer as well as the effect of H pylori eradication on the healing and recurrence of gastric and duodenal ulcer found. PATIENTS: Some 278 consecutive patients underwent gastroscopy with multiple biopsies of the gastric antrum and corpus for histological examination and rapid urease test. One hundred peptic ulcers (59 gastric ulcers, 39 duodenal ulcers, and two gastric ulcers concomitant with a duodenal ulcer) were found. Seventy per cent of these ulcers were H pylori positive. METHODS: According to their H pylori status, ulcer patients were randomised to one of the following treatments: H pylori negative ulcers received omeprazole 20 mg twice daily for four to eight weeks, whereas H pylori positive lesions were treated with omeprazole 20 mg twice daily plus amoxycillin 1 g twice daily (the second of these for the first two weeks) or omeprazole alone for four to eight weeks while continuing NSAID therapy. Patients with healed ulcers were endoscopically followed up for six months after stopping antiulcer therapy while continuing NSAIDs. RESULTS: Endoscopic healing rates for gastric and duodenal ulcers in the three different groups were similar both at four and eight weeks. H pylori eradication did not influence healing, which occurred in 14 of 20 (70%) of patients in whom H pylori was eradicated, compared with 14 of 17 (82%) of patients with persistent infection. Cumulative recurrence rates at six months did not statistically differ among the three different groups (27% in H pylori negative, 46% in H pylori positive, and 31% in those where H pylori was eradicated during the healing phase), although a numerical trend in favour of a higher recurrence rate in infected patients was evident. CONCLUSIONS: H pylori eradication does not confer any significant advantage on the healing of gastric and duodenal ulcers associated with longterm NSAID use. It remains to be established with certainty whether eradication may be helpful in the reduction of recurrence in a specific subset of NSAID associated ulcer.

Endoscopic assessment of the effects of dipyrone (metamizol) in comparison to paracetamol and placebo on the gastric and duodenal mucosa of healthy adult volunteers.

The potentially damaging gastric and duodenal effects of dipyrone, a nonnarcotic analgesic agent, were evaluated in three phases in comparison to placebo and paracetamol. Three groups of 12 healthy adult volunteers were treated in a double-blind study, according to a cross-over, randomization sequence, using the double-dummy technique, for two 15-day periods, with dipyrone 3 g/day and placebo (group I), dipyrone 1.5 g/day and placebo (group II), and dipyrone 1.5 g/day and paracetamol 1.5 g/day (group III). An esophagogastroduodenoscopy was performed at the beginning and end of each treatment period. In the first treatment group, grade-3 and 4 mucosal lesions were found after dipyrone administration (3 g/day) in 3 of 12 (25%) subjects (multiple antral erosions, gastric ulcer and duodenal ulcer, 1 case each), whereas grade-2 mucosal lesions (antral erosions) were detected in 1 of 12 cases (8%) after the corresponding placebo treatment. The difference between the two treatments, however, was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). Only in the gastric ulcer case were subjective symptoms reported (feeling of hunger). At the 1.5-g/day dose (groups II and III), dipyrone produced no gastroduodenal lesions, the endoscopic results showing no appreciable difference between dipyrone and either placebo (p = 0.54) or paracetamol (p = 0.99). No subjective symptoms were reported in any of these subjects. Dipyrone, administered for 2 weeks, has effects on the gastric and duodenal mucosa comparable to those of paracetamol and placebo, though noticeable damage is detectable at a dosage of 3 g/day.

Gastroduodenal tolerability of nabumetone versus naproxen in the treatment of rheumatic patients.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this endoscopic, double-blind study was to evaluate the gastric tolerability of nabumetone, a novel nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug, compared with naproxen in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: Patients with definite or classic rheumatoid arthritis as defined by ACR criteria were eligible for entry into the study if an initial endoscopy was normal or showed the presence of only one erosion or one or two submucosal hemorrhages. After a 7-day washout period, the patients were randomized to receive either nabumetone, 1 g, or naproxen, 500 mg, b.i.d. Blinding was achieved by the use of double dummies. Endoscopy was repeated after 4 wk of treatment. The primary efficacy parameters were Ritchie articular index, duration of morning stiffness, and global assessments. RESULTS: Gastric mucosal lesions of different degrees were observed in 9% (2/22) of nabumetone-treated patients and in 40% (12/30) of those who received naproxen (p = 0.01). One duodenal ulcer was found in a patient treated with nabumetone, and this patient had a history of duodenal ulcer. In the naproxen group, six patients were found to have an ulcer. Clinical evaluation of rheumatological symptomatology showed no statistical difference in relieving symptoms between the two drugs in the primary efficacy assessments. However, six nabumetone-treated patients dropped out because of lack of efficacy, compared with one in the naproxen group. Side effects were noted in three patients treated with nabumetone and in 14 treated with naproxen (p = 0.004). CONCLUSION: This study showed that nabumetone, 1 g daily, results in significantly less deterioration of gastric mucosa than naproxen, 500 mg daily, but the efficacy of naproxen, 1 g, appears to be more than that achieved with nabumetone, 1 g.

A comparison of severe gastric damage as a result of pirprofen and naproxen treatment in rheumatoid arthritis: a controlled endoscopic study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this controlled endoscopic study was to compare the therapeutic efficacy and the gastric tolerance of two nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, pirprofen versus naproxen. DESIGN: A randomized endoscopic double-blind double-dummy study. SETTING: The gastrointestinal unit of a teaching hospital. SUBJECTS: Forty patients suffering from rheumatoid arthritis were enrolled. After an initial upper gastrointestinal endoscopy to rule out the presence of gastric mucosal lesions, the patients were randomly allocated in a double-blind, double-dummy manner, to receive either pirprofen (400 mg t.i.d.) or naproxen (500 mg b.i.d.) for 4 weeks; endoscopic control followed this treatment period, or was anticipated in the event of painful dyspepsia. INTERVENTIONS: Endoscopy at the beginning of the study and at 4 weeks, or anticipated in the event of painful dyspepsia. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome measure of the study was the possibility that pirprofen was less toxic to the gastric mucosa than naproxen, and at least as effective. RESULTS: Both drugs proved effective in relieving clinical symptoms, without a statistically significant difference. Gastric mucosa lesions were observed in 90% of pirprofen-treated patients and in 60% of those on naproxen (P = 0.03). The most severe lesions (grades 3 and 4) were found in 65% of subjects treated with pirprofen, as opposed to 15% of those treated with naproxen (P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that pirprofen is at least as active as naproxen in relieving rheumatic symptoms, but its administration results in a significantly severe degree of gastric damage.

Sulglycotide in the prevention of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug-induced gastroduodenal mucosal injury. A controlled double-blind, double-dummy, randomized endoscopic study versus placebo in rheumatic patients.

The aim of this double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled trial was to evaluate whether sulglycotide prevents the onset of gastroduodenal mucosal injury in patients with rheumatic disease treated with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). One hundred patients, free from endoscopically detectable lesions of the gastroduodenal mucosa, affected either by rheumatoid arthritis or osteoarthritis, and candidates for NSAID therapy, were randomly allocated either to 200 mg sulglycotide three times daily (n = 50) or to an indistinguishable placebo (n = 50) for 4 weeks, together with standard NSAID administration (50 mg diclofenac three times daily (n = 50); 50 mg indomethacin three times daily (n = 50)). Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy was repeated at the end of the study. It was possible to evaluate 86 patients after treatment (sulglycotide = 42, placebo = 44); diclofenac = 45, indomethacin = 41). Six of 42 patients (14%) in the sulglycotide group and 15 of 44 (34%) in the placebo group had developed gastric or duodenal ulcerative lesions (p = 0.02). These data suggest that sulglycotide prophylaxis may be useful for the prevention of gastric and duodenal ulcer associated with NSAID therapy in rheumatic patients.

Rifamycin SV administered by intra-articular infiltrations shows disease modifying activity in patients with pauci- or polyarticular juvenile rheumatoid arthritis.

The therapeutic activity of rifamycin SV administered by the intra-articular route was evaluated in 52 children with juvenile rheumatoid arthritis (oligopolyarthritis). Each active joint was injected once a week for 10 weeks; thereafter patients were followed for 3-48 months. The number of active joints and joints with limitation of motion, the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and C-reactive protein improved significantly at the end of the treatment cycle, with progressive improvement during the subsequent period of observation. At 48-month of follow-up, 78% of joints did not present signs of inflammation; and 66% of joints showed no functional limitations. Joints without radiological lesions at baseline and large joints responded best to the rifamycin treatment. Persistent knee effusions were reabsorbed completely in most cases during the treatment and within the first 6 months of follow-up. Recurrences of synovitis were observed in 7% of joints. De novo radiological lesions in initially undamaged joints occurred during the second year of follow-up in only 10% of patients. At 24 months, 62% of patients with oligoarthritis and 24% with polyarthritis showed complete remission in all affected joints and recovered movement in all those joints which had shown limitations at baseline. There was also a normalization of inflammatory indexes (ESR, C-reactive protein) and regression of general features of disease. Further long term studies are now required to confirm these promising preliminary results.

A double-blind crossover study of two cyclobenzaprine regimens in primary fibromyalgia syndrome.

In a double-blind crossover study, the efficacy and tolerability of oral cyclobenzaprine administered in two different regimens were compared in 40 patients affected by primary fibromyalgia syndrome. The patients were randomly divided into two groups. Each group of 20 patients was treated for 15 days with either a single dose of 10 mg/day cyclobenzaprine at bedtime or 30 mg/day cyclobenzaprine in three equal doses daily. Following treatment there was a 15-day washout period before the groups were crossed over to the other treatment. Both regimens resulted in a significant decline in the number of tender points; significant improvements were also reported in the quality of sleep, anxiety, fatigue, irritable bowel syndrome and stiffness. There was no significant difference in efficacy between the two therapeutic regimens at any stage during the trial. The frequency of reported side-effects was significantly greater (P < 0.001) when patients received 30 mg/day cyclobenzaprine (26 patients, 84%) than when they received 10 mg/day (10 patients, 27%). A dose of 10 mg cyclobenzaprine at bedtime significantly improved the symptomatology of patients affected by primary fibromyalgia syndrome. The higher dose did not further reduce these symptoms but did result in a higher incidence of side-effects.

Multiple intra-articular treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: a randomized prospective study comparing rifamycin SV with pefloxacin.

In a randomized, prospective study the efficacy and tolerability of extensive multiple intra-articular administrations of two antibiotics, rifamycin SV and pefloxacin, were evaluated in 40 patients with classical or definite rheumatoid arthritis. Total weekly doses of 525 mg rifamycin or 560 mg pefloxacin were given for 10 weeks, and 12 months after treatment all clinical indices, erythrocyte sedimentation rate and C-reactive protein improved significantly in the rifamycin group. Some of the treatment indices (morning stiffness, severity of pain by visual analogue scale, grip strength and Ritchie's index) were already improved when the treatment ended, whereas others (erythrocyte sedimentation rate, C-reactive protein, number of painful and swollen joints) improved progressively during the follow-up. In the pefloxacin treatment group all indices except C-reactive protein and severity of pain determined using a visual analogue scale were significantly improved 12 months after treatment. Comparison of the two treatments showed a significant difference in erythrocyte sedimentation rate (P less than 0.047), Ritchie's index (P less than 0.036) and C-reactive protein (P less than 0.028) in favour of rifamycin.

Prevention of appearance of radiological lesions in early rheumatoid arthritis: a randomized, single-blind study comparing intra-articular rifamycin with auranofin.

In a prospective, randomized, single-blind study of 116 patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (mean disease duration 7 months), therapeutic activity of intra-articular rifamycin SV (525 mg/week) infiltration into each peripheral joint over 10 weeks was compared with that of 3 mg auranofin given orally twice daily. The incidence of side-effects was lower in rifamycin-treated patients. At the end of follow-up, the clinical variables and erythrocyte sedimentation rate showed a significant and persistent improvement both in 16 patients who continued the auranofin treatment regularly and in 55 treated with rifamycin who had completed the therapeutic cycle 62.5 months before; the latex test decreased only in the rifamycin group. In patients treated with auranofin or who changed to other commonly used antirheumatic agents, 57% of those with an initially negative radiological picture developed new radiological lesions in at least one of the small joints compared with 9% in the rifamycin group. Although the number of patients treated with rifamycin was small and the follow-up relatively short, the results of the study indicated that treatment with intra-articular rifamycin SV may prevent the appearance of radiological lesions in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis and normal radiographs initially.

A double-blind gastroscopic evaluation of the effects of etodolac and naproxen on the gastrointestinal mucosa of rheumatic patients.

The aim of this clinical, endoscopical study was to evaluate the therapeutic efficacy and the gastric tolerability of etodolac, a new anti-inflammatory, non-steroidal drug, compared with naproxen. The study was conducted on 48 patients suffering from rheumatoid arthritis. 44 of whom completed the trial. After an initial oesophagogastroduodenoscopy to exclude the presence of gastric mucosal lesions, patients were randomly allocated to double-blind treatment with either etodolac 200 mg b.i.d. or naproxen 500 mg b.i.d. for a period of 4 weeks. Endoscopic control followed this treatment period. Both drugs proved effective in relieving clinical symptoms, without a statistically significant difference. Gastric mucosal lesions were observed in 15% of etodolac-treated patients and in 46% of patients treated with naproxen (P less than 0.05) (95% CI 0.01-0.60). Painful dyspepsia was observed in 15% of patients treated with etodolac vs. 38% of patients on naproxen therapy. This study demonstrates that etodolac is at least as active as naproxen in relieving rheumatic symptoms, and its administration results in a significantly lower degree of gastric damage.

Clinical, laboratory and radiographic features in early rheumatoid arthritis.

We evaluated disease status in relation to age, sex and disease duration using some short term indices of disease activity, laboratory tests, and radiological features in 315 patients with rheumatoid arthritis of duration varying from 3 to 36 months (mean 12 months). No differences were observed among various age groups in disease duration, female/male ratio, incidence of radiologic lesions and other indices of disease process. Some clinical markers of the disease process such as involvement of the flexor tendons of the hands and Ritchie's index (score greater than 9) were significantly more frequent in the women (p less than 0.0013 and p less than 0.04, respectively). In the patients with disease of recent onset women were slightly more numerous (56%) than men; however, in those with disease duration of 36 months there were significantly more women (72%) (p less than 0.039), suggesting a greater tendency to chronic disease in this sex. Radiological lesions of the small joints of the hands, feet, and/or wrists were found in 37% of the cases with disease duration of up to 4 months and in 91% at 36 months (p less than 0.0001). The lesions were associated significantly more frequently with Ritchie index (p less than 0.02) and with laboratory indices of inflammatory activity (erythrocyte sedimentation rate greater than or equal to 25 mm/h) (p less than 0.001) and immune response (latex test greater than or equal to 80) (p less than 0.0001). Logistic regression analysis showed that the duration of illness is the most important factor correlating with radiologic lesions.

Imidazole salicylate versus piroxicam in the treatment of arthrosis in elderly patients. A double-blind clinical and endoscopic trial.

The clinical efficacy and gastroduodenal tolerability of imidazole salicylate (imidazole 2-hydroxybenzoate, ITF 182), a new synthetic drug with an anti-inflammatory action, was evaluated endoscopically in comparison with those of piroxicam in elderly patients suffering from osteoarthrosis. Of the 41 patients entering the trial, only 38 completed the protocol (6 men and 32 women; mean age, 71; range, 65-80 years). After upper gastrointestinal endoscopy for the purpose of excluding gastric and duodenal mucosal lesions, the patients were allocated at random, according to a double-blind, double-dummy protocol, to treatment either with imidazole salicylate 750 mg three times daily or with piroxicam 20 mg once daily for a period of 4 weeks. Imidazole salicylate proved active in controlling a number of the pain symptoms caused by arthrosis, although its efficacy was inferior to that of piroxicam. Grade 2 gastric mucosal lesions were detected in 1 of 20 patients (5%) treated with imidazole salicylate; lesions corresponding to grades 2, 3, and 4 were found in 6 of 18 (33%) of those treated with piroxicam (P = .034). Painful dyspepsia was reported by 15% of the patients in the imidazole salicylate group and by 28% of those in the piroxicam group. On the basis of these results and under the experimental conditions adopted in this trial, the authors concluded that imidazole salicylate is characterized by good gastric tolerability and can thus be used in the treatment of rheumatic diseases in the elderly.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)