首页> 外文期刊>Arthritis and Rheumatism >Clinical efficacy and safety of etanercept versus sulfasalazine in patients with ankylosing spondylitis: a randomized, double-blind trial.
【24h】

Clinical efficacy and safety of etanercept versus sulfasalazine in patients with ankylosing spondylitis: a randomized, double-blind trial.

机译:依那西普与柳氮磺胺吡啶在强直性脊柱炎患者中的临床疗效和安全性:一项随机,双盲试验。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

OBJECTIVE: Etanercept, a fully human tumor necrosis factor (TNF) receptor, is an effective treatment in patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS). Sulfasalazine is frequently used for the treatment of both axial symptoms and peripheral symptoms of AS, and it has been the recommended therapy before the use of an anti-TNF agent when peripheral arthritis is present. Until now, no clinical trial has compared the efficacy and safety of a TNF blocker with that of sulfasalazine. This study was undertaken to compare the efficacy and safety of etanercept with that of sulfasalazine after 16 weeks of treatment in patients with axial and peripheral manifestations of AS. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind study, patients received etanercept 50 mg once weekly (n=379) or sulfasalazine titrated to a maximum of 3 gm/day (n=187) for 16 weeks. The primary end point was the proportion of patients who achieved the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society criteria for 20% improvement (ASAS20) at 16 weeks. Last observation carried forward was predefined for imputation of missing values. RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 41 years, 74% were male, and the mean disease duration was 7.6 years. The proportion of ASAS20 responders at week 16 was greater among patients treated with etanercept compared with those treated with sulfasalazine (75.9% versus 52.9%; P<0.0001). As early as week 2 of treatment, etanercept was found to be more effective than sulfasalazine (P<0.0001) in ameliorating both the axial symptoms and peripheral manifestations. Serious adverse events rarely occurred, and the rate of serious adverse events did not differ between groups. CONCLUSION: In this population of patients with AS, etanercept was significantly more effective than sulfasalazine in improving the signs and symptoms of AS in the axial skeleton and peripheral joints.
机译:目的:依那西普是一种完全的人类肿瘤坏死因子(TNF)受体,对强直性脊柱炎(AS)患者是一种有效的治疗方法。柳氮磺吡啶通常用于治疗AS的轴向症状和周围症状,并且当存在周围关节炎时,在使用抗TNF药物之前,推荐使用柳氮磺吡啶。迄今为止,尚无临床试验将TNF阻滞剂与柳氮磺胺吡啶的功效和安全性进行比较。本研究旨在比较依那西普与柳氮磺胺吡啶治疗16例AS轴向和外周表现患者的疗效和安全性。方法:在这项随机,双盲研究中,患者每周一次接受依那西普50 mg(n = 379)或柳氮磺胺吡啶滴定至最高3 gm /天(n = 187),共16周。主要终点是在16周时达到国际脊柱关节炎评估标准的20%改善标准(ASAS20)的患者比例。预先结转的最后一个观察值是为估算缺失值而预先定义的。结果:患者平均年龄为41岁,男性为74%,平均病程为7。6年。依那西普治疗的患者在第16周时ASAS20反应者的比例高于柳氮磺胺吡啶治疗的患者(75.9%比52.9%; P <0.0001)。早在治疗的第2周,依那西普在改善轴向症状和周围症状方面比柳氮磺胺吡啶(P <0.0001)更有效。严重不良事件很少发生,各组之间的严重不良事件发生率没有差异。结论:在这种AS患者中,依那西普在改善轴向骨骼和周围关节AS症状和体征方面比柳氮磺胺吡啶显着更有效。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号