These findings suggest an aetiological association between life stress and breast cancer.

This study reports on 105 patients with acute low-back pain given tizanidine (4 mg three times daily) plus ibuprofen (400 mg three times daily) or placebo plus ibuprofen (400 mg three times daily). Patients assessed their pain using visual analogue scales in a daily diary and the doctor assessed their condition at baseline and on days 3 and 7. Both groups were treated effectively, but earlier improvement occurred in patients given tizanidine/ibuprofen, particularly regarding pain at night and at rest. Doctors assessed the helpfulness of treatment: tizanidine/ibuprofen was significantly better than placebo/ibuprofen at day 3 (P = 0.05). Significant differences between treatments in favour of tizanidine/ibuprofen occurred in patients with moderate and severe pain at night (P less than 0.05), at rest (P less than 0.05) and those with moderate or severe sciatica (P less than 0.05). Significantly more patients given placebo/ibuprofen had gastro-intestinal side-effects compared with tizanidine/ibuprofen (P = 0.002). This supports previous work in animals showing that tizanidine mediates gastric mucosal protection against anti-inflammatory drugs. More patients given tizanidine/ibuprofen suffered drowsiness and other central nervous system effects (P = 0.025). In patients with severe acute low-back pain, however, some sedation and bed rest is advantageous. This study shows that tizanidine/ibuprofen is more effective in the treatment of moderate or severe acute low-back pain than placebo and ibuprofen alone.

NSAIDs significantly reduce overall pain over 4 weeks. This short-term responsiveness is retained, and even after several years of therapy with tiaprofenic acid pain scores increased over 2 weeks when it was changed to placebo. Our results do not show long-term benefits from the use of NSAIDs in OA and the majority of patients had persisting pain and disability despite therapy.

A multi-centre randomized, double-blind, parallel-group clinical trial was carried out in 63 patients with osteoarthritis of the knee to compare the efficacy and tolerability of a course of intra-articular injections of 20 mg sodium hyaluronate with a similar course of injections of placebo. Treatment consisted of up to 11 injections over a 23-week period. Evaluation was by means of subjective symptom and activity assessments, serially during the course of treatment and also 25 weeks thereafter. Ten patients (5 of 30 on active treatment; 5 of 33 on placebo) were withdrawn prematurely. Pain on movement, assessed by visual analogue scale (VAS) showed statistically significant (p less than 0.05 to p less than 0.0001) reductions in mean scores throughout the first 11 weeks of treatment with sodium hyaluronate but smaller, non-significant, reductions with placebo treatment. The difference between treatments was significant (p less than 0.05) at 5 weeks. Pain at rest, also assessed by VAS, showed little change in mean scores with placebo but with sodium hyaluronate there was a progressive reduction which was significant (p less than 0.01) throughout the period from 5 to 23 weeks. The difference between sodium hyaluronate and placebo was significant (p less than 0.05 to p less than 0.002) at Weeks 5, 11, 15, 19 and 23. 'Activities of daily living' were assessed using a standard scale. There were small improvements with both treatments, significant at some assessments and somewhat greater with sodium hyaluronate than placebo, but there were no statistically significant differences between the groups.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Patients (112) with acute low-back pain of recent onset were recruited to this double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled parallel group study in general practice to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of the muscle relaxant, tizanidine. They were treated for 7 days with tizanidine (4 mg three times daily) or matching placebo. Aspirin tablets (300 mg) were taken as required as 'rescue' medication. Symptoms were assessed by the patient and doctor before treatment, and after 3 and 7 days. Patients recorded pain and aspirin consumption in a daily diary. Both treatments were effective. In patients who had taken no medication prior to entry, aspirin consumption was almost halved in the first 3 days of taking tizanidine compared with placebo (P = 0.037). Results for pain at rest, pain at night, restriction of movement and pain on movement suggest that tizanidine may give greater improvement, earlier. No serious drug-related adverse events or abnormal biochemistry or haematology were observed in either group. Drowsiness occurred in 22% of patients taking tizanidine although, in patients with severe acute low-back pain, sedation, analgesia and bed rest might be beneficial and desired. Considerably more patients given aspirin/placebo had gastro-intestinal side-effects (P = 0.018). In conclusion, tizanidine may reduce the need for analgesics and be useful in the treatment of acute low-back pain.

In a single-blind trial, five treatments for painful stiff shoulder were compared for a 4-week assessment period in 60 patients. The treatments were acupuncture, steroid injection with placebo and with active tolmetin sodium, physiotherapy in the form of ultrasound and 'placebo' physiotherapy with placebo tolmetin sodium. Objective assessment was gained by use of goniometer readings to monitor shoulder abduction. Pain was measured by visual analogue scales and by a 4-point scale. Comparative assessment was also recorded and at the end of the study a success or failure was recorded for each patient's treatment. With very few exceptions all patients improved markedly, both in terms of the subjective and objective parameters. No differences between the treatments were detected. The incidence and severity of side-effects was low. It is suggested that the results show that the painful stiff shoulder may be a self-limiting condition and that any beneficial effect was really due to natural recovery. This is an important consideration because patients do not always receive immediate attention when referred to an out-patient department and the use of physiotherapy and acupuncture in such cases, perhaps, should be critically examined.

SUMMARY Thirty-seven patients with chronic back pain were entered into a randomised, 3-way, double-blind, cross-over comparison of naproxen sodium 550 mg twice daily, diflunisal 500 mg twice daily, and placebo. Each treatment was given for 14 days after a preadmission wash-out week during which only paracetamol was allowed. Patients were assessed on admission and at the end of each treatment with respect to global pain, night pain, pain on movement, and pain on standing. Both visual analogue scales and simple descriptive scales were used to measure pain. Side effects were elicited by a nonleading question. Both methods of pain measurement gave similar results and were highly correlated. Naproxen sodium was superior to placebo in relieving global pain and, depending on the method of measurement, in relieving night pain and pain on movement. Diflunisal showed no significant differences from placebo. Side effects were similar on all 3 treatments. The final preference of the patients was significantly in favour of the active treatments.Both naproxen sodium and diflunisal are analgesics with anti-inflammatory properties that are used primarily for their analgesic effect. Diflunisal has been heralded as the safer aspirin. In a controlled general-practitioner study1 it was reported that diflunisal had 3 advantages over aspirin in being more effective, more convenient (twice daily dosage), and less likely to cause gastric side effects in patients treated for acute pain. However, there has been some evidence23 to suggest that even this 'safe' drug may cause acute peptic ulcer. Naproxen sodium has been shown to produce significantly higher and earlier plasma levels of naproxen than an equivalent dose of the free acid, naproxen.4 It is therefore suited for use in acute conditions. Naproxen sodium has shown to be as effective as indomethacin in treating acute musculoskeletal disorders in general practice.5The present study was set up to compare diflunisal and naproxen sodium in chronic back pain in outpatients attending a hospital clinic. A placebo was included to try to resolve the problem of comparing 2 similar drugs which may be equally effective or ineffective. The study was also designed to compare the 2 main methods of measuring pain, the visual analogue scale (VAS) and the simple descriptive 4-point scale (SDS).Accepted for publication 20 February 1981 Correspondence to Dr H. Berry. Patients and methodsStudy design. The study was a double-blind, 3-way, cross-over comparison of naproxen sodium, diflunisal, and placebo in patients with chronic back pain of at least 3 months' duration. Patients satisfying the admission criteria were randomly allocated to one of the 6 possible orders of treatment. Any existing drug treatment for back pain was replaced by paracetamol for 7 days, after which the 3 test preparations were given in turn for 2 weeks.Patients

SUMMARY Levels of C4d, a fragment of C4 generated during activation of the classical complement pathway, were measured in the plasma of 77 patients with rheumatoid arthritis and 30 healthy subjects. Disease activity was judged according to Ritchie's articular index to be mildly active in 31 (group 1), moderately active in 29 (group 2), and severely active in 17 patients (group 3). Plasma levels of C3d, a fragment of C3, and serum levels of C4, C3, and immune complexes were also measured. The ratios C4d/C4 and C3d/C3 were calculated. The C4d/C4 and C3d/C3 ratios and the levels of circulating immune complexes correlated with the degree of disease activity without significantly departing from linear trend and discriminated between patients with different grades of disease activity. C4d, C3d, C4, and C3 also correlated with disease activity but in a non-linear relationship. A significant correlation was found between C4d and C3d, and between C4d/C4 and C3d/C3. C4d and C4d/C4 also correlated with circulating immune complexes. These results indicate that indices of C4 and C3 activation, in particular the ratios C3d/C3 and C4d/C4, provide a sensitive assessment of disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis, and confirm the major part played by the classical complement pathway in the pathogenesis of this disease.Activation of the complement system represents a major mechanism of inflammation in a variety of connective tissue disorders.' Complement involvement in rheumatoid arthritis has been demonstrated by the finding of depressed levels of complement factors in the synovial fluid of patients with active disease.2 3 In the peripheral blood of these patients, however, the levels of complement factors are normal or increased, owing to their behaviour as acute phase reactants.8 Thus an increased synthesis compensates for the accelerated catabolism of these factors, explaining why their levels do not reliably reflect complement consumption in rheumatoid arthritis.9Unequivocal evidence of complement activation can be obtained by the measure of complement fragments which are generated during complement activation.10 Levels of the fragment C3d are found