No abstract

Objective. To compare the clinical efficacy, effect on serum C-reactive protein (CRP), serum amyloid A (SAA), and plasma interleukin-6 (IL-6) levels, and safety of tenidap with a combination of hydroxychloroquineplus-piroxicam, and piroxicam alone, in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients.Methods. A double-blind, randomized, multicenter study in which patients with active RA were treated with tenidap 120 mg/day, hydroxychloroquine 400 mglday and piroxicam 20 mglday, or piroxicam alone 20 mglday, for 24 weeks.Results. At weeks 12 and 24, tenidap produced greater improvements than piroxicam based on 5 primary efficacy parameters; this improvement showed statistical significance in 4 of the 5 measures at week 12, and in 3 of the 5 measures at week 24. Clinical improvements in the hydroxychloroquine-plus-piroxicamtreated patients were similar to those seen in patients treated with tenidap. Compared with piroxicam, tenidap was associated with significantly greater reductions in serum CRP concentrations at 4, 12, and 24 weeks, and significantly greater reductions in SAA concentrations at weeks 12 and 24. The decrease in SAA concentrations was also significantly greater at weeks 4 and 24 in the tenidap-treated group than in the hydroxychloroquine-plus-piroxicam-treated group. Significant reductions in plasma IL-6 levels were observed at weeks 4, 12, and 24 within the tenidap group, and at week 24 within the hydroxychloroquine-plus-piroxicam-treated group. The overall occurrence of side effects, including gastrointestinal side effects, was similar in all 3 treatment groups. A small proportion of tenidap-treated

Four independent studies have investigated and compared the effects of tenidap sodium, naproxen and placebo on CRP in patients with active RA. One of these studies also investigated the effects of tenidap and naproxen on serum amyloid A (SAA) concentrations and ESR. The duration of the four studies ranged between 2 weeks and 24 weeks, and depending on the study, tenidap sodium was administered orally in doses of 40-120 mg/day and naproxen in doses of 1000 mg/day. In all four studies serum CRP concentrations in tenidap-treated patients had decreased significantly from baseline at the time of final assessment. The decrease in CRP concentration in tenidap-treated patients was observed as early as 1 week after initiation of therapy and was sustained for up to 6 months, the last assessment timepoint. CRP concentrations in naproxen-treated and placebo patients were essentially unchanged. The decreases from baseline observed in tenidap-treated patients were significantly greater than the changes observed in naproxen-treated or placebo patients. After 24 weeks of tenidap treatment the decrease in CRP was paralleled by significant decreases in SAA concentration and ESR. The finding that tenidap sodium rapidly, consistently and significantly lowered CRP serum concentrations differentiates tenidap sodium from the NSAID, naproxen. This could possibly have important therapeutic implications given that other long-term investigations have shown that reducing serum CRP and SAA concentrations correlates with a reduction in radiographically-assessed disease progression.

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs have been a mainstay in the treatment of inflammatory diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis. However, these agents can result in severe and occasionally life-threatening adverse effects that can limit therapeutic benefit. Progress toward safer anti-inflammatory therapy was aided by the discovery that cyclooxygenase (COX) exists as two isozymes, COX-1 and COX-2. Both isozymes form prostaglandins that support physiologic functions; however, the formation of proinflammatory prostaglandins is catalyzed by COX-2. Inhibition of COX-2 accounts for the anti-inflammatory and analgesic action of NSAIDs; however, concurrent inhibition of COX-1 inhibits prostaglandin-dependent mechanisms such as gastroduodenal mucosal defense and platelet aggregation. This inhibition is the basis of the gastrointestinal toxicity and bleeding characteristic of these drugs. These findings led to the hypothesis that agents that selectively inhibit COX-2 would possess anti-inflammatory and analgesic action but would spare COX-1, thereby avoiding adverse effects in the gastrointestinal tract and platelets. Selective COX-2 inhibitors are now available. The novelty of these agents has raised questions in the medical community as to what constitutes selectivity for COX-2. This review outlines the criteria that must be met to characterize a compound as COX-2-specific. Clinical evidence of clear improvement in gastrointestinal tolerability and safety must be demonstrated in addition to complementary evidence of COX-2 selectivity obtained from enzyme, biochemical, and clinical pharmacology evaluations.

No abstract