Indapamide is an orally active sulphonamide diuretic agent. Although some evidence appears to indicate that the antihypertensive action of indapamide is primarily a result of its diuretic activity, only a limited diuresis occurs with the usual antihypertensive doses of 2.5 mg daily, and in vitro and in vivo data suggest that it may also reduce blood pressure by decreasing vascular reactivity and peripheral vascular resistance. In mild to moderate hypertension it is as effective as thiazide diuretics and beta-adrenergic blocking agents in lowering blood pressure when used as the sole treatment. Indapamide has been successfully combined with beta-adrenergic blocking agents, methyldopa, and other anti-hypertensive agents. While such findings need confirmation, it appears that indapamide shares the potential with other diuretic agents to induce electrolyte and other metabolic abnormalities, although it may do so with less frequency or severity. Thus, indapamide appears to offer a suitable alternative to more established drugs as a 'first-line' treatment in patients with mild to moderate hypertension. Whether it differs significantly from other diuretics when used as antihypertensive therapy, either in its mode of action or its side effect profile, needs further clarification.

Diltiazem is an orally and intravenously active calcium channel blocking agent shown to be an effective and well-tolerated treatment for stable angina and angina due to coronary artery spasm. Its efficacy in these diseases has generally been similar to that of nifedipine or verapamil - alternative calcium channel blockers with which diltiazem has many electrophysiological, haemodynamic, and antiarrhythmic similarities. The antianginal mechanism of diltiazem cannot be precisely described; however, it appears to increase myocardial oxygen supply and decrease myocardial oxygen demand, mainly by coronary artery dilatation and/or via both direct and indirect haemodynamic alterations. Diltiazem has also shown substantial efficacy in the treatment of unstable angina, hypertension, and supraventricular tachyarrhythmias, but further study is necessary before its place in the treatment of these diseases may be clearly established. Although headache due to peripheral vasodilatation and depression of atrioventricular nodal conduction may be troublesome, side effects occur in only 2 to 10% of patients receiving diltiazem and are generally minor in nature. Thus, diltiazem offers a worthwhile alternative to other agents currently available for the treatment of angina pectoris. Although the infrequency of serious side effects may offer an advantage, its relative place in therapy compared with that of other calcium channel blockers remains to be clarified.

Dantrolene sodium acts primarily by affecting calcium flux across the sarcoplasmic reticulum of skeletal muscle. Recently, dantrolene has been used very successfully in the treatment of several rare hypercatabolic syndromes which have previously been associated with high mortality rates. In malignant hyperthermia, where early diagnosis and treatment usually with intravenous dantrolene in association with other supportive measures (and often subsequent dantrolene therapy) is performed, recovery is seen in virtually 100% of patients. There is a rapid resolution of hyperthermia, dysrhythmias, muscle rigidity, tachycardia, hypercapnia, mottled or cyanotic skin, and metabolic acidosis, and a slower normalisation of myoglobinuria and elevated serum creatine phosphokinase levels. In patients with family history or previous episodes of malignant hyperthermia, prophylactic treatment with dantrolene prior to anaesthesia prevents the syndrome occurring in most cases. Where malignant hyperthermia has developed patients have been successfully treated with further dantrolene therapy. Dantrolene has also been used successfully in the treatment of a few cases of heat stroke and the neuroleptic malignant syndrome--both of which have many similarities to malignant hyperthermia. Dantrolene is well established in the treatment of patients with muscle spasticity where it generally improves at least some of the components of spasticity (i.e. hyper/hypotonia, clonus, muscle cramps and spasms, resistance to stretch and flexor reflexes, articular movement, neurological and motor functions and urinary control). However, in some patients, particularly those with multiple sclerosis, dantrolene may not be effective, and in many cases muscular strength may diminish. Long term dantrolene therapy has been associated with hepatic toxicity and may cause problems in patients treated for disorders of muscle spasticity. Thus, dantrolene offers a unique advance in the therapy available for the treatment of hypercatabolic disorders and is also useful in the treatment of muscle spasticity of various aetiology.

Auranofin is the first orally active gold compound for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. Like other chrysotherapeutic agents, its exact mechanism of action is unknown, but it probably acts via immunological mechanisms and alteration of lysosomal enzyme activity. Although long term clinical experience with auranofin is limited, its efficacy appears to approach that of sodium aurothiomalate. Further comparative studies with aurothioglucose, hydroxychloroquine and D-penicillamine are required before definitive statements can be made regarding the relative efficacy of auranofin and these agents. While patients have demonstrated clinical remission of rheumatoid arthritis in response to auranofin therapy, radiological studies have been inconclusive regarding its effect on the occurrence or progression of erosive lesions. Auranofin is relatively well tolerated in most patients, but diarrhoea, skin rash, and pruritus are sometimes troublesome, and thrombocytopenia and proteinuria are potentially serious side effects which may occur during therapy. Whereas mucocutaneous side effects are more frequent with injectable gold compounds, gastrointestinal reactions are the most common adverse effect seen with auranofin. The frequency of side effects has been similar with auranofin and sodium aurothiomalate, but they are generally less severe with auranofin. While some of the side effects are controlled by a reduction in dosage, temporary or permanent withdrawal of auranofin may be necessary. Auranofin is clearly a useful addition to the limited list of agents with disease-modifying potential presently available for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. It will doubtless generate much interest as its final place in therapy becomes better defined through additional well-designed studies and wider clinical experience.

No abstract