Conclusion-This study suggests that an early initiation therapy of disease modifying drug seems to be of benefit. However, this study was unable to demonstrate a clinically relevant superiority of the combination therapy although several outcomes were in favour of this observation. The tolerability of the three treatment modalities seems acceptable. (Ann Rheum Dis 1999;58:220-225)

The predominance of CCR5-positive mononuclear cells in the synovial effusions of patients with arthritis suggests an important role for CCR5 in the process of joint inflammation, and identifies CCR5 as a possible new target for therapeutic intervention.

Objective-Recent studies have demonstrated the short term eYcacy of leflunomide. This study evaluates the eYcacy and safety of leflunomide and sulfasalazine in rheumatoid arthritis over a two year follow up period. Methods-358 patients with rheumatoid arthritis in a double blind trial were randomly allocated to receive either leflunomide 20 mg/day, placebo, or sulfasalazine 2 g/day. Those completing six months of treatment (n=230) were given the option to continue in 12 (n=168) and 24 (n=146) month double blinded extensions; the placebo group switched to sulfasalazine. This report compares eYcacy and safety of leflunomide with sulfasalazine in the 6, 12, and 24 month patient cohorts. Results-The eYcacy seen at six months was maintained at 12 and 24 months. Twenty four month cohorts on leflunomide showed significant improvement compared with sulfasalazine in doctor (−1.46 v −1.11, p=0.03) and patient (−1.61 v −1.04, p<0.001) global assessments, ACR20% response (82% v 60%, p<0.01), and functional ability ( mean HAQ −0.65 v −0.36, p=0.0149; HAQ disability index −0.89 v −0.60, p=0.059). Improvement in other variables was comparable for the two drugs, including slowing of disease progression. Improved HAQ scores in 6, 12, and 24 month leflunomide cohorts were seen in both non-responders (24%, 29%, 35%, respectively v sulfasalazine 8%, 10%, 27%) and ACR20% responders (leflunomide 63%, 62%, 66% v sulfasalazine 50%, 64%, 44%). Leflunomide is well tolerated at doses of 20 mg. No unexpected adverse events or late toxicity were noted during the two year period. Diarrhoea, nausea, and alopecia were less frequent with continued treatment. Conclusion-These long term data confirm that leflunomide is an eYcacious and safe disease modifying antirheumatic drug.

No abstract

Results. A total of 214 patients (mean age 57 years) were treated with leflunomide for >2 years; 74.8% of the patients were female. The mean disease duration was 4.1 years (range 0.1-26.6 years), and in 44% of patients, RA was first diagnosed within 2 years of entry into the phase III studies. The mean duration of leflunomide treatment was 4.6 years (range 2.8-5.8 years), and 32% of patients had received no previous treatment with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. ACR20, ACR50, and ACR70 response rates and HAQ scores at 1 year were maintained through year 4 or until the end point. No new types of adverse events were observed, and liver function was normal at baseline and at the end point in the majority of patients.Conclusion. The improvements in both functional ability and physician-based efficacy measures seen with leflunomide after 1 year were maintained for up to 5 years (maximum treatment duration 5.8 years), demonstrating that the early efficacy of leflunomide in patients with RA is sustained long-term, and that the long-term safety profile of leflunomide is no different from that observed in phase III trials.