Recent developments in disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs

Hunneyball, I M

doi:10.1007/978-3-0348-7108-2_4

Cited by 5 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 265 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Since the effects of gold salts [13] and I)-penicillamine [14] in rat adjuvant arthritis have also been reported to be extremely variable, it was decided to further investigate the effects of both parenteral and oral gold salts and Dpenicillamine in collagen arthritis induced by type II collagen from fetal bovine articular cartilage; in addition, benoxaprofen, an antiinflammatory drug with an unsual antiinflammatory profile [ 15] was included in the study.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of gold salts,d-penicillamine and benoxaprofen on type II collagen-induced arthritis in rats

Lewis¹,

Carlson²,

Chang³

et al. 1984

Agents and Actions

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We investigated the therapeutic effect of two gold salts, gold sodium thiomalate (GST, i.m.) and auranofin (p.o.), D-penicillamine (p.o.) and benoxaprofen (p.o.) in rat collagen-induced arthritis using type II collagen from fetal bovine articular cartilage. GST, but not auranofin, reduced hind paw edema and bone pathology. However, auranofin reduced serum copper and zymosan-induced prostaglandin production from peritoneal macrophages. In contrast, GST increased both serum copper and macrophage prostaglandin production by zymosan. Benoxaprofen reduced both hind paw edema and pathology, whereas D-penicillamine was without effect. None of these treatments influenced the circulating level of antibody to type II collagen.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of gold salts,d-penicillamine and benoxaprofen on type II collagen-induced arthritis in rats

Lewis¹,

Carlson²,

Chang³

et al. 1984

Agents and Actions

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is possible that the extended duration of administration in this study may have contributed to the beneficial effects of this drug at the highest test dose. Methylprednisolone and similar steroids have previously been shown to be effective in the rat adjuvant arthritis model [23,24]. However, the failure of GST to influence adjuvant arthritis is not altogether surprising since equivocal results have been reported for this drug in the past [25].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…This sequence reflects the rank order of overall antiinflammatory activity in this study. The therapeutic effectiveness of D-penicillamine is of interest since this drug is not generally thought to be inhibitory in adjuvant arthritis [23,24]. It is possible that the extended duration of administration in this study may have contributed to the beneficial effects of this drug at the highest test dose.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

The absence of antibodies to type II collagen in established adjuvant arthritis in rats

et al. 1984

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Utilizing an adjuvant arthritis model in rats, we examined humoral immunity to collagen and inflammation in animals with active disease and during drug therapy. Humoral immunity to types I or II collagen was not detected in the sera of rats with advanced adjuvant arthritis; this was in marked contrast to rats with type II collagen-induced arthritis which possessed serum antibodies to native and denatured type II collagen. Hind paw edema and bone pathology were monitored as parameters of inflammation. A new investigational drug, Wy-41,770, was most effective in reducing all of these aspects of inflammatory disease while indomethacin, methylprednisolone, and D-penicillamine caused a less significant diminution of only some of these parameters of inflammation. Antibodies to collagen were not detected in the sera of rats treated with the drugs under study. These data demonstrate that adjuvant arthritis can occur in rats in the absence of antibodies to types I or II collagen.

show abstract

“…Gumpel’s paper reviewed his team’s results with drugs with which they had experience, and did not aim at outlining the entire group. In 1980, however, three other reviews aimed at doing just that (Bunch and O’Duffy 1980; Hunneyball 1980; Anastassiades 1980). If one examines Gumpel’s text together with these reviews, one finds that the term “disease-modifying” (and the interchangeably used term “remission-inducing”4) did in fact serve to group together a plethora of pharmacological compounds, most of which were either in marginal use or under investigation.…”

Section: The Prototypical Dmardsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…1The prototypical DMARDs. Drugs marked with ‘×’ were subject to review as either “disease-modifying” or “remission-inducing” drugs in the four publications that first employed these labels (Gumpel 1976; Bunch and O’Duffy 1980; Anastassiades 1980; Hunneyball 1980). In addition to the drugs on which these reviews focused , a number of other compounds were mentioned either for their anecdotal use ( a ) or as being researched ( r ).…”

Section: The Prototypical Dmardsmentioning

confidence: 99%

To stop the erosion of hope: the DMARD category and the place of semantics in modern rheumatology

Buer

2017

Inflammopharmacol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The category of disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) emerged in the 1970s to describe drugs capable of altering the long-term destructive course of arthritis. It became a core concept in rheumatology’s reorientation towards pharmaceuticals in the late twentieth century. By examining the earliest use of the term “disease-modifying” in scientific publications, this paper identifies the drugs that the category described when it first emerged. Leaning on systematic reviews of each of these drugs towards the end of their career in rheumatology, it then establishes that posterity would not recognize any of these early DMARDs as capable of altering the long-term course of the disease. The notion of disease-modifying drugs was thus originally used to categorize drugs that were not disease-modifying. Instead of interpreting this inconsistency as an anomaly, the paper argues that the DMARD category may have gained currency because it allowed a number of actors to respond pragmatically to an ongoing crisis in the pharmacological approach to treating arthritis. The term offered to conjure prospects of disease-modifying effects regardless of drugsʼ actual capacities, and thus to semantically solve the tensions between needs and means that characterized rheumatology at the time. While shedding light on a pivotal moment in the history of rheumatology, the paper also models an approach to understanding drug categories as meaning-making mechanisms by which people can mediate the sometimes uneasy connections that exist between medical practice and science.

show abstract

Recent developments in disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs

Cited by 5 publications

References 265 publications

Effect of gold salts,d-penicillamine and benoxaprofen on type II collagen-induced arthritis in rats

Effect of gold salts,d-penicillamine and benoxaprofen on type II collagen-induced arthritis in rats

The absence of antibodies to type II collagen in established adjuvant arthritis in rats

To stop the erosion of hope: the DMARD category and the place of semantics in modern rheumatology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About