Clinical Trial
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Randomized Controlled Trial
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

A clinical study of CPH 82 vs methotrexate in early rheumatoid arthritis.

Rheumatology 2000 March
OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of CPH 82 in comparison with methotrexate (MTX) in adult patients with early, active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and to compare the tolerance and safety profiles of the two drugs.

METHODS: The study was a 24-week, double-blind, randomized study in 10 centres of 100 patients with active RA, with a disease duration of less than 2 yr at the start of treatment, which consisted of either CPH 82 300 mg/day or MTX 10 mg/week. The six primary effect variables were: number of swollen joints, Ritchie's articular index, patient's pain score, patient's global score, Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) and C-reactive protein (CRP). Erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), physician's global score and the efficacy according to the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) and American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response criteria were also analysed.

RESULTS: There was a significant improvement for both drugs in all variables. Significant differences between the drugs in favour of MTX were found only in patient's pain score, CRP and ESR. By the EULAR criteria, 76% and 86% were judged to be responders in the CPH 82 and MTX groups, respectively. By the ACR criteria, the corresponding figures were 58% and 64%. The most common side-effects were gastrointestinal, which were similar in both groups. The numbers of treatment failures due to adverse events were two with CPH 82 and 14 with MTX.

CONCLUSIONS: The clinical effect of CPH 82 in this study was comparable to that of MTX at a dose of 10 mg/week. Both drugs reduced acute-phase reactants, MTX more effectively than CPH 82. The safety profile of CPH 82 was more favourable than that of MTX without folic acid supplementation.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app