Richard W. Martin

BACKGROUND: Etanercept, which blocks the action of tumor necrosis factor, reduces disease activity in patients with long-standing rheumatoid arthritis. Its efficacy in reducing disease activity and preventing joint damage in patients with active early rheumatoid arthritis is unknown. METHODS: We treated 632 patients with early rheumatoid arthritis with either twice-weekly subcutaneous etanercept (10 or 25 mg) or weekly oral methotrexate (mean, 19 mg per week) for 12 months. Clinical response was defined as the percent improvement in disease activity according to the criteria of the American College of Rheumatology. Bone erosion and joint-space narrowing were measured radiographically and scored with use of the Sharp scale. On this scale, an increase of 1 point represents one new erosion or minimal narrowing. RESULTS: As compared with patients who received methotrexate, patients who received the 25-mg dose of etanercept had a more rapid rate of improvement, with significantly more patients having 20 percent, 50 percent, and 70 percent improvement in disease activity during the first six months (P<0.05). The mean increase in the erosion score during the first 6 months was 0.30 in the group assigned to receive 25 mg of etanercept and 0.68 in the methotrexate group (P= 0.001), and the respective increases during the first 12 months were 0.47 and 1.03 (P=0.002). Among patients who received the 25-mg dose of etanercept, 72 percent had no increase in the erosion score, as compared with 60 percent of patients in the methotrexate group (P=0.007). This group of patients also had fewer adverse events (P=0.02) and fewer infections (P= 0.006) than the group that was treated with methotrexate. CONCLUSIONS: As compared with oral methotrexate, subcutaneous [corrected] etanercept acted more rapidly to decrease symptoms and slow joint damage in patients with early active rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: Assessment of the inter and intraobserver variability of the modified Rodnan (m-Rodnan) total skin thickness score by clinical palpation [a commonly used outcome measure in trials of systemic sclerosis (SSc)]. METHODS: Skin thickness was assessed by clinical palpation of 17 body areas on 0 to 3 scale (normal, mild, moderate, severe). The m-Rodnan total skin thickness score was derived by summation of the scores from all 17 body areas. Using the m-Rodnan, 6-7 investigators assessed skin thickness in 5-6 patients with SSc (22 patients and 23 examiners total) at each of 4 sessions for the determination of interobserver variability (accuracy). In addition 21 of the investigators then assessed m-Rodnan in 2-3 patients each (60 patients total) 3 times over a 2-8 week period to quantitate intraobserver variability (reliability). RESULTS: Interobserver and intraobserver mean +/- within patient standard deviations (SD) for the m-Rodnan were found to be 17.7 +/- 4.6 and 20.7 +/- 2.45, respectively. CONCLUSION: The m-Rodnan total skin thickness score is at least as reliable for measuring skin thickness in SSc as are the ARA and Ritchie joint tenderness counts for assessing joint disease in rheumatoid arthritis. These data are useful for the determination of sample size and for the definitions of clinically meaningful response. Assessment of skin score is sufficiently reproducible to include as a measure of disease outcome, especially if patients are serially evaluated by the same investigator.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who received monotherapy with either etanercept or methotrexate (MTX) for 2 years and to assess the safety of this therapy. METHODS: In the Enbrel ERA (early rheumatoid arthritis) trial, 632 patients with early, active RA were randomized to receive either twice-weekly subcutaneous etanercept (10 mg or 25 mg) or weekly oral MTX (mean dosage 19 mg per week) for at least 1 year in a double-blind manner. Following the blinded phase of the trial, 512 patients continued to receive the therapy to which they had been randomized for up to 1 additional year, in an open-label manner. Radiograph readers remained blinded to treatment group assignment and the chronologic order of images. RESULTS: At 24 months, more 25-mg etanercept patients than MTX patients met American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement criteria (72% and 59%, respectively; P = 0.005), and more had no increase in total score and erosion scores on the Sharp scale (P = 0.017 and P = 0.012, respectively). The mean changes in total Sharp score and erosion score in the 25-mg etanercept group (1.3 and 0.66 units, respectively) were significantly lower than those in the MTX group (3.2 and 1.86 units, respectively; P = 0.001). Significantly more patients in the 25-mg etanercept group (55%) than in the MTX group (37%) had at least 0.5 units of improvement in the Health Assessment Questionnaire disability index (P < 0.001). Fewer patients in the etanercept group than in the MTX group experienced adverse events or discontinued treatment because of adverse events. CONCLUSION: Etanercept as monotherapy was safe and was superior to MTX in reducing disease activity, arresting structural damage, and decreasing disability over 2 years in patients with early, aggressive RA.

OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that systemic sclerosis (SSc) patients taking high-dose D-penicillamine (D-Pen) would have greater softening of skin, lower frequency of renal crisis, and better survival than patients taking low-dose D-Pen. METHODS: Seventeen centers enrolled 134 SSc patients with early (< or =18 months) diffuse cutaneous scleroderma into a 2-year, double-blind, randomized comparison of high-dose D-Pen (750-1,000 mg/day) versus low-dose D-Pen (125 mg every other day). All 134 patients were followed up for a mean+/-SD of 4.0+/-1.1 years to assess the frequencies of new-onset scleroderma renal crisis (SRC) and mortality. RESULTS: Sixty-eight patients completed 24 months of drug treatment. The course of the modified Rodnan skin thickness score in the 32 high-dose and the 36 low-dose D-Pen completers was not different at 24 months: the skin score dropped 4.8+/-10.3 (mean+/-SD) units in the high-dose group and 6.9+/-8.4 units in the low-dose group (P = 0.384 by t-test; favoring low-dose D-Pen) from 20.4+/-10.3 in the high-dose and 19.9+/-6.6 in the low-dose D-Pen group at study entry. The incidences of SRC and mortality were not different (P > 0.38 by Cox proportional hazards and by chi-square test) in the 66 high-dose patients (8 developed SRC and 8 died) compared with the 68 low-dose patients (10 developed SRC and 12 died). Of the 20 adverse event-related withdrawals, 80% occurred in the high-dose D-Pen group. CONCLUSION: The course of the skin score and the frequencies of SRC and mortality in the high-dose D-Pen group were not different from those in the low-dose D-Pen group. Eighty percent of the adverse event-related withdrawals occurred in the high-dose D-Pen patients. Although this study cannot answer the question of whether low-dose D-Pen is effective, it does suggest that there is no advantage to using D-Pen in doses higher than 125 every other day.