Inverting the therapeutic pyramid: Observations and recommendations on new directions in rheumatoid arthritis therapy based on the author's experience

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0049-0172(10)80003-4Get rights and content

In evaluating current therapy for rheumatoid arthritis (RA), it is increasingly being recognized that sequential single-drug treatment, as exemplified by the traditional therapeutic pyramid, is often too little, too late, and ineffective in preventing disease progression or joint damage in patients with “at-risk,” aggressive synovitis or what might be called type 2 RA. Designation of drugs as either antiinflammatory or disease-modifying is not supported by the author's experience. Evidence exists that prevention of joint damage correlates best with control of clinical and laboratory measures of inflammation, regardless of the medication used. The earlier and more effective the control of the inflammation, the better the patient response. Until a major breakthrough occurs, the author recommends that patients with aggressive RA be treated with a combination of fast-acting and slow-acting medications to achieve early control and then “bridge down” to a simplified maintenance program. Retrospective observation by the author of 54 patients with early, intermediate, and late disease treated with combinations of prednisone, methotrexate, auranofin, hydroxychloroquine, and azathioprine showed maximum response in patients with disease duration of less than 2 years, minimal toxicity, and lack of erosions in patients with control of inflammation. Twelve patients with inflammation not initially suppressed by prednisone and methotrexate had improved control with additional drugs in combination, including auranofin, hydroxychloroquine, and azathioprine. After inflammation was controlled, reduction of prednisone and methotrexate doses was possible in 60% of patients, primarily those with early disease. The goal of this therapeutic model is to control inflammation before joint damage occurs and progressively simplify the cost and complexity of therapy in contrast to the current pyramidal approach.

References (45)

  • JF Fries

    Re-evaluating the therapeutic approach to rheumatoid arthritis: The “sawtooth” strategy

    J Rheumatol

    (1990)
  • I Kushner

    Does aggressive therapy of rheumatoid arthritis affect outcome?

    J Rheumatol

    (1989)
  • F Wolfe et al.

    Remission in rheumatoid arthritis

    J Rheumatol

    (1985)
  • B Hepburn

    What is a disease-modifying antirheumatic drug?

    J Rheumatol

    (1986)
  • L Iannuzzi et al.

    Does drug therapy slow radiographic deterioration in rheumatoid arthritis?

    N Engl J Med

    (1983)
  • JB O'Sullivan et al.

    The prevalence of rheumatoid arthritis: Follow-up evaluation of the effect of criteria on rates in Sudbury, Massachusetts

    Ann Intern Med

    (1972)
  • WM Mikkelsen et al.

    A four-year follow-up of suspected rheumatoid arthritis: The Tecumseh, Michigan, Community Health Study

    Arthritis Rheum

    (1969)
  • A Brook et al.

    Radiographic change in early rheumatoid arthritis

    Am Rheum Dis

    (1977)
  • HA Fuchs et al.

    Evidence of significant radiologic erosions in rheumatoid arthritis within the first 2 years of disease

    J Rheumatol

    (1989)
  • I Caruso et al.

    Clinical, laboratory and radiographic features of early RA

    J Rheumatol

    (1990)
  • TT Möttonen

    Prevention of erosiveness and rate of development of new erosions in early rheumatoid arthritis

    Ann Rheum Dis

    (1988)
  • T Pincus et al.

    Taking mortality in rheumatoid arthritis seriously-Predictive markers, socioeconomic status, and comorbidity

    J Rheumatol

    (1986)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text