-
Current Gene Therapy 2019Ferroptosis is a newly discovered form of iron-dependent oxidative cell death characterized by lethal accumulation of lipid-based reactive oxygen species (ROS). It is... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Ferroptosis is a newly discovered form of iron-dependent oxidative cell death characterized by lethal accumulation of lipid-based reactive oxygen species (ROS). It is distinct from other forms of cell death including apoptosis, necrosis, and autophagy in terms of morphology, biochemistry and genetics.
DISCUSSION
Ferroptosis can be induced by system xc- inhibitors or glutathione peroxidase 4 (GPx4) inhibitors, as well as drugs such as sorafenib, sulfasalazine (SAS), and artesunate (ART). Ferroptosis has been recently shown to be critical in regulating growth of tumors, such as hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), renal cell carcinoma (RCC), non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), ovarian cancer, pancreatic carcinoma, and diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Ferroptosis is also associated with resistance to chemotherapeutic drugs and the anti-tumor efficacy of immunotherapy.
CONCLUSION
This review summarizes the mechanism of ferroptosis and its relationship with different types of tumors, to advance our understanding of cell death and to find a novel approach for clinical cancer management.
Topics: Apoptosis; Artesunate; Autophagy; Cell Death; Ferroptosis; Humans; Iron; Neoplasms; Phospholipid Hydroperoxide Glutathione Peroxidase; Reactive Oxygen Species; Sulfasalazine
PubMed: 31264548
DOI: 10.2174/1566523219666190628152137 -
Current Gastroenterology Reports Mar 2023Crohn's Disease (CD) is a chronic inflammatory disease that can lead to progressive damage to the gastrointestinal tract and significant disability. Early, "top-down"... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE OF REVIEW
Crohn's Disease (CD) is a chronic inflammatory disease that can lead to progressive damage to the gastrointestinal tract and significant disability. Early, "top-down" biologic therapy is recommended in moderate-to-severe CD to induce remission and to prevent hospitalization and complications. However, an estimated 20-30% of patients with CD have a mild disease course and may not garner sufficient benefit from expensive, immunosuppressing agents to justify their risks. Herein, we review characteristics of patients with mild CD, the available options for disease treatment and monitoring, and future directions of research.
RECENT FINDINGS
For ambulatory outpatients with low-risk, mild, ileal or ileocolonic CD, induction of remission with budesonide is recommended. For colonic CD, sulfasalazine is a reasonable choice, although other aminosalicylates have no role in the treatment of CD. No large, randomized trial has supported the use of antibiotics or antimycobacterials in the treatment of CD. Partial Enteral Nutrition and Crohn's Disease Exclusion Diets may be appropriate for inducing remission in some adult patients, with trials ongoing. Select patients with mild-to-moderate CD may benefit from maintenance therapy with azathioprines or gut specific biologics, such as vedolizumab. The role of complementary and alternative medicine is not well defined. The identification, risk stratification, and monitoring of patients with mild CD can be a challenging clinical scenario. Some patients with low risk of disease progression may be appropriate for initial induction of remission with budesonide or sulfasalazine, followed by close clinical monitoring. Future research should focus on pre-clinical biomarkers to stratify disease, novel therapies with minimal systemic immune suppression, and validation of rigorous clinical monitoring algorithms.
Topics: Humans; Crohn Disease; Sulfasalazine; Budesonide; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Enteral Nutrition; Remission Induction
PubMed: 36753033
DOI: 10.1007/s11894-023-00863-y -
Clinical Rheumatology Sep 2023Systematic r eview to evaluate the quality of the clinical practice guidelines (CPG) for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) management and to provide a synthesis of high-quality... (Review)
Review
Systematic r eview to evaluate the quality of the clinical practice guidelines (CPG) for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) management and to provide a synthesis of high-quality CPG recommendations, highlighting areas of consistency, and inconsistency. Electronic searches of five databases and four online guideline repositories were performed. RA management CPGs were eligible for inclusion if they were written in English and published between January 2015 and February 2022; focused on adults ≥ 18 years of age; met the criteria of a CPG as defined by the Institute of Medicine; and were rated as high quality on the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II instrument. RA CPGs were excluded if they required additional payment to access; only addressed recommendations for the system/organization of care and did not include interventional management recommendations; and/or included other arthritic conditions. Of 27 CPGs identified, 13 CPGs met eligibility criteria and were included. Non-pharmacological care should include patient education, patient-centered care, shared decision-making, exercise, orthoses, and a multi-disciplinary approach to care. Pharmacological care should include conventional synthetic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs), with methotrexate as the first-line choice. If monotherapy conventional synthetic DMARDs fail to achieve a treatment target, this should be followed by combination therapy conventional synthetic DMARDs (leflunomide, sulfasalazine, hydroxychloroquine), biologic DMARDS and targeted synthetic DMARDS. Management should also include monitoring, pre-treatment investigations and vaccinations, and screening for tuberculosis and hepatitis. Surgical care should be recommended if non-surgical care fails. This synthesis offers clear guidance of evidence-based RA care to healthcare providers. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The protocol for this review was registered with Open Science Framework ( https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/UB3Y7 ).
Topics: Adult; Humans; Antirheumatic Agents; Arthritis, Rheumatoid; Hydroxychloroquine; Methotrexate; Sulfasalazine; Practice Guidelines as Topic
PubMed: 37291382
DOI: 10.1007/s10067-023-06654-0 -
Cancer Discovery Dec 2019A challenge in oncology is to rationally and effectively integrate immunotherapy with traditional modalities, including radiotherapy. Here, we demonstrate that...
A challenge in oncology is to rationally and effectively integrate immunotherapy with traditional modalities, including radiotherapy. Here, we demonstrate that radiotherapy induces tumor-cell ferroptosis. Ferroptosis agonists augment and ferroptosis antagonists limit radiotherapy efficacy in tumor models. Immunotherapy sensitizes tumors to radiotherapy by promoting tumor-cell ferroptosis. Mechanistically, IFNγ derived from immunotherapy-activated CD8 T cells and radiotherapy-activated ATM independently, yet synergistically, suppresses SLC7A11, a unit of the glutamate-cystine antiporter xc, resulting in reduced cystine uptake, enhanced tumor lipid oxidation and ferroptosis, and improved tumor control. Thus, ferroptosis is an unappreciated mechanism and focus for the development of effective combinatorial cancer therapy. SIGNIFICANCE: This article describes ferroptosis as a previously unappreciated mechanism of action for radiotherapy. Further, it shows that ferroptosis is a novel point of synergy between immunotherapy and radiotherapy. Finally, it nominates SLC7A11, a critical regulator of ferroptosis, as a mechanistic determinant of synergy between radiotherapy and immunotherapy..
Topics: Amino Acid Transport System y+; Animals; Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological; CD8-Positive T-Lymphocytes; Cell Line, Tumor; Cell Survival; Down-Regulation; Ferroptosis; Gene Expression Regulation, Neoplastic; Humans; Immunotherapy; Interferon-gamma; Lipid Metabolism; Melanoma, Experimental; Mice; Oxidation-Reduction; Sulfasalazine; Xenograft Model Antitumor Assays
PubMed: 31554642
DOI: 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-19-0338 -
Digestion 2023Two major types of 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA)-containing preparations, namely, mesalazine/5-ASA and sulfasalazine (SASP), are currently used as first-line therapy for... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Two major types of 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA)-containing preparations, namely, mesalazine/5-ASA and sulfasalazine (SASP), are currently used as first-line therapy for ulcerative colitis. Recent reports show that optimization of 5-ASA therapy is beneficial for both patient outcomes and healthcare costs. Although 5-ASA and SASP have good efficacy and safety profiles, clinicians occasionally encounter patients who develop 5-ASA intolerance.
SUMMARY
The most common symptoms of acute 5-ASA intolerance syndrome are exacerbation of diarrhea, fever, and abdominal pain. Patients who discontinue 5-ASA therapy because of intolerance have a higher risk of adverse clinical outcomes, such as hospital admission, colectomy, need for advanced therapies, and loss of response to anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) biologics. When patients develop symptoms of 5-ASA intolerance, the clinician should consider changing the type of 5-ASA preparation. Recent genome-wide association studies and meta-analyses have shown that 5-ASA allergy is associated with certain single-nucleotide polymorphisms. Although there are no modalities or biomarkers for diagnosing 5-ASA intolerance, the drug-induced lymphocyte stimulation test can be used to assist in the diagnosis of acute 5-ASA intolerance syndrome with high specificity and low sensitivity. This review presents a general overview of 5-ASA and SASP in the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease and discusses the latest insights into 5-ASA intolerance.
KEY MESSAGES
5-ASA is used as first-line therapy for ulcerative colitis. Optimization of 5-ASA may be beneficial for patient outcomes and healthcare systems. Acute 5-ASA intolerance syndrome is characterized by diarrhea, fever, and abdominal pain. Periodic renal function monitoring is recommended for patients receiving 5-ASA.
Topics: Humans; Mesalamine; Colitis, Ulcerative; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Genome-Wide Association Study; Remission Induction; Administration, Oral; Sulfasalazine; Fever; Abdominal Pain
PubMed: 36366816
DOI: 10.1159/000527452 -
Theranostics 2022: Intracellular bacterial survival is a major factor causing chronic or recurrent infection, leading to the failure of both host defense and/or antibiotic treatment....
: Intracellular bacterial survival is a major factor causing chronic or recurrent infection, leading to the failure of both host defense and/or antibiotic treatment. However, the elimination of intracellular bacteria is challenging as they are protected from antibiotics and host immune attack. Recent studies have indicated that iron helps macrophages against intracellular bacteria, contradictory to traditional "nutritional immunity", in which iron is considered a key nutrient for bacterial survival in host cells. However, how iron facilitates intracellular bacterial death has not been fully clarified. In this study, we found that ferroptotic stress can help macrophages suppress intracellular bacteria by reversing the importation of ferrous iron into bacterial vacuoles via ferroportin and thereby inducing ferroptosis-like bacterial death. : A macrophage model of bacterial invasion was established to monitor dynamic changes in ferroptotic hallmarks, including ferrous iron and lipid peroxidation. Ferroptosis inducers and inhibitors were added to the model to evaluate the relationship between ferroptotic stress and intracellular bacterial survival. We then determined the spatiotemporal distributions of ferroportin, ferrous iron, and lipid peroxidation in macrophages and intracellular bacteria. A bacterial infection mouse model was established to evaluate the therapeutic effects of drugs that regulate ferroptotic stress. : Ferrous iron and lipid peroxidation increased sharply in the early stage of bacterial infection in the macrophages, then decreased to normal levels in the late stage of infection. The addition of ferroptosis inducers (ras-selective lethal small molecule 3, sulfasalazine, and acetaminophen) in macrophages promoted intracellular bacterial suppression. Further studies revealed that ferrous iron could be delivered to the intracellular bacterial compartment via inward ferroportin transportation, where ferrous iron induced ferroptosis-like death of bacteria. In addition, ferroptotic stress declined to normal levels in the late stage of infection by regulating iron-related pathways in the macrophages. Importantly, we found that enhancing ferroptotic stress with a ferroptosis inducer (sulfasalazine) successfully suppressed bacteria in the mouse infection models. : Our study suggests that the spatiotemporal response to ferroptosis stress is an efficient pathway for macrophage defense against bacterial invasion, and targeting ferroptosis may achieve therapeutic targets for infectious diseases challenged by intracellular pathogens.
Topics: Animals; Cell Death; Ferroptosis; Iron; Macrophages; Mice; Sulfasalazine
PubMed: 35265210
DOI: 10.7150/thno.66663 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2016Randomized trials investigating the efficacy of aminosalicylates for the treatment of mildly to moderately active Crohn's disease have yielded conflicting results. A... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Randomized trials investigating the efficacy of aminosalicylates for the treatment of mildly to moderately active Crohn's disease have yielded conflicting results. A systematic review was conducted to critically examine current available data on the efficacy of sulfasalazine and mesalamine for inducing remission or clinical response in these patients.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the efficacy of aminosalicylates compared to placebo, corticosteroids, and other aminosalicylates (alone or in combination with corticosteroids) for the treatment of mildly to moderately active Crohn's disease.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE and the Cochrane Central Library from inception to June 2015 to identify relevant studies. There were no language restrictions. We also searched reference lists from potentially relevant papers and review articles, as well as proceedings from annual meetings (1991-2015) of the American Gastroenterological Association and American College of Gastroenterology.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized controlled trials that evaluated the efficacy of sulfasalazine or mesalamine in the treatment of mildly to moderately active Crohn's disease compared to placebo, corticosteroids, and other aminosalicylates (alone or in combination with corticosteroids) were included.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Data extraction and assessment of methodological quality was independently performed by the investigators and any disagreement was resolved by discussion and consensus. We assessed methodological quality using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. The overall quality of the evidence supporting the outcomes was evaluated using the GRADE criteria. The primary outcome measure was a well defined clinical endpoint of induction of remission or response to treatment. Secondary outcomes included mean Crohn's disease activity index (CDAI) scores, adverse events, serious adverse events and withdrawal due to adverse events. For dichotomous outcomes we calculated the pooled risk ratio (RR) and corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) using a random-effects model. For continuous outcomes we calculated the mean difference (MD) and 95% CI using a random-effects model. Sensitivity analyses based on a fixed-effect model and duration of therapy were conducted where appropriate.
MAIN RESULTS
Twenty studies (2367 patients) were included. Two studies were judged to be at high risk of bias due to lack of blinding. Eight studies were judged to be at high risk of bias due to incomplete outcomes data (high drop-out rates) and potential selective reporting. The other 10 studies were judged to be at low risk of bias. A non-significant trend in favour of sulfasalazine over placebo for inducing remission was observed, with benefit confined mainly to patients with Crohn's colitis. Forty-five per cent (63/141) of sulfasalazine patients entered remission at 17-18 weeks compared to 29% (43/148) of placebo patients (RR 1.38, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.89, 2 studies). A GRADE analysis rated the overall quality of the evidence supporting this outcome as moderate due to sparse data (106 events). There was no difference between sulfasalazine and placebo in adverse event outcomes. Sulfasalazine was significantly less effective than corticosteroids and inferior to combination therapy with corticosteroids (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.86, 1 study, 110 patients). Forty-three per cent (55/128) of sulfasalazine patients entered remission at 17 to 18 weeks compared to 60% (79/132) of corticosteroid patients (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.91; 2 studies, 260 patients). A GRADE analysis rated the overall quality of the evidence supporting this outcome as moderate due to sparse data (134 events). Sulfasalazine patients experienced significantly fewer adverse events than corticosteroid patients (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.82; 1 study, 159 patients). There was no difference between sulfasalazine and corticosteroids in serious adverse events or withdrawal due to adverse events. Olsalazine was less effective than placebo in a single trial (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.71; 91 patients). Low dose mesalamine (1 to 2 g/day) was not superior to placebo for induction of remission. Twenty-three per cent (43/185) of low dose mesalamine patients entered remission at week 6 compared to 15% (18/117) of placebo patients (RR = 1.46, 95% CI 0.89 to 2.40; n = 302). A GRADE analysis indicated that the overall quality of the evidence supporting this outcome was low due to risk of bias (incomplete outcome data) and sparse data (61 events). There was no difference between low dose mesalamine and placebo in the proportion of patients who had adverse events (RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.96; 3 studies, 342 patients) or withdrew due to adverse events (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.95; 3 studies, 342 patients). High dose controlled-release mesalamine (4 g/day) was not superior to placebo, inducing a clinically non significant reduction in CDAI (MD -19.8 points, 95% CI -46.2 to 6.7; 3 studies, 615 patients), and was also inferior to budesonide (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.78; 1 study, 182 patients, GRADE = low). While high dose delayed-release mesalamine (3 to 4.5 g/day) was not superior to placebo for induction of remission (RR 2.02, 95% CI 0.75 to 5.45; 1 study, 38 patients, GRADE = very low), no significant difference in efficacy was found when compared to conventional corticosteroids (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.36; 3 studies, 178 patients, GRADE = moderate) or budesonide (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.05; 1 study, 307 patients, GRADE = moderate). However, these trials were limited by risk of bias (incomplete outcome data) and sparse data (small numbers of events). There was a lack of good quality clinical trials comparing sulfasalazine with other mesalamine formulations. Adverse events that were commonly reported included headache, nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain and diarrhea.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Sulfasalazine is only modestly effective with a trend towards benefit over placebo and is inferior to corticosteroids for the treatment of mildly to moderately active Crohn's disease. Olsalazine and low dose mesalamine (1 to 2 g/day) are not superior to placebo. High dose mesalamine (3.2 to 4 g/day) is not more effective than placebo for inducing response or remission. However, trials assessing the efficacy of high dose mesalamine (4 to 4.5 g/day) compared to budesonide yielded conflicting results and firm conclusions cannot be made. Future large randomized controlled trials are needed to provide definitive evidence on the efficacy of aminosalicylates in active Crohn's disease.
Topics: Aminosalicylic Acids; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Budesonide; Crohn Disease; Delayed-Action Preparations; Gastrointestinal Agents; Humans; Induction Chemotherapy; Mesalamine; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sulfasalazine
PubMed: 27372735
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008870.pub2 -
Journal of Gastroenterology and... Jan 2021Although oral mesalamine is the first-choice drug for treating mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis (UC), some patients show symptoms of intolerance, including...
BACKGROUND AND AIM
Although oral mesalamine is the first-choice drug for treating mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis (UC), some patients show symptoms of intolerance, including exacerbation of diarrhea and abdominal pain. The present study clarified the current state and clinical courses of patients with mesalamine intolerance.
METHODS
Patients who were diagnosed with UC and administered oral mesalamine at eight hospitals in Japan with a follow-up period exceeding 1 year were analyzed.
RESULTS
Sixty-seven (11%) of 633 patients showed intolerance to at least one formulation of oral mesalamine. The frequency of mesalamine intolerance has increased in recent years, rising from 5.3% in 2007-2010 to 9.1% in 2011-2013 and 16.2% in 2014-2016. The most common complications were the exacerbation of diarrhea (n = 29), a fever (n = 25), and abdominal pain (n = 22). Readministration of mesalamine/sulfasalazine was attempted in 43 patients, mostly with other types of formulation of mesalamine, and more than half of these patients proved to be tolerant. The risk factors for mesalamine intolerance were female gender (odds ratio [OR] = 1.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.08-3.12), age < 60 years old (OR = 2.82; CI, 1.19-8.33), and pancolitis (OR = 2.09; 95% CI, 1.23-3.60). There were no significant differences in the use of anti-tumor necrosis factor-α agents, colectomy, or steroid-free remission at the last visit between patients with and without mesalamine intolerance.
CONCLUSIONS
Mesalamine intolerance is not rare, and its frequency has been increasing recently. The prognosis of patients with mesalamine intolerance did not differ significantly from that of those without intolerance.
Topics: Abdominal Pain; Administration, Oral; Adult; Colitis, Ulcerative; Diarrhea; Disease Progression; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Humans; Male; Mesalamine; Middle Aged; Prognosis; Retrospective Studies; Risk Factors; Severity of Illness Index; Sex Factors; Sulfasalazine; Time Factors
PubMed: 32525567
DOI: 10.1111/jgh.15138 -
Nature Reviews. Rheumatology Mar 2024In the past two decades, the treatment of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) has evolved markedly, owing to the availability of a growing number of novel, potent and... (Review)
Review
In the past two decades, the treatment of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) has evolved markedly, owing to the availability of a growing number of novel, potent and relatively safe therapeutic agents and the shift of management strategies towards early achievement of disease remission. However, JIA encompasses a heterogeneous group of diseases that require distinct treatment approaches. Furthermore, some old drugs, such as methotrexate, sulfasalazine and intraarticular glucocorticoids, still maintain an important therapeutic role. In the past 5 years, information on the efficacy and safety of drug therapies for JIA has been further enriched through the accomplishment of several randomized controlled trials of newer biologic and synthetic targeted DMARDs. In addition, a more rational therapeutic approach has been fostered by the promulgation of therapeutic recommendations and guidelines. A multinational collaborative effort has led to the development of the recommendations for the treat-to-target strategy in JIA. There is currently increasing interest in establishing the optimal time and modality for discontinuation of treatment in children with JIA who achieve sustained clinical remission. The aim of this Review is to summarize the current evidence and discuss the therapeutic approaches to the management of non-systemic phenotypes of JIA, including oligoarthritis, polyarthritis, enthesitis-related arthritis and psoriatic arthritis.
Topics: Child; Humans; Arthritis, Juvenile; Antirheumatic Agents; Methotrexate; Sulfasalazine; Arthritis, Psoriatic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38321298
DOI: 10.1038/s41584-024-01079-8 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2014Ankylosing spondylitis (AS) is a chronic inflammatory disease of unknown cause and affects mainly the spine, but can also affect other joints. Disease progression may... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Ankylosing spondylitis (AS) is a chronic inflammatory disease of unknown cause and affects mainly the spine, but can also affect other joints. Disease progression may result in loss of mobility and function. Sulfasalazine is a disease-modifying antirheumatic drug used in the treatment of AS. However, its efficacy remains unclear. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2005.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the benefits and harms of sulfasalazine for the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis (AS).
SEARCH METHODS
We searched for relevant randomized and quasi-randomized trials in any language, using the following sources: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 11); MEDLINE (2003 to 28 November 2013); EMBASE (2003 to 27 November 2013); CINAHL (2003 to 28 November 2013); Ovid MEDLINE data, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (28 November 2013); and the reference sections of retrieved articles.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We evaluated randomized and quasi-randomized trials examining the benefits and harms of sulfasalazine on AS.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently reviewed unblinded trial reports according to the selection criteria. Disagreements on the inclusion of the studies were resolved, when necessary, by recourse to a third review author. The same authors independently assessed the risk of bias of included trials and entered the data extracted from the included trials. We combined results using mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) for continuous data, and risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous data.We restructured outcome measures for this update based on recommendations from the editorial group. Major outcomes included: pain, Bath ankylosing spondylitis disease activity index (BASDAI), Bath ankylosing spondylitis function index (BASFI), Bath ankylosing spondylitis metrology index (BASMI), radiographic progression, total number of withdrawals due to adverse events, and serious adverse events.
MAIN RESULTS
We did not add any new studies to this review following the updated search. In the original review, we included 11 studies in the analysis, involving 895 participants in total. All included studies compared sulfasalazine with placebo. We judged most of the studies as low risk of bias or unclear risk of bias in five domains (random sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding of outcome assessment, selective reporting, and other sources of bias). However, for incomplete outcome data, we only judged one trial at low risk of bias.None of the included trials assessed BASDAI, BASFI, BASMI or radiographic progression. Different parameters were used to assess pain. The pooled MD for back pain measured on a 0 to 100 mm visual analogue scale was -2.96 (95% confidence interval (CI) -6.33 to 0.41; absolute risk difference 3%, 95% CI 1% to 6%; 6 trials). Compared to placebo, a significantly higher rate of withdrawals due to adverse effects (RR 1.50, 95% CI 1.04 to 2.15; absolute risk difference 4%, 95% CI 0.4% to 8.8%; 11 trials) was found in the sulfasalazine group. A serious adverse reaction was reported in one patient taking sulfasalazine (Peto odds ratio 7.50, 95% CI 0.15 to 378.16).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is not enough evidence to support any benefit of sulfasalazine in reducing pain, disease activity, radiographic progression, or improving physical function and spinal mobility in the treatment of AS. A statistically significant benefit in reducing the erythrocyte sedimentation rate and easing spinal stiffness was mentioned in the previous version. However, the effect size was very small and not clinically meaningful. More withdrawals because of side effects occurred with sulfasalazine. Further studies, with larger sample sizes, longer duration, and using validated outcome measures are needed to verify the uncertainty of sulfasalazine in AS.
Topics: Antirheumatic Agents; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Spondylitis, Ankylosing; Sulfasalazine
PubMed: 25427435
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004800.pub3