-
Therapie Jun 2016
Topics: Dermatologic Agents; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Psoriasis; Sulfasalazine; Sweet Syndrome
PubMed: 27235662
DOI: 10.1016/j.therap.2015.11.006 -
Life Sciences Jul 2023Medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) is the most common fertility-sparing treatment in patients with early-stage endometrial cancer. If MPA treatment fails, hysterectomy is...
AIMS
Medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) is the most common fertility-sparing treatment in patients with early-stage endometrial cancer. If MPA treatment fails, hysterectomy is recommended. Thus, there is an urgent need for novel treatment approaches for MPA-resistant endometrial cancer patients who wish to preserve their fertility. Ferroptosis is a recently discovered type of regulated cell death caused by the excessive accumulation of reactive oxygen species (ROS), followed by aberrant lipid peroxidation. Recent studies have shown that inducing ferroptosis is a potential therapeutic strategy for cancer. However, the role of ferroptosis in endometrial cancer treatment remains to be discussed. We therefore investigated the effects of ferroptosis inducers on MPA-resistant endometrial cancer cells.
MAIN METHODS
The levels of solute carrier family 7 member 11 (SLC7A11) and glutathione peroxidase 4 (GPX4), the main mediators of ferroptosis, were examined. Cell viability was evaluated after treatment with the ferroptosis inducers sulfasalazine, erastin, or RSL3. The degree of intracellular oxidative stress after treatment with these drugs was evaluated by the glutathione level, ROS level, ferrous iron level, lipid peroxidation and changes in mitochondrial morphology. The effect of ferroptosis inducers in vivo was also examined.
KEY FINDINGS
The expression of SLC7A11 and GPX4 in MPA-resistant ECC-1 cells decreased in comparison to parental ECC-1 cells. Sulfasalazine, erastin, and RSL3 significantly reduced cell viability and increased intracellular oxidative stress in MPA-resistant ECC-1 cells. Ferroptosis inducers also suppressed in vivo tumor growth more effectively in MPA-resistant ECC-1.
SIGNIFICANCE
Treatment with ferroptosis inducers could be a novel therapeutic approach for MPA-resistant endometrial cancer.
Topics: Female; Humans; Ferroptosis; Medroxyprogesterone Acetate; Reactive Oxygen Species; Sulfasalazine; Endometrial Neoplasms
PubMed: 37160245
DOI: 10.1016/j.lfs.2023.121753 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2015Methotrexate, a folate antagonist, is an immunosuppressant drug that is effective for treating several inflammatory disorders including Crohn's disease. Ulcerative... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Methotrexate, a folate antagonist, is an immunosuppressant drug that is effective for treating several inflammatory disorders including Crohn's disease. Ulcerative colitis, a related chronic inflammatory bowel disease, can be challenging to treat. T his updated systematic review summarizes the current evidence on the use of methotrexate for induction maintenance of remission in ulcerative colitis.
OBJECTIVES
The objectives of this review were to assess the efficacy and safety of methotrexate for maintenance of remission in patients with ulcerative colitis.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL and the Cochrane IBD/FBD group specialized trials register from inception to June 26, 2014. Study references and review papers were also searched for additional trials. Abstracts from major gastroenterological meetings were searched to identify research published in abstract form only.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized controlled trials in which methotrexate was compared to placebo or an active comparator in patients with quiescent ulcerative were considered for inclusion.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias for each study. The primary outcome was the occurrence of clinical or endoscopic relapse as defined by the primary studies. Secondary outcomes included frequency and nature of adverse events, change of disease activity score and steroid-sparing effect. We calculated the risk ratio and corresponding 95% confidence interval for dichotomous outcomes. Data were analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis. The overall quality of the evidence supporting the outcomes was evaluated using the GRADE criteria.
MAIN RESULTS
Three trials (165 patients) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. One study compared oral methotrexate (12.5 mg/week) to placebo, another compared oral methotrexate (15 mg/week) to 6-mercaptopurine (6-MP, 1.5 mg/kg/day) or 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA, 3 g/day) and the other compared methotrexate (15 mg/week) in combination sulfasalazine (3 g/day) to sulfasalazine. The placebo-controlled study was rated as low risk of bias. The study comparing methotrexate to 6-MP and 5-ASA was rated as high risk of bias and the study assessing methotrexate and sulfasalazine was rated as unclear risk of bias for sequence generation, allocation concealment and blinding. The placebo-controlled study found no statistically significant differences in the proportion of patients who maintained remission. At nine months, 36% (5/14) of methotrexate patients maintained remission compared to 54% (10/18) of placebo patients (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.45). A GRADE analysis indicated that the overall quality of the evidence for this outcome was low due to very sparse data (15 events). The study comparing combination therapy to sulfasalazine found no statistically significant difference in the proportion of patients who maintained remission. At 12 months, 100% (14/14) of patients in the combination group maintained remission compared to 75% (9/12) of sulfasalazine patients (RR 1.32, 95% CI 0.94 to 0.86), A GRADE analysis indicated that the overall quality of the evidence for this outcome was very low due to unknown risk of bias and very sparse data (23 events). There were no statistically significant differences in maintenance of remission rates between methotrexate and 6-MP or between methotrexate and 5-ASA. At 76 weeks, 14% (1/7) of methotrexate patients maintained remission compared to 64% (7/11) of 6-MP patients (RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.03 to 1.45) and 0% (0/2) of 5-ASA patients (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.06 to 20.71). A GRADE analysis indicated that the overall quality of the evidence from this study was very low due to high risk of bias and very sparse data. Adverse events reported in these studies included transient leucopenia, migraine, nausea and dyspepsia, mild alopecia, mild increase in aspartate aminotransferase levels, peritoneal abscess, hypoalbuminemia, severe rash and atypical pneumonia
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The results for efficacy and safety outcomes between methotrexate and placebo, methotrexate and sulfasalazine, methotrexate and 6-mercaptopurine and methotrexate and 5-aminosalicylic acid were uncertain. Whether a higher dose or parenteral administration of methotrexate would be effective in quiescent ulcerative colitis is unknown. At present there is no evidence supporting the use of methotrexate for maintenance of remission in ulcerative colitis. More studies are needed to determine the efficacy and safety of methotrexate maintenance therapy in patients with quiescent ulcerative colitis. Large scale methodologically rigorous randomized controlled trials are needed. These studies should investigate higher doses of methotrexate (e.g. 15 to 25 mg/week) and parenteral administration.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Colitis, Ulcerative; Humans; Immunosuppressive Agents; Maintenance Chemotherapy; Mercaptopurine; Mesalamine; Methotrexate; Sulfasalazine
PubMed: 26263042
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007560.pub3 -
Immunity, Inflammation and Disease Feb 2022Inflammatory signals in the sacroiliac (SI) joints and the aorta of patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) were graded by positron emission tomography/computed...
AIM
Inflammatory signals in the sacroiliac (SI) joints and the aorta of patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) were graded by positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) imaging before and after treatment with sulfasalazine (SSZ) or adalimumab (ADA).
METHODS
Patients with axSpA, Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) ≥ 4, were recruited. Disease-modifying antirheumatic drug-naïve patients started SSZ for 12 weeks, whereas those with prestudy treatment with or contraindication to SSZ commenced ADA for 16 weeks. In addition, those patients in the SSZ group with insufficient response commenced ADA for 16 weeks. 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT was performed after inclusion and after treatment with SSZ and ADA. Maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) was assessed for the aorta and the SI joints, and maximal target-to-blood-pool ratio (TBRmax) only for the aorta.
RESULTS
Among five SSZ patients, mean ± SD BASDAI was 4.7 ± 1.6 before and 3.5 ± 1.4 after treatment (p = .101). In 13 ADA patients, the BASDAI decreased from 5.4 ± 1.6 to 2.8 ± 2.2 (p < .001). Among the SSZ patients, SUVmax in SI joints decreased from 2.35 ± 0.55 to 1.51 ± 0.22 (-35.8%, p = .029). Aortic TBRmax decreased from 1.59 ± 0.43 to 1.26 ± 0.26 (-33.2%, p = .087). In the ADA patients, SUVmax in the SI joints was 1.92 ± 0.65 before and 1.88 ± 0.54 after treatment (-1.8%, p = .808) and TBRmax in the aorta 1.50 ± 0.60 before and 1.40 ± 0.26 after treatment (-6.7%, p = .485).
CONCLUSIONS
Our small open-label study showed that SSZ may reduce PET-CT-detectable inflammation in the SI joints, with a trend towards a reduction in the aorta.
Topics: Adalimumab; Aorta; Axial Spondyloarthritis; Humans; Inflammation; Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography; Spondylitis, Ankylosing; Sulfasalazine; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34755937
DOI: 10.1002/iid3.552 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2020Oral 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA; also known as mesalazine or mesalamine) preparations were intended to avoid the adverse effects of sulfasalazine (SASP) while... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Oral 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA; also known as mesalazine or mesalamine) preparations were intended to avoid the adverse effects of sulfasalazine (SASP) while maintaining its therapeutic benefits. In an earlier version of this review, we found that 5-ASA drugs were more effective than placebo for maintenance of remission of ulcerative colitis (UC), but had a significant therapeutic inferiority relative to SASP. In this version, we have rerun the search to bring the review up to date.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy, dose-responsiveness, and safety of oral 5-ASA compared to placebo, SASP, or 5-ASA comparators for maintenance of remission in quiescent UC and to compare the efficacy and safety of once-daily dosing of oral 5-ASA with conventional (two or three times daily) dosing regimens.
SEARCH METHODS
We performed a literature search for studies on 11 June 2019 using MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. In addition, we searched review articles and conference proceedings.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled trials with a minimum treatment duration of six months. We considered studies of oral 5-ASA therapy for treatment of participants with quiescent UC compared with placebo, SASP, or other 5-ASA formulations. We also included studies that compared once-daily 5-ASA treatment with conventional dosing of 5-ASA and 5-ASA dose-ranging studies.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. The primary outcome was the failure to maintain clinical or endoscopic remission. Secondary outcomes were adherence, adverse events (AE), serious adverse events (SAE), withdrawals due to AEs, and withdrawals or exclusions after entry. Trials were separated into five comparison groups: 5-ASA versus placebo, 5-ASA versus SASP, once-daily dosing versus conventional dosing, 5-ASA (balsalazide, Pentasa, and olsalazine) versus comparator 5-ASA formulation (Asacol and Salofalk), and 5-ASA dose-ranging. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for each outcome. We analyzed data on an intention-to-treat basis, and used GRADE to assess the overall certainty of the evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
The search identified 44 studies (9967 participants). Most studies were at low risk of bias. Ten studies were at high risk of bias. Seven of these studies were single-blind and three were open-label. 5-ASA is more effective than placebo for maintenance of clinical or endoscopic remission. About 37% (335/907) of 5-ASA participants relapsed at six to 12 months compared to 55% (355/648) of placebo participants (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.76; 8 studies, 1555 participants; high-certainty evidence). Adherence to study medication was not reported for this comparison. SAEs were reported in 1% (6/550) of participants in the 5-ASA group compared to 2% (5/276) of participants in the placebo group at six to 12 months (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.19 to 1.84; 3 studies, 826 participants; low-certainty evidence). There is probably little or no difference in AEs at six to 12 months' follow-up (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.18; 5 studies, 1132 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). SASP is more effective than 5-ASA for maintenance of remission. About 48% (416/871) of 5-ASA participants relapsed at six to 18 months compared to 43% (336/784) of SASP participants (RR 1.14, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.27; 12 studies, 1655 participants; high-certainty evidence). Adherence to study medication and SAEs were not reported for this comparison. There is probably little or no difference in AEs at six to 12 months' follow-up (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.40; 7 studies, 1138 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There is little or no difference in clinical or endoscopic remission rates between once-daily and conventionally dosed 5-ASA. About 37% (717/1939) of once-daily participants relapsed over 12 months compared to 39% (770/1971) of conventional-dosing participants (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.01; 10 studies, 3910 participants; high-certainty evidence). There is probably little or no difference in medication adherence rates. About 10% (106/1152) of participants in the once-daily group failed to adhere to their medication regimen compared to 8% (84/1154) of participants in the conventional-dosing group (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.93; 9 studies, 2306 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). About 3% (41/1587) of participants in the once-daily group experienced a SAE compared to 2% (35/1609) of participants in the conventional-dose group at six to 12 months (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.87; moderate-certainty evidence). There is little or no difference in the incidence of AEs at six to 13 months' follow-up (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.04; 8 studies, 3497 participants; high-certainty evidence). There may be little or no difference in the efficacy of different 5-ASA formulations. About 44% (158/358) of participants in the 5-ASA group relapsed at six to 18 months compared to 41% (142/349) of participants in the 5-ASA comparator group (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.28; 6 studies, 707 participants; low-certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is high-certainty evidence that 5-ASA is superior to placebo for maintenance therapy in UC. There is high-certainty evidence that 5-ASA is inferior compared to SASP. There is probably little or no difference between 5-ASA and placebo, and 5-ASA and SASP in commonly reported AEs such as flatulence, abdominal pain, nausea, diarrhea, headache, and dyspepsia. Oral 5-ASA administered once daily has a similar benefit and harm profile as conventional dosing for maintenance of remission in quiescent UC.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Aminosalicylic Acids; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Bias; Colitis, Ulcerative; Drug Administration Schedule; Humans; Maintenance Chemotherapy; Medication Adherence; Mesalamine; Patient Dropouts; Placebos; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Recurrence; Remission Induction; Sulfasalazine
PubMed: 32856298
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000544.pub5 -
BMJ Case Reports May 2015
Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents; Antirheumatic Agents; Arthritis, Rheumatoid; Humans; Male; Methotrexate; Middle Aged; Pleural Effusion; Pleurodesis; Pneumothorax; Prednisolone; Pulmonary Fibrosis; Sulfasalazine
PubMed: 25956496
DOI: 10.1136/bcr-2014-208194 -
Placenta Feb 2023Development of a therapeutic that targets the pathophysiological elements of preeclampsia would be a major advance for obstetrics, with potential to save the lives of...
INTRODUCTION
Development of a therapeutic that targets the pathophysiological elements of preeclampsia would be a major advance for obstetrics, with potential to save the lives of countless mothers and babies. We recently identified anti-inflammatory drug sulfasalazine as a prospective candidate therapeutic for treatment of preeclampsia. In primary human cells and tissues in vitro, sulfasalazine potently decreased secretion of anti-angiogenic sFlt-1 and sENG, increased production of pro-angiogenic PlGF, mitigated endothelial dysfunction, and promoted whole vessel vasodilation.
METHODS
Using nitric oxide synthase antagonist Nω-Nitro-l-arginine methyl ester hydrochloride, a preeclampsia-like phenotype was induced in pregnant mice, including high blood pressure, fetal growth restriction, and elevated circulating sFlt-1. Mice were treated with sulfasalazine or vehicle from gestational day (D)13.5, with blood pressure measurements across gestation, fetal measurements at D17.5, and wire myograph assessment of vasoactivity.
RESULTS
Sulfasalazine had a modest effect on blood pressure, decreasing diastolic and mean blood pressure on D13.5, but not later in gestation, or systolic blood pressure. Sulfasalazine was not able to rescue fetal growth, in male or female fetuses. There was a suggestion of improved vasoactivity with sulfasalazine, but further clarification is required.
DISCUSSION
In this mouse model of preeclampsia, sulfasalazine did not sustain reductions in blood pressure nor affect fetal parameters of size and weight, both desirable attributes of a viable preeclampsia therapeutic. While these data suggest sulfasalazine might improve vasoactivity, murine toxicity considerations limited the dose range of sulfasalazine that could be tested in the current study.
Topics: Pregnancy; Female; Male; Mice; Animals; Humans; Pre-Eclampsia; Sulfasalazine; Blood Pressure; Hypertension; Disease Models, Animal; Nitric Oxide Synthase; Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Receptor-1; Nitric Oxide
PubMed: 36623415
DOI: 10.1016/j.placenta.2023.01.001 -
Biopharmaceutics & Drug Disposition Sep 2021Cystine/glutamate transporter (xCT) is an antiporter involved in cystine uptake and glutamate efflux. However, there are very few reports regarding the kinetic analysis...
Cystine/glutamate transporter (xCT) is an antiporter involved in cystine uptake and glutamate efflux. However, there are very few reports regarding the kinetic analysis of xCT for cystine uptake using cancer cell lines, as well as the inhibition pattern of sulfasalazine, an inhibitor of xCT, for cystine uptake. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to clarify the kinetics of xCT in A549 cells, human lung cancer cells, and to reveal the inhibition pattern of sulfasalazine. Cystine uptake occurred in a time-dependent manner, with linear cystine uptake observed for 5 min. Additionally, sulfasalazine inhibited cystine uptake in a concentration-dependent manner, presenting an IC value of 24.7 ± 5.6 μM. Cystine uptake was saturated with increasing concentration, demonstrating K and V values of 179.4 ± 26.7 μM and 30.4 ± 2.3 nmol/min/mg protein, respectively. Moreover, during cystine uptake with sulfasalazine, K and V were >300 μM and 8.0 ± 1.5 nmol/min/mg protein, respectively, suggesting that sulfasalazine might demonstrate a mixed inhibition pattern. Furthermore, xCT siRNA decreased the xCT mRNA level and reduced cystine uptake. In conclusion, xCT was involved in the cystine uptake in A549 cells and sulfasalazine showed a mixed inhibition pattern to xCT.
Topics: A549 Cells; Amino Acid Transport System y+; Antiporters; Antirheumatic Agents; Biological Transport, Active; Cystine; Humans; Neoplasms; Sulfasalazine
PubMed: 34287957
DOI: 10.1002/bdd.2298 -
Rheumatology International May 2022To compare efficacy and safety of two different combination csDMARD therapy in Methotrexate-failed Rheumatoid arthritis patients. In this 24-week open-label,... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
Comparison between leflunomide and sulfasalazine based triple therapy in methotrexate refractory rheumatoid arthritis: an open-label, non-inferiority randomized controlled trial.
To compare efficacy and safety of two different combination csDMARD therapy in Methotrexate-failed Rheumatoid arthritis patients. In this 24-week open-label, parallel-group non-inferiority, single-center clinical trial, Methotrexate-failed Rheumatoid arthritis patients with disease duration < 2 years, were randomized to either of the two treatment regimens-Methotrexate + Leflunomide + Hydroxychloroquine or Methotrexate + Sulfasalazine + Hydroxychloroquine. Primary endpoint was proportion of patients achieving EULAR good response at 12 weeks. Non-inferiority of Leflunomide based therapy was confirmed if the upper limit of the 2-sided 95% confidence interval of treatment difference between the 2 groups was lower than the selected non-inferiority margin of (- 20%) in primary endpoint at 12 weeks. Secondary endpoints were improvement in DAS28, functional outcome and adverse events at 24 weeks. 136 eligible patients were randomized to either Leflunomide or Sulfasalazine group (68 in each group).63 and 59 patients in Leflunomide and 66 and 61 patients in Sulfasalazine group completed 12 and 24 weeks of trial, respectively. In Intension-to-treat analysis, EULAR good response was achieved by 58.8% and 54.4% patients (p = 0.7) at the end of 12 weeks, and 61.7% and 64.7% patients (p = 0.8) at the end of 24 weeks-in Leflunomide and Sulfasalazine group respectively. At 12 weeks, the difference in EULAR good response with 2-sided 95% confidence interval between 2 groups was 4.4% (- 12%, 20%) in intention-to-treat and 5.8% (- 11%, 23%) in perprotocol analysis.15 and 21 adverse events were recorded in Leflunomide and Sulfasalazine group respectively. Parenteral Methotrexate was required more in Sulfasalazine group due to gastrointestinal intolerance. Leflunomide based csDMARD therapy is non-inferior to Sulfasalazine based csDMARD therapy in Methotrexate-failed Rheumatoid arthritis patients with comparable safety profile. Trial registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02930343) dated 10.09.2016.
Topics: Antirheumatic Agents; Arthritis, Rheumatoid; Drug Therapy, Combination; Humans; Hydroxychloroquine; Leflunomide; Methotrexate; Sulfasalazine; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34586472
DOI: 10.1007/s00296-021-04994-1 -
Expert Opinion on Pharmacotherapy 2016Juvenile idiopathic arthritis is the most frequent chronic rheumatic disease in childhood. Synthetic disease modifying drugs (DMARDs) have been used in its treatment... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Juvenile idiopathic arthritis is the most frequent chronic rheumatic disease in childhood. Synthetic disease modifying drugs (DMARDs) have been used in its treatment since the 1980s and have led to substantial improvement of quality of life and disease outcome. Recent pharmacological research has focused on newer medications, especially biologic agents.
AREAS COVERED
Synthetic DMARDS, especially methotrexate, rightfully remain the first-line treatment of most categories of juvenile arthritis, as attested by several international guidelines. A substantial body of evidence supports these medications, and recent research tries to clarify their optimal use in the clinical setting, both as monotherapy and in combination with biologics. In addition, new forms of synthetic DMARDs are in the research pipeline, or are already used for rheumatoid arthritis.
EXPERT OPINION
Methotrexate remains the preferred first-line medication for polyarticular arthritis, with leflunomide as a viable alternative in case of intolerance or toxicity, despite lack of approval in Europe and the US. Sulfasalazine and hydroxychloroquine are used only rarely in clinical practice, considered in combination with methotrexate if biologics are not available. New synthetic DMARDS are in the research pipeline for JIA, in the form of small molecules.
Topics: Antirheumatic Agents; Arthritis, Juvenile; Biological Products; Drug Therapy, Combination; Humans; Hydroxychloroquine; Isoxazoles; Leflunomide; Methotrexate; Quality of Life; Sulfasalazine
PubMed: 26678914
DOI: 10.1517/14656566.2016.1133592