Rheumatoid arthritis

New developments in the use of existing therapies

James Robert O'Dell, D. L. Scott

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Combination therapy with methotrexate may be the newest standard to which future therapies for rheumatoid arthritis are compared. Many questions remain to be answered regarding the appropriateness of such combination therapies for specific patients and clinical situations, and the optimal therapeutic combinations. Other unanswered questions regarding combination therapy include the need for appropriate monitoring, long-term safety and cost-benefit implications. Future research is needed to clarify the role of biological response modifiers (e.g. anti-tumour necrosis factor therapies) and matrix metalloproteinase inhibitors, both as components of and alternatives to methotrexate combination regimens.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)24-26
Number of pages3
JournalRheumatology
Volume38
Issue numberSUPPL. 2
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 1 1999

Fingerprint

Rheumatoid Arthritis
Methotrexate
Therapeutics
Matrix Metalloproteinase Inhibitors
Immunologic Factors
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha
Safety

Keywords

  • Biological response modifiers
  • Combination therapy
  • Cyclosporin
  • Hydroxychloroquine
  • Leflunomide
  • Metalloproteinase inhibitors
  • Methotrexate
  • Sulphasalazine

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Rheumatology
  • Pharmacology (medical)

Cite this

Rheumatoid arthritis : New developments in the use of existing therapies. / O'Dell, James Robert; Scott, D. L.

In: Rheumatology, Vol. 38, No. SUPPL. 2, 01.11.1999, p. 24-26.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{f55d0dc294e2434faf87c8ec737429ad,
title = "Rheumatoid arthritis: New developments in the use of existing therapies",
abstract = "Combination therapy with methotrexate may be the newest standard to which future therapies for rheumatoid arthritis are compared. Many questions remain to be answered regarding the appropriateness of such combination therapies for specific patients and clinical situations, and the optimal therapeutic combinations. Other unanswered questions regarding combination therapy include the need for appropriate monitoring, long-term safety and cost-benefit implications. Future research is needed to clarify the role of biological response modifiers (e.g. anti-tumour necrosis factor therapies) and matrix metalloproteinase inhibitors, both as components of and alternatives to methotrexate combination regimens.",
keywords = "Biological response modifiers, Combination therapy, Cyclosporin, Hydroxychloroquine, Leflunomide, Metalloproteinase inhibitors, Methotrexate, Sulphasalazine",
author = "O'Dell, {James Robert} and Scott, {D. L.}",
year = "1999",
month = "11",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1093/rheumatology/38.suppl_1.24",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "38",
pages = "24--26",
journal = "Rheumatology (United Kingdom)",
issn = "1462-0324",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",
number = "SUPPL. 2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Rheumatoid arthritis

T2 - New developments in the use of existing therapies

AU - O'Dell, James Robert

AU - Scott, D. L.

PY - 1999/11/1

Y1 - 1999/11/1

N2 - Combination therapy with methotrexate may be the newest standard to which future therapies for rheumatoid arthritis are compared. Many questions remain to be answered regarding the appropriateness of such combination therapies for specific patients and clinical situations, and the optimal therapeutic combinations. Other unanswered questions regarding combination therapy include the need for appropriate monitoring, long-term safety and cost-benefit implications. Future research is needed to clarify the role of biological response modifiers (e.g. anti-tumour necrosis factor therapies) and matrix metalloproteinase inhibitors, both as components of and alternatives to methotrexate combination regimens.

AB - Combination therapy with methotrexate may be the newest standard to which future therapies for rheumatoid arthritis are compared. Many questions remain to be answered regarding the appropriateness of such combination therapies for specific patients and clinical situations, and the optimal therapeutic combinations. Other unanswered questions regarding combination therapy include the need for appropriate monitoring, long-term safety and cost-benefit implications. Future research is needed to clarify the role of biological response modifiers (e.g. anti-tumour necrosis factor therapies) and matrix metalloproteinase inhibitors, both as components of and alternatives to methotrexate combination regimens.

KW - Biological response modifiers

KW - Combination therapy

KW - Cyclosporin

KW - Hydroxychloroquine

KW - Leflunomide

KW - Metalloproteinase inhibitors

KW - Methotrexate

KW - Sulphasalazine

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0032720050&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0032720050&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1093/rheumatology/38.suppl_1.24

DO - 10.1093/rheumatology/38.suppl_1.24

M3 - Article

VL - 38

SP - 24

EP - 26

JO - Rheumatology (United Kingdom)

JF - Rheumatology (United Kingdom)

SN - 1462-0324

IS - SUPPL. 2

ER -