TY - JOUR
T1 - Evaluation and management of psoriatic arthritis
T2 - The role of biologic therapy
AU - Ruderman, Eric M.
N1 - Funding Information:
Funding sources: Supported by an unrestricted grant from Wyeth Pharmaceuticals.
PY - 2003/8/1
Y1 - 2003/8/1
N2 - Clinicians often view psoriatic arthritis (PsA) as a rather minor arthritic disorder because many are unaware of the substantial damage, disability, and reduced quality of life that patients with this disease can suffer. Compared with better-studied arthritic conditions, such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with well-known consequences of disease progression, PsA does not elicit the same urgency to treat early and aggressively. This is largely owing to the lack of predictive epidemiologic data regarding disease progression in PsA. However, numerous studies indicate that PsA and RA are comparable in terms of overall severity of joint involvement and disability over equivalent disease duration. Many of the drugs traditionally used for PsA therapy are also used to treat RA, including nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), corticosteroids, methotrexate (MTX), sulfasalazine, cyclosporine, etretinate, auranofin, intramuscular gold, and azathioprine. All of these drugs have significant risk of toxicity over long-term use, and all provide variable efficacy. This makes it difficult for clinicians to make sound risk-benefit assessments regarding treatment or nontreatment of PsA, because the risks of disease progression cannot be weighed against the risks of therapy. The newer biologic antirheumatic drugs appear to combine greater efficacy of treatment with significantly less toxicity by targeting specific mediators involved in the pathogenesis of PsA.
AB - Clinicians often view psoriatic arthritis (PsA) as a rather minor arthritic disorder because many are unaware of the substantial damage, disability, and reduced quality of life that patients with this disease can suffer. Compared with better-studied arthritic conditions, such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with well-known consequences of disease progression, PsA does not elicit the same urgency to treat early and aggressively. This is largely owing to the lack of predictive epidemiologic data regarding disease progression in PsA. However, numerous studies indicate that PsA and RA are comparable in terms of overall severity of joint involvement and disability over equivalent disease duration. Many of the drugs traditionally used for PsA therapy are also used to treat RA, including nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), corticosteroids, methotrexate (MTX), sulfasalazine, cyclosporine, etretinate, auranofin, intramuscular gold, and azathioprine. All of these drugs have significant risk of toxicity over long-term use, and all provide variable efficacy. This makes it difficult for clinicians to make sound risk-benefit assessments regarding treatment or nontreatment of PsA, because the risks of disease progression cannot be weighed against the risks of therapy. The newer biologic antirheumatic drugs appear to combine greater efficacy of treatment with significantly less toxicity by targeting specific mediators involved in the pathogenesis of PsA.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0042634177&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0042634177&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/s0190-9622(03)01145-9
DO - 10.1016/s0190-9622(03)01145-9
M3 - Review article
C2 - 12894136
AN - SCOPUS:0042634177
SN - 0190-9622
VL - 49
SP - 125
EP - 132
JO - Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology
JF - Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology
IS - 2 A
ER -