Comparison of the impact of Tripterygium wilfordii Hook F and Methotrexate treatment on radiological progression in active rheumatoid arthritis: 2-year follow up of a randomized, non-blinded, controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Tripterygium wilfordii Hook F (TwHF) alone or in combination with methotrexate (MTX) has been shown to be more effective than MTX monotherapy in controlling the manifestations in subjects with disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD)-naïve active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) over a 6-month period. The long-term impact of these therapies on disease activity and radiographic progression in RA has not been examined. METHODS: Patients with DMARD-naïve RA enrolled in the "Comparison of Tripterygium wilfordii Hook F with methotrexate in the Treatment of Active Rheumatoid Arthritis" (TRIFRA) study were randomly allocated into three arms with TwHF or MTX or the two in combination. Clinical indexes and radiographic data at baseline and year 2 was collected and compared using an intent-to-treat (ITT) and a per-protocol (PP) analysis. Two radiologists blinded to the treatment scored the images independently. RESULTS: Of 207 subjects 109 completed the 2-year follow up. The number of subjects withdrawing from the study and the number adhering to the initial regimens were similar among the three groups (p > = 0.05). In the ITT analysis, proportions of patients reaching American College of Rheumatology 50% (ACR50) response criteria were 46.4%, 58.0% and 50.7% in the MTX, TwHF and MTX + TwHF groups (TwHF vs MTX monotherapy, p = 0.004). Similar patterns were found in ACR20, ACR70, Clinical Disease Activity Index good responses, European League Against Rheumatism good response, remission rate and low disease activity rate at year 2. The results of the PP analysis agreed with those in the ITT analysis. The changes in total Sharp scores and joint erosion and joint space narrowing during the 2 years were associated with changes in disease activity measured by the 28-joint count Disease Activity Score and were comparable among the three groups (p > 0.05). Adverse events were similar in the three treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: During the 2-year therapy period, TwHF monotherapy was not inferior to MTX monotherapy in controlling disease activity and retarding radiological progression in patients with active RA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This is a follow-up study. Original trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT01613079 . Registered on 4 June 2012.

Comparison of Tripterygium wilfordii Hook F with methotrexate in the treatment of active rheumatoid arthritis (TRIFRA): a randomised, controlled clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy and safety of Tripterygium wilfordii Hook F (TwHF) with methotrexate (MTX) in the treatment of active rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Design: a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial. All patients were assessed by trained investigators who were unaware of the therapeutic regimen. INTERVENTION: 207 patients with active RA were randomly allocated (1:1:1) to treatment with MTX 12.5 mg once a week, or TwHF 20 mg three times a day, or the two in combination. At week 12, if reduction of the 28-joint count Disease Activity Score (DAS28) was <30% in the monotherapy groups, the patient was switched to MTX+TwHF. The primary efficacy point was the proportion of patients achieving an American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 50 response at week 24. RESULTS: 174/207 (84.1%) patients completed 24 weeks of the trial. In an intention-to-treat analysis, the proportion of patients reaching the ACR50 response criteria was 46.4% (32/69), 55.1% (38/69) and 76.8% (53/69), respectively, in the MTX, TwHF and MTX+TwHF groups (TwHF vs MTX monotherapy, p=0.014; MTX+TwHF vs MTX monotherapy, p<0.001). Similar statistically significant patterns at week 24 were found for ACR20, ACR70, clinical Disease Activity Index good responses, EULAR good response, remission rate and low disease activity rate. Significant improvement in the Health Assessment Questionnaire and 36-item Short-Form Health Survey questionnaire scores from baseline to week 24 was seen in each treatment arm (p<0.05), though no significant difference was found among the treatment arms (p>0.05). The result of per-protocol analysis agreed with that seen in the intention-to-treat analysis. Seven, three and five women in the TwHF, MTX and combination groups, respectively, developed irregular menstruation (TwHF vs MTX monotherapy, p=0.216). CONCLUSIONS: TwHF monotherapy was not inferior to, and MTX+TwHF was better than, MTX monotherapy in controlling disease activity in patients with active RA. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01613079.