Long term effectiveness of RA-1 as a monotherapy and in combination with disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis.

BACKGROUND: Data on long term use of Ayurvedic drugs is sparse. They may prove useful if combined with modern medicine in certain clinical situations (integrative medicine). We present the results of a long term observational study of RA-1 (Ayurvedic drug) used in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). OBJECTIVE: The objective was to study safety of long term use of RA-1 for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). MATERIALS AND METHODS: On completion of a 16 week randomized controlled study, 165 consenting volunteer patients were enrolled into a three year open label phase (OLP) study. Patients were symptomatic with persistent active disease and naïve for disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARD). 57 patients were on fixed low dose prednisone. Patients were examined every 10-14 weeks in a routine rheumatology practice using standard care norms. They continued RA-1 (Artrex ™, 2 tablets twice daily) throughout the study period and were generally advised to lead a healthy life style. Based on clinical judgment, rheumatologist added DMARD and/or steroids (modified if already in use) to patients with inadequate response; chloroquine and/or methotrexate commonly used. Treatment response was assessed using American College of Rheumatology (ACR) efficacy measures and ACR 20% improvement index standard update statistical software (SAS and SPSS) were used; significant at p < 0.05. RESULTS: 158, 130 and 122 patients respectively completed evaluations at 1, 2 and 3 year primary end point. The ACR 20 response (range 34-40%) remained stable over three years (p = 0.33). Patients improved optimum for several measures by one year (p < 0.05) and this was sustained. The use of steroids varied from 42 to 49% patients at yearly end points (mean daily dose 5 mg prednisone); correspondingly the use of DMARD varied from 20 to 34% patients. 40% patients on RA-1 did not require DMARD/steroids for control of disease. 77% patients reported adverse events, albeit mild and mostly gut related, and not causing withdrawal. Several study limitations (especially self-selection) were reduced by the high patient retention and consistency in drug use. CONCLUSION: RA-1 is safe and effective in the long term management of symptomatic active chronic RA. DMARDs and/or steroids can be used judiciously along with RA-1 to treat difficult disease/flares. Further studies are required to evaluate RA-1 in early RA. This paves way for research and application of integrative therapeutic approach in clinical medicine.

Ayurvedic medicine offers a good alternative to glucosamine and celecoxib in the treatment of symptomatic knee osteoarthritis: a randomized, double-blind, controlled equivalence drug trial.

OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate clinical equivalence between two standardized Ayurveda (India) formulations (SGCG and SGC), glucosamine and celecoxib (NSAID). METHODS: Ayurvedic formulations (extracts of Tinospora cordifolia, Zingiber officinale, Emblica officinalis, Boswellia serrata), glucosamine sulphate (2 g daily) and celecoxib (200 mg daily) were evaluated in a randomized, double-blind, parallel-efficacy, four-arm, multicentre equivalence drug trial of 24 weeks duration. A total of 440 eligible patients suffering from symptomatic knee OA were enrolled and monitored as per protocol. Primary efficacy variables were active body weight-bearing pain (visual analogue scale) and modified WOMAC pain and functional difficulty Likert score (for knee and hip); the corresponding a priori equivalence ranges were ±1.5 cm, ±2.5 and ±8.5. RESULTS: Differences between the intervention arms for mean changes in primary efficacy variables were within the equivalence range by intent-to-treat and per protocol analysis. Twenty-six patients showed asymptomatic increased serum glutamic pyruvic transaminase (SGPT) with otherwise normal liver function; seven patients (Ayurvedic intervention) were withdrawn and SGPT normalized after stopping the drug. Other adverse events were mild and did not differ by intervention. Overall, 28% of patients withdrew from the study. CONCLUSION: In this 6-month controlled study of knee OA, Ayurvedic formulations (especially SGCG) significantly reduced knee pain and improved knee function and were equivalent to glucosamine and celecoxib. The unexpected SGPT rise requires further safety assessment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Drug Trial Registry-India, www.ctri.nic.in, CTRI/2008/091/000063.

Evaluating higher doses of Shunthi - Guduchi formulations for safety in treatment of osteoarthritis knees: A Government of India NMITLI arthritis project.

BACKGROUND: Results of an exploratory trial suggested activity trends of Zingiber officinale-Tinopsora cordifolia (platform combination)-based formulations in the treatment of Osteoarthritis (OA) Knees. These formulations were "platform combination+Withania somnifera+Tribulus terrestris" (formulation B) and "platform combination+Emblica officinale" (formulation C). This paper reports safety of these formulations when used in higher doses (1.5-2 times) along with Sallaki Guggul and Bhallataka Parpati (a Semecarpus anacardium preparation). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ninety-two patients with symptomatic OA knees were enrolled in a 6 weeks investigator blind, randomized parallel efficacy 4-arm multicenter drug trial. The 4 arms were (I) formulation B, 2 t.i.d.; (II) formulation B, 2 q.i.d.; (III) platform combination+Sallaki Guggul; (IV) Bhallataka Parpati+formulation C. A detailed enquiry was carried out for adverse events (AE) and drug toxicity as per a priori check list and volunteered information. Laboratory evaluation included detailed hematology and metabolic parameters. Patients were examined at baseline, first and fourth weeks, and on completion. Standard statistical program (SPSS version 12.5) was used for analysis. RESULTS: None of the patients reported serious AE or withdrew due to any drug-related toxicity. Mild gut-related (mostly epigastric burning) AE was reported. A mild increase in liver enzymes [serum glutamic pyruvate transaminase (SGPT), serum glutamic oxaloacetic transaminase (SGOT)] without any other hepatic abnormality was reported in 2 patients (group IV). Other laboratory parameters remained normal. The mean improvement in active pain visual analog scale (1.4, CI 0.5-2.22), WOMAC (functional activity questionnaire) pain score (1.37, CI 0.22-2.5), and urinary C-TAX (cartilage collagen breakdown product) assay was maximum (NS) in group IV. Lower dose group I showed numerically superior improvement compared with higher dose group II. CONCLUSION: The results suggested that despite higher doses, standardized Ayurvedic formulations demonstrated a good safety profile. An improved efficacy and likely chondroprotective effect was shown by group IV intervention. A confirmatory drug trial with adequate power and sample size was planned based on the learning from this trial.

Comparable efficacy of standardized Ayurveda formulation and hydroxychloroquine sulfate (HCQS) in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA): a randomized investigator-blind controlled study.

Hydroxychloroquine sulfate (HCQS) is a popular disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) despite modest efficacy and toxicity. Ayurveda (ancient India medicinal system) physicians treat rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with allegedly safer herbal formulations. We report a head-to-head comparison in an exploratory drug trial. The objective is to compare standardized Ayurvedic formulations and HCQS in the treatment of RA. One hundred twenty-one patients with active moderately severe RA (ACR 1988 classified) were randomized into a 24-week investigator-blind, parallel efficacy, three-arm (two Ayurvedic and HCQS) multicenter drug trial study; polyherb (Tinospora cordifolia and Zingiber officinale based) and monoherb (Semecarpus anacardium). Study measures included joint counts (pain/tenderness and swelling), pain visual analogue scale, global disease assessments, and health assessment questionnaire. Oral meloxicam (fixed-dosage schedule) was prescribed to all patients during the initial 16 weeks. Patients on prednisolone could continue a fixed stable dose (<7.5 mg daily). Rescue oral use of paracetamol was permitted and monitored. All groups matched well at baseline. An intent-to-treat analysis (ANOVA, significance P < 0.05) did not show significant differences by treatment groups. In the polyherb, monoherb, and HCQS arms, 44%, 36%, and 51%, respectively, showed ACR 20 index improvement. Several efficacy measures improved significantly in the HCQS and polyherb groups with no difference between the groups (corrected P). However, the latter was individually superior to monoherb. Only mild adverse events (gut and skin, and none withdrew) were reported with no differences between the groups. Forty-two patients dropped out. This preliminary drug trial controlled for HCQS demonstrated a standardized Ayurvedic polyherb drug to be effective and safe in controlling active RA. A better-designed study with a longer evaluation period is recommended.

A Randomized Controlled Exploratory Evaluation of Standardized Ayurvedic Formulations in Symptomatic Osteoarthritis Knees: A Government of India NMITLI Project.

The multidisciplinary "New Millennium Indian Technology Leadership Initiative" Arthritis Project was undertaken to validate Ayurvedic medicines. Herbal formulations in popular use were selected by expert consensus and standardized using modern tools. Our clinical strategy evolved from simple exploratory evaluations to better powered statistically designed drug trials. The results of the first drug trial are presented here. Five oral formulations (coded A, B, C, D and E), with a common base of Zingiber officinale and Tinospora cordifolia with a maximum of four plant extracts, were evaluated; with placebo and glucosamine as controls. 245 patients suffering from symptomatic OA knees were randomized into seven arms (35 patients per arm) of a double blind, parallel efficacy, multicentric trial of sixteen weeks duration. The groups matched well at baseline. There were no differences for patient withdrawals (17.5%) or adverse events (AE) of mild nature. Intention-to-treat efficacy analysis, demonstrated no significant differences (P < .05) for pain (weight bearing) and WOMAC questionnaire (knee function); placebo response was high. Based on better pain relief, significant (P < .05) least analgesic consumption and improved knee status, "C" formulation was selected for further development. Controlled exploratory drug trials with multiple treatment arms may be used to economically evaluate several candidate standardized formulations.