PubMed1984
It has been widely accepted for a number of years that chrysotherapy is a valuable therapeutic agent in the treatment of progressive rheumatoid disease. This therapeutic benefit has, to some extent, been offset by the potential toxicity associated with gold compounds. The development of a gold compound with a greater therapeutic to toxicity ratio would be of considerable interest and benefit, to both patients and physicians. Initial studies with auranofin suggested that this compound was a reliably absorbed agent and that its use would avoid regular gold thiol injections. Its initial therapeutic profile was considered to be similar to that of injectable gold compounds, but with a significantly greater safety margin. The further information that has accrued from the clinical studies reported so far would tend to support these early suggestions in that auranofin has compared very favourably with gold thiols and other disease-remittive agents and that the prevalence of side effects requiring withdrawal of therapy has been approximately 25-30 per cent less. In addition, the reasons for withdrawal have often been less potentially serious side effects, notably nephrotoxicity and haematological reactions. In a review of over 3000 patients treated with auranofin, compared to 465 patients treated with injectable gold, the frequency of withdrawal from studies due to inefficacy of auranofin was approximately two to three times higher than with the gold thiols. It would appear, therefore, that in those patients continuing on therapy, auranofin is similar to injectable gold, but that a higher proportion of patients will fail to get a response within three to six months to the therapy. This potential lack of therapeutic effect is offset by the increased safety margin. In time, it is possible that auranofin will be accepted for earlier treatment in the course of rheumatoid disease than perhaps would normally have been considered. The in vivo and in vitro studies of auranofin on its mechanism of action are of considerable interest. They provide theoretical and valuable information on the mechanism of action of gold compounds and the cellular functions and interactions which may be involved in the pathogenesis of rheumatoid disease. It is interesting to note that auranofin appears to be more potent and have different effects than gold thiols, despite the fact that in terms of clinical therapeutic profile the compounds are similar.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)