Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Leflunomide”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2000

Treatment with leflunomide slows radiographic progression of rheumatoid arthritis: results from three randomized controlled trials of leflunomide in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis. Leflunomide Rheumatoid Arthritis Investigators Group.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether treatment with leflunomide (LEF), methotrexate (MTX), or sulfasalazine (SSZ) for 6-12 months retards progression of radiographic damage and to identify clinical variables that correlate with radiographic progression. METHODS: Radiographs of the hands and feet were performed at baseline and at the end of study or early exit in 3 randomized controlled trials. Protocol US301 was a 12-month controlled trial of LEF or MTX treatment compared with placebo in 482 patients randomized in a 3:3:2 ratio. Protocol MN301 compared 6 months of LEF or SSZ treatment with placebo in 358 patients, randomized in a 3:3:2 ratio, with continued blinded treatment in the active control arms for 12 months. Protocol MN302 compared 12 months of LEF treatment with MTX in 999 patients. Radiographs were blinded for sequence and treatment and were scored for erosions and joint space narrowing. All analyses were by intent-to-treat. Sensitivity analyses were performed to account for missing data. RESULTS: LEF, MTX, and SSZ treatment resulted in statistically significantly less radiographic progression compared with placebo at 6 and 12 months: for protocol US301, LEF versus placebo P = 0.0007 and MTX versus placebo P = 0.0196; for protocol MN301, LEF versus placebo P = 0.0004 and SSZ versus placebo P = 0.0484. The effect of LEF treatment was similar to that of MTX and SSZ. CONCLUSION: These are the first 6- and 12-month randomized placebo- and active drug-controlled trials to demonstrate retardation of radiographic progression by a new disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD), LEF, as well as 2 commonly used DMARDs, MTX and SSZ.

Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal↗
PubMed1995

Differential effects of the immunosuppressive agents cyclosporine and leflunomide in vivo. Leflunomide blocks clonal T cell expansion yet allows production of lymphokines and manifestation of T cell-mediated shock.

The effects of leflunomide and CsA on immune responses in vitro and in vivo were investigated. Like CsA, leflunomide inhibited mitogen- or antigen-driven T cell proliferation in vitro. However, leflunomide impaired neither the capability of T cells to produce IL-2 and IL-4, nor the expression of IL-2R, that is, the acquisition of competence. In contrast to CsA, the IL-2-driven growth of secondary T cells was blocked by leflunomide. Cell cycle analyses revealed that activated T cells did not enter S phase of the cell cycle in the presence of leflunomide. Next, the effects of leflunomide and CsA on the T cell response toward the bacterial superantigen (SAg) staphylococcal enterotoxin B (SEB) were analyzed in vivo. SEB-induced early deletion (apoptosis) of a fraction of SEB-reactive V beta 8+ T cells and IL-2R expression were not impaired by either CsA nor leflunomide. On the other hand, both CsA and leflunomide prevented V beta 8-selective clonal T cell expansion and generation of SEB-specific cytolytic activity. In contrast to CsA, leflunomide treatment permitted in vivo SEB-induced production of T cell-derived lymphokines (IL-2 and TNF). Further, leflunomide failed to protect D-galactosamine-sensitized mice from SEB-induced, T cell-mediated lethal shock, whereas CsA was fully protective. Manifestation of SEB-induced T cell anergy was not impaired by leflunomide. Our results provide evidence that CsA and leflunomide differ significantly in their functional properties to suppress immune responses in that both agents inhibit T cell functions linked to clonal expansion, while leflunomide does not inhibit lymphokine secretion and thus permits lymphokine-mediated immune functions.

Animals↗
PubMed1999

Treatment of active rheumatoid arthritis with leflunomide compared with placebo and methotrexate. Leflunomide Rheumatoid Arthritis Investigators Group.

CONTEXT: Leflunomide is a reversible inhibitor of de novo pyrimidine synthesis shown to be effective in a phase 2 trial in 402 patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA). OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of leflunomide treatment with placebo and methotrexate treatment in patients with active RA. DESIGN: Randomized, double-blind, placebo, and active-controlled 12-month study. SETTING: Forty-seven university and private rheumatology practices in the United States and Canada. PATIENTS: Diagnosis of RA by the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria for duration of 6 months or longer and no previous methotrexate treatment. INTERVENTION: Leflunomide treatment (20 mg/d), placebo, or methotrexate treatment (7.5-15 mg/wk). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: American College of Rheumatology success rate (completed 52 weeks of treatment and met the ACR > or = 20% response criteria), disease progression as assessed by x-ray films, and improvement in function and health-related quality of life using the intent-to-treat population. RESULTS: The 482 patients studied were predominantly women (mean age, 54 years; mean disease duration, 6.7 years) for whom a mean of 0.8 disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs had failed. The ACR response and success rates for patients receiving leflunomide treatment (52% and 41%, respectively) and methotrexate treatment (46% and 35%, respectively) were significantly higher than those for patients receiving placebo (26% and 19%, respectively) (P<.001), and they were statistically equivalent, with mean time to initial response at 8.4 weeks for patients receiving leflunomide vs 9.5 weeks for patients receiving methotrexate therapy. X-ray analyses demonstrated less disease progression with leflunomide (P=.001) and methotrexate (P = .02) therapy than with placebo. Leflunomide and methotrexate treatment improved measures of physical function and health-related quality of life significantly more than placebo (P<.001 and P<.05, respectively). Common adverse events for patients receiving leflunomide treatment included gastrointestinal complaints, skin rash, and reversible alopecia. Asymptomatic transaminase elevations resulted in treatment discontinuations for 7.1% of patients receiving leflunomide therapy, 1.7% of patients receiving placebo, and 3.3% of patients receiving methotrexate therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical responses following administration of leflunomide, a new therapeutic agent for the treatment of RA, were statistically superior to those with placebo and equivalent to those with methotrexate treatment. Both active treatments improved signs and symptoms of active RA, delayed disease progression as demonstrated by x-ray films, and improved function and health-related quality of life.

Adult↗
PubMed1999

Efficacy and safety of leflunomide compared with placebo and sulphasalazine in active rheumatoid arthritis: a double-blind, randomised, multicentre trial. European Leflunomide Study Group.

BACKGROUND: Phase II trials of leflunomide, an inhibitor of de-novo pyrimidine synthesis, have shown efficacy in rheumatoid arthritis. This double-blind randomised trial compared leflunomide with placebo and sulphasalazine in active rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: 358 patients were randomly assigned leflunomide (100 mg daily on days 1-3, then 20 mg daily), placebo, or sulphasalazine (0.5 g daily, titrated progressively to 2.0 g daily at week 4). The primary endpoints were tender and swollen joint counts and investigator's and patient's overall assessments. Analyses were by intention to treat. FINDINGS: The mean changes in the leflunomide, placebo, and sulphasalazine groups were -9.7, -4.3, and -8.1 for tender joint count; -7.2, -3.4, and -6.2 for swollen joint count; -1.1, -0.3, and -1.0 for physician's overall assessment; and -1.1, -0.4, and -1.1 for patient's overall assessment. Leflunomide and sulphasalazine were significantly superior to placebo (p=0.0001 for joint counts; p<0.001 for assessments). Radiographic disease progression was significantly slower with leflunomide and sulphasalazine than with placebo (p<0.01). Most common adverse events with leflunomide were diarrhoea (17%), nausea (10%), alopecia (8%), and rash (10%). Transiently abnormal liver function was seen in three leflunomide-group patients and five sulphasalazine-group patients. There were two cases of reversible agranulocytosis in the sulphasalazine group. INTERPRETATION: Leflunomide was more effective than placebo in treatment of rheumatoid arthritis and showed similar efficacy to sulphasalazine. Leflunomide was well tolerated. This drug may be a useful option as a disease-modifying antirheumatic drug.

Algorithms↗
PubMed2001

Improved functional ability in patients with rheumatoid arthritis--longterm treatment with leflunomide versus sulfasalazine. European Leflunomide Study Group.

OBJECTIVE: We previously reported that the new disease modifying antirheumatic drug leflunomide resulted in significant improvement in functional ability compared with placebo and sulfasalazine in a 6 month double blind, randomized, Phase III trial in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The current study compared functional disability in cohorts of patients with RA from the initial study who volunteered to continue treatment with leflunomide or sulfasalazine. METHODS: The Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) was used to assess functional ability in patients completing 6 months of therapy who chose to continue in double blinded 12 and 24 month extensions. Patients on active regimens continued taking leflunomide 20 mg/day or sulfasalazine 2 g/day; those taking placebo were switched at Month 6 to sulfasalazine. RESULTS: Leflunomide significantly improved patients' functional ability compared to placebo (p < or = 0.0001) and sulfasalazine (p < or = 0.01) at 6 months. These changes were seen as early as Month 1, and continued improvements were seen in 12 and 24 month cohorts. Mean HAQ scores were significantly improved with leflunomide compared with sulfasalazine at 24 months (-0.65 vs -0.36; p = 0.0149); corresponding changes in HAQ Disability Index (DI) were -0.73 vs -0.56 and were not statistically different. Leflunomide is safe and well tolerated and no unexpected adverse events were noted during the 2 year period; diarrhea, nausea, and alopecia were less frequent with continued treatment. CONCLUSION: These longterm data confirm leflunomide improves functional ability as shown by reductions in HAQ scores. The benefit of leflunomide is reflected in other efficacy criteria, such as global assessments and the American College of Rheumatology response rates, all of which showed significantly more improvement with leflunomide than sulfasalazine at 24 months.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1998

Clinical experience with leflunomide in rheumatoid arthritis. Leflunomide Investigators' Group.

Leflunomide is a novel isoxazol drug with disease modifying properties for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Several Phase II trials have been completed and 3 large Phase III trials are nearing completion. A multicenter Phase II randomized, double blind, placebo controlled, 24 week study of 402 patients with active RA revealed that leflunomide 25 mg once daily was significantly (p < 0.05) superior to placebo in all primary and secondary outcome measures; leflunomide 10 mg daily was also statistically superior to placebo for all outcome measures except tender joint count and score. Significantly (p < 0.05) more patients responded to leflunomide 10 and 25 mg than to placebo. Leflunomide appears to be well tolerated in patients treated for up to 18 months. Gastrointestinal events, weight loss, rash/allergic reactions, and reversible alopecia were the most frequently reported drug related adverse events. Patients treated with leflunomide were not more susceptible to infections than those given placebo. Based upon the results of a population based pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic model, leflunomide 20 mg was selected as optimal dose for the Phase III studies; these are 6 to 12 month multicenter, randomized, double blind, controlled trials that include as active comparators methotrexate and sulfasalazine. Once-daily administration of leflunomide is effective in patients with active RA.

Antirheumatic Agents↗
PubMed1999

Function and health-related quality of life: results from a randomized controlled trial of leflunomide versus methotrexate or placebo in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis. Leflunomide Rheumatoid Arthritis Investigators Group.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of leflunomide or methotrexate compared with placebo in improving function and health-related quality of life in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and to examine correlations between response status (as defined by the American College of Rheumatology [ACR] response criteria) and improvement in these measures. METHODS: This 52-week, multicenter, doubleblind, controlled trial compared responses to the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), modified Health Assessment Questionnaire (MHAQ), Problem Elicitation Technique (PET), Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36 (SF-36), and questions regarding work productivity among 3 treatment groups (leflunomide, methotrexate, and placebo). Improvement in the PET top 5 and SF-36 scales and component scores were compared with ACR response rates. RESULTS: Clinically meaningful and statistically significant (P<0.0001) improvement in measures of function and heath-related quality of life (MHAQ scores, all scales and disability index of the HAQ, weighted top 5 score of the PET, 5 of 8 scales and physical component score of the SF-36, and work productivity) was seen during treatment with leflunomide in comparison with placebo. Methotrexate administration resulted in significant improvements (P<0.05) in comparison with placebo in the MHAQ scores, HAQ disability index, weighted top 5 score of the PET, physical component score of the SF-36, and bodily pain scale. Compared with methotrexate, leflunomide administration resulted in significantly (P<0.01) more improvement in the MHAQ scores, 5 of 8 scales and disability index of the HAQ, weighted top 5 score of the PET, and 2 of 8 scales and physical component score of the SF-36. Improvements in the PET score, SF-36 physical component score, and work productivity correlated with the ACR responder rates of > or =20% and > or =50% improvement. CONCLUSION: Significant improvements in function and health-related quality of life occurred in patients with RA during treatment with leflunomide or methotrexate. These findings were clinically meaningful and correlated with the ACR response status.

Adjuvants, Immunologic↗
PubMed2000

Clinical improvement as reflected in measures of function and health-related quality of life following treatment with leflunomide compared with methotrexate in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: sensitivity and relative efficiency to detect a treatment effect in a twelve-month, placebo-controlled trial. Leflunomide Rheumatoid Arthritis Investigators Group.

OBJECTIVE: To examine correlations between clinical improvement as defined by the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) responder analysis and clinical improvement as determined by 4 function and/or health-related quality of life measures, and to estimate the sensitivity and relative efficiency of these measures compared with changes in the tender joint count in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: A 52-week, multicenter, double-blind controlled trial was conducted to compare treatment with leflunomide (n = 182), methotrexate (n = 180), or placebo (n = 118) in patients with active RA. ACR response rates and improvement in scores on the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), Problem Elicitation Technique (PET), and Medical Outcomes Survey Short Form 36 (SF-36) were compared in 438 of the patients. RESULTS: In comparing leflunomide with placebo, the patient global assessment, HAQ disability index, and SF-36 bodily pain scale were most responsive to treatment group differences. The modified HAQ (M-HAQ), PET Top 5, SF-36 physical component score, physician global assessment, pain intensity scale, and SF-36 physical functioning scale were more responsive to treatment group differences than was the tender joint count. In comparing methotrexate with placebo, the patient and physician global assessments were most responsive. These 2 measures, as well as the pain intensity scale and the C-reactive protein level, were more responsive to treatment group differences than was the tender joint count, while the SF-36 mental health component score was least responsive. A close correlation between changes in the M-HAQ and HAQ scores indicated that the M-HAQ was similarly responsive to change over time. Improvements in the PET, SF-36 physical component score, bodily pain, and physical functioning scales correlated with the ACR responder status. CONCLUSION: Both disease-specific and generic measures of function and health-related quality of life detect improvements in RA patients. Using both types of measures for evaluating therapies will identify discernible changes that are important to patients, and will facilitate comparisons across different disease states.

Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Mechanism of the antiproliferative action of leflunomide. A77 1726, the active metabolite of leflunomide, does not block T-cell receptor-mediated signal transduction but its antiproliferative effects are antagonized by pyrimidine nucleosides.

BACKGROUND: Leflunomide, a novel immunosuppressive drug, prolongs experimental graft survival effectively and has been well tolerated in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. A77 1726, the active metabolite of leflunomide, inhibits lymphocyte proliferation in vitro. This study was conducted in Jurkat T cells to investigate the effects of A77 1726 on signal transduction pathways initiated by ligands of the T-cell receptor CD3 complex and to evaluate the effects of A77 1726 on nucleotide biosynthesis. METHODS: Tritiated thymidine incorporation and cell counts quantitated cell proliferation. Spectrofluorescence of Indo/AM dye measured intracellular Ca2+ mobilization. A luciferase assay quantitated interleukin-2 gene promoter activity in stimulated cells transfected with an interleukin-2 promoter-luciferase gene construct. Pyrimidine and purine nucleosides were used to assess antagonism of the antiproliferative activity of A77 1726. RESULTS: (1) A77 1726 dose-dependently inhibited the proliferation of Jurkat T cells (inhibitory concentration of 50% = 6 mumol/L); (2) A77 1726 did not decrease mobilization of intracellular Ca2+ stimulated by phytohemagglutinin or anti-CD3 monoclonal antibody; (3) A77 1726 did not inhibit interleukin-2 gene promoter activity in cells stimulated with ionomycin plus phorbol myristate acetate; (4) inhibition of cell proliferation by A77 1726 was antagonized by addition of uridine, cytidine, or 2(+)-deoxycytidine; (5) addition of uridine 24 hours after treatment with A77 1726 antagonized inhibition of proliferation; (6) A77 1726 was not antagonized by 2'-deoxyuridine, thymidine, adenosine, or guanosine. CONCLUSIONS: (1) A77 1726 inhibited Jurkat T-cell proliferation without inhibiting T-cell receptor-mediated signal transduction events, including tyrosine kinase-dependent intracellular Ca2+ mobilization and activation of the interleukin-2 gene promoter; (2) the antiproliferative effects of A77 1726 on Jurkat T cells are primarily due to interruption of de novo pyrimidine nucleotide biosynthesis. These data provide evidence for a novel in vitro mechanism of the antiproliferative action of this immunosuppressant.

Aniline Compounds↗
PubMed2001

Two-year, blinded, randomized, controlled trial of treatment of active rheumatoid arthritis with leflunomide compared with methotrexate. Utilization of Leflunomide in the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis Trial Investigator Group.

OBJECTIVE: Three 6-12-month, double-blind, randomized, controlled trials have shown leflunomide (LEF; 20 mg/day, loading dose 100 mg x 3 days) to be effective and safe for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This analysis of the North American trial assessed whether the clinical benefit evident at month 12 was sustained over 24 months of treatment with LEF as compared with the efficacy and safety of methotrexate (MTX), an equivalent disease-modifying antirheumatic drug, at 24 months. METHODS: The year-2 cohort, comprising patients continuing into the second year of treatment with > or = 1 dose of study medication and > or = 1 followup visit after week 52, consisted of 235 patients (LEF n = 98; placebo n = 36; MTX n = 101). The mean (+/- SD) maintenance dose of LEF was 19.6 +/- 1.99 mg/day in year 2 and that of MTX was 12.6 +/- 4.69 mg/week. Statistical analyses used an intent-to-treat (ITT) approach. Statistical comparisons of the active treatments only were prospectively defined in the protocol. RESULTS: In total, 85% and 79% of LEF and MTX patients, respectively, who entered year 2 completed 24 months of treatment. From month 12 to month 24, the American College of Rheumatology improvement response rates of > or = 20% (LEF 79% versus MTX 67%; P = 0.049), > or = 50% (LEF 56% versus MTX 43%; P = 0.053), and > or = 70% (LEF 26% versus MTX 20%; P = 0.361) were sustained in both of the active treatment groups. The mean change in total Sharp radiologic damage scores at year 2 compared with year 1 and baseline (LEF 1.6 versus MTX 1.2) showed statistically equivalent sustained retardation of radiographic progression in the active treatment groups. Maximal improvements evident at 6 months in the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) disability index (HAQ DI) and the physical component score of the Medical Outcomes Survey 36-item short form were sustained over 12 months and 24 months; improvement in the HAQ DI with LEF4(-0.60) was statistically significantly superior to that with MTX (-0.37) at 24 months (P = 0.005). Over 24 months in the ITT cohort, serious treatment-related adverse events were reported in 1.6% of the LEF-treated patients and 3.7% of the MTX-treated patients. Frequently reported adverse events included upper respiratory tract infections, diarrhea, nausea and vomiting, rash, reversible alopecia, and transient liver enzyme elevations. CONCLUSION: The safety and efficacy of LEF and MTX were maintained over the second year of this 2-year trial. Both active treatments retarded radiographic progression over 24 months. LEF was statistically significantly superior to MTX in improving physical function as measured by the HAQ DI over 24 months of treatment. Results indicate that LEF is a safe and effective initial treatment for active RA, with clinical benefit sustained over 2 years of treatment without evidence of new or increased toxicity.

Adult↗
PubMed1994

An evaluation of leflunomide in the canine renal transplantation model.

Leflunomide is an isoxazole with newly discovered immunosuppressive properties. Its mechanism of action operates later in the cell cycle than cyclosporine and appears to interfere with lymphocyte IL-2 responsiveness. With the encouraging results from in vitro and small-animal studies, we subjected leflunomide to the rigorous canine renal transplantation model in a dose response protocol. Thirty-eight female mongrel dogs underwent renal transplantation and bilateral nephrectomy. Immunosuppression was stratified from controls with no immunosuppression to monotherapy with leflunomide at 2, 4, 8, and 16 mg/kg/day given orally and in a combination therapy with cyclosporine. To evaluate its toxicity while maintaining a low constant blood level, eight dogs were treated by continuous intravenous infusion at doses of 2, 4, 6, and 8 mg/kg/day. The mean survival time for nonimmunosuppressed controls (n = 2) was 9 days, leflunomide 2 mg/kg/day (n = 2) was 9 days, leflunomide 4 mg/kg/day (n = 4) was 16 days, leflunomide 8 mg/kg/day (n = 5) was 28 days, leflunomide 16 mg/kg/day (n = 7) was 21 days. Cyclosporine alone at 10 mg/kg/day (n = 4) resulted in a mean survival time of 13 days. The mean survival time with the combination of cyclosporine 10 mg/kg/day with leflunomide 4 mg/kg/day (n = 6) was 68 days. The mean survival time for continuous intravenous leflunomide 2 mg/kg/day (n = 2) was 10 days; for leflunomide 4 mg/kg/day, 20 days; for leflunomide 6 mg/kg/day, 14 days; and leflunomide 8 mg/kg/day, 21 days. The mean serum trough levels of leflunomide ranged from 10 micrograms/ml at the 2 mg dose to 55 micrograms/ml for the 16 mg dose, levels that have been well tolerated in man. Leflunomide at 16 mg/kg/day reliably prevented acute allograft rejection, but the dogs died of inanition with normal renal function. Leflunomide at a nontoxic dose of 4 mg/kg/day extended survival to 16 days, but all dogs died of rejection. A combination of inadequate doses of leflunomide (4 mg/kg/day) and cyclosporine (10 mg/kg/day) resulted in all animals having normal renal function and weight for > or = 30 days. Even at a high dose of 16 mg/kg/day, no viral or bacterial infections were noted. These observations in a canine system add to the growing enthusiasm for the evaluation of leflunomide in human transplantation.

Administration, Oral↗
PubMed1999

In vivo activity of leflunomide: pharmacokinetic analyses and mechanism of immunosuppression.

BACKGROUND: Leflunomide is an experimental drug with demonstrated ability to prevent and reverse acute allograft and xenograft rejection. The two biochemical activities reported for the active metabolite of leflunomide, A77 1726, are inhibition of tyrosine phosphorylation and inhibition of dihydroorotate dehydrogenase, an enzyme necessary for de novo pyrimidine synthesis. These activities can be distinctly separated in vitro by the use of uridine, which reverses the anti-proliferative effects of A77 1726 caused by inhibition of de novo pyrimidine synthesis. We report the effect of uridine on the in vivo immunosuppressive activities of leflunomide. METHODS: We first quantified the serum levels of A77 1726, the active metabolite of leflunomide, after a single treatment of leflunomide (5, 15, and 35 mg/kg). Additionally, we quantified the levels of serum uridine and of nucleotide triphosphates in the liver, spleen, and lymph nodes of Lewis rats after the administration of a single dose of uridine (500 mg/kg; i.p.). Lewis rats heterotopically transplanted with brown Norway or Golden Syrian hamster hearts were treated for 50 or 75 days with leflunomide (5, 15, and 35 mg/kg/day; gavage) alone or in combination with uridine (500 mg/ kg/day; i.p.). Hematocrits were determined and the levels of alloreactive or xenoreactive immunoglobulin (Ig)M and IgG were determined by flow cytometric analysis. The allograft and xenografts, small bowel, liver, kidney, and spleen were subjected to pathological examination. RESULTS: A linear relationship was observed between the serum A77 1726 concentrations in Lewis rats and the dose of leflunomide administered. Peak A77 1726 concentrations were 20.9, 71.8 and 129.3 mg/l (77.5, 266.1 and 478.8 microM) for the 5, 15, and 35 mg/kg doses of leflunomide, respectively. The concentration of uridine in the serum of normal Lewis rats is 6.5 microM; after i.p. administration of 500 mg/kg uridine, the serum uridine concentrations peaked at 384.1 microM in 15-30 min. The rapid elimination of uridine was not reflected in the lymphoid compartments, and the pharmacokinetics of pyrimidine nucleotides in the spleen resembled that of A77 1726. This dose of uridine, when administered daily (500 mg/kg/day, i.p.), weakly antagonized the immunosuppressive activities of leflunomide (5, 15, and 35 mg/kg/day) in the allotransplantation model. In contrast, in the xenotransplantation model, the same concentration of uridine completely antagonized the immunosuppressive activities of low-dose leflunomide (15 mg/kg/day) and partially antagonized the immunosuppressive activities of high-dose leflunomide (35 mg/kg/day). Toxicities associated with high-dose leflunomide (35 mg/kg/day) were anemia, diarrhea, and pathological changes in the small bowel and liver. These toxicities were significantly reduced by uridine co-administration. CONCLUSION: These studies reveal that the blood levels of A77 1726 in Lewis rats satisfy in vitro requirements for both inhibition of de novo pyrimidine synthesis and protein tyrosine kinase activity. Our data also illustrate that the in vivo mechanism of immunosuppression by leflunomide is complex and is affected by at least the following four factors: type and vigor of the immune response, availability of uridine for salvage by proliferating lymphocytes, species being investigated, and concentration of serum A77 1726.

Aniline Compounds↗
PubMed1999

Leflunomide: a review of its use in active rheumatoid arthritis.

UNLABELLED: A77 1726, the active metabolite of leflunomide, is an immunomodulator which inhibits cell proliferation in activated lymphocytes in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis. Because A77 1726 has a long half-life (approximately 2 weeks), treatment with oral leflunomide is initiated with a loading dose of 100mg once daily for 3 days and continued with 20mg once daily. Results of large randomised, double-blind, multicentre trials of up to 24 months' duration have shown that leflunomide is significantly superior to placebo and at least as effective as sulfasalazine in improving primary outcome measures, such as tender joint counts, swollen joint counts and physicians' and patients' global assessment, in adult patients with active rheumatoid arthritis. Whereas improvement in all primary outcome measures with leflunomide was similar to or significantly less than that with methotrexate after 12 months, the efficacy of both agents was similar after 24 months. The therapeutic effect of leflunomide appears earlier (at 4 weeks) than that of sulfasalazine or methotrexate, and reduction from baseline values in functional disability was significantly greater with leflunomide than with sulfasalazine, methotrexate or placebo at end-point. Leflunomide was at least as effective as sulfasalazine or methotrexate in delaying the rate of radiological progression of disease. The most common adverse events reported in patients receiving leflunomide in randomised double-blind, placebo-controlled trials were diarrhoea (27%), respiratory infections (21%), nausea (13%), headache (13%), rash (12%), increased serum hepatic aminotransferases (10%), dyspepsia (10%) and alopecia (9%). Leflunomide was as well tolerated as sulfasalazine or methotrexate in clinical trials. Monitoring of serum hepatic enzyme levels is recommended in patients receiving leflunomide. The drug is not recommended in female patients who are or may become pregnant. Drug treatment should be discontinued, and hastened drug elimination procedure should be considered, in male patients wishing to father a child. 16 potential cases of pancytopenia and 9 cases of serious skin reactions have been associated with the use of leflunomide in 76,000 patients to date. CONCLUSIONS: Leflunomide is a disease-modifying antirheumatic drug which reduces the signs and symptoms of inflammatory arthritis and delays the radiological progression of disease in adult patients with active rheumatoid arthritis. The drug appears to be as effective and as well tolerated as sulfasalazine or methotrexate, and represents a suitable alternative to these agents in adult patients with active rheumatoid arthritis. Benefits with leflunomide are evident within 4 weeks and efficacy is maintained for durations of up to 24 months.

Adult↗
PubMed1998

Leflunomide, a novel immunomodulating agent, prevents the development of allergic sensitization in an animal model of allergic asthma.

BACKGROUND: Leflunomide is a new anti-inflammatory and immunomodulating agent which is showing promise in several immune disorders, especially rheumatoid arthritis. Its activity profile suggests it may be of use in modulating allergic sensitization. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effectiveness of leflunomide in preventing the development of allergic sensitization. METHODS: Fifty-three brown Norway rats were sensitized by intraperitoneal injection of ovalbumin and adjuvant (ricin) on day 0. To determine the ability of leflunomide to inhibit primary allergic sensitization six rats were treated with A77 1726, the active metabolite of leflunomide, from day 0 through day 5, six were treated from day 5 through day 10, and nine rats acted as controls. On day 14, ovalbumin-specific serum antibody levels and the magnitude of the early-phase airway response (EAR) after inhalation allergen challenge were assessed. To determine the ability of acute topical treatment with leflunomide to inhibit mast cell degranulation, three groups of five animals received either vehicle, 100 microg A77 1726, or 1000 g A77 1726 60 min prior to aerosol allergen challenge. To determine the effects of leflunomide treatment in vivo on mast cell function in vitro, mast cells were obtained by bronchoalveolar lavage from 17 rats (nine treated with leflunomide and eight controls). Allergen-specific and non-specific degranulation (48/80 induced) were studied. RESULTS: In the leflunomide treated rats both ovalbumin-specific IgE and IgG levels were significantly reduced, and the increases in lung resistance and lung elastance were essentially abolished, compared to those of the control group. Non significant differences were found in any of the parameters between the two leflunomide treated groups. Topical pre-treatment with leflunomide did not prevent the allergen-induced EAR. Treatment with leflunomide in vivo prevented allergen-induced mast cell degranulation in vitro because the mast cells lacked IgE on their surface. Non allergen-specific degranulation was normal and allergen-induced degranulation could be restored by passive sensitization. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggests that leflunomide can prevent primary allergic sensitization and prevent allergen-induced EAR by inhibiting production of allergen-specific IgE antibodies. Further studies in atopic conditions are warranted.

Allergens↗
PubMed1996

Effects of leflunomide and other immunosuppressive agents on T cell proliferation in vitro.

Leflunomide and its active metabolite, A771726, are structurally unrelated to immunosuppressive agents currently under investigation. Previous in vitro studies have revealed that leflunomide primarily inhibits interleukin-2-stimulated T cell proliferation. In the current study, we have extended our previous work and demonstrate that leflunomide prevents T cell progression induced by phytohemagglutinin into the S phase of the cell cycle. To discriminate further the action on T cells of leflunomide from other immunosuppressive agents, we performed kinetic studies where leflunomide was added either after the initiation of mixed lymphocyte cultures (MLC) or after interleukin-2 stimulation of CTLL-4 cell proliferation. These studies revealed that leflunomide acted comparably to rapamycin, but was distinct from brequinar sodium in the MLC, and from cyclosporine and mycophenolic acid in both MLC and CTLL-4. Although previous biochemical studies indicated that leflunomide can inhibit src-family tyrosine kinase activity, more recent studies have suggested that leflunomide can also inhibit pyrimidine synthesis. Our data demonstrate that the ability of leflunomide (25-100 microM) to inhibit MLC and CTLL-4 cell proliferation is partially antagonized by uridine (25-100 microM), and support the hypothesis that leflunomide inhibits pyrimidine synthesis in T cells. Unique molecular mechanisms of immunosuppression suggest that drug combinations may result in synergistic immunosuppression. Our in vitro studies revealed synergistic inhibition of T cell proliferation with the combinations of leflunomide with cyclosporine or with rapamycin. We have extended those studies to quantitate inhibition of MLC by the combinations of leflunomide and brequinar sodium or mycophenolic acid.

Cell Division↗
PubMed2000

Leflunomide suppresses TNF-induced cellular responses: effects on NF-kappa B, activator protein-1, c-Jun N-terminal protein kinase, and apoptosis.

Leflunomide is a pyrimidine biosynthesis inhibitor that has recently been approved for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. However, the mechanism of leflunomide's antiarthritis activity and is not fully understood. The critical role that TNF plays in rheumatoid arthritis led us to postulate that leflunomide blocks TNF signaling. Previously, we have demonstrated that leflunomide inhibits TNF-induced NF-kappaB activation by suppressing I-kappaBalpha (inhibitory subunit of NF-kappaB) degradation. We in this study show that leflunomide also blocks NF-kappaB reporter gene expression induced by TNFR1, TNFR-associated factor 2, and NF-kappaB-inducing kinase (NIK), but not that activated by the p65 subunit of NF-kappaB, suggesting that leflunomide acts downstream of NIK. Leflunomide suppressed TNF-induced phosphorylation of I-kappaBalpha, as well as activation of I-kappaBalpha kinase-beta located downstream to NIK. Leflunomide also inhibited TNF-induced activation of AP-1 and the c-Jun N-terminal protein kinase activation. TNF-mediated cytotoxicity and caspase-induced poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase cleavage were also completely abrogated by treatment of Jurkat T cells with leflunomide. Leflunomide suppressed TNF-induced reactive oxygen intermediate generation and lipid peroxidation, which may explain most of its effects on TNF signaling. The suppressive effects of leflunomide on TNF signaling were completely reversible by uridine, indicating a critical role for pyrimidine biosynthesis in TNF-mediated cellular responses. Overall, our results suggest that suppression of TNF signaling is one of the possible mechanisms for inhibitory activity of leflunomide against rheumatoid arthritis.

Apoptosis↗