Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 341

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Minocycline in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A 48-Week, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial

Tilley, Barbara C., Alarcon, Graciela S., Heyse, Stephen P., Trentham, David E., Neuner, Rosemarie, Kaplan†, David A., Clegg, Daniel O., Leisen, James C. C., Buckley, Lenore, Cooper, Sheldon M., Duncan, Howard, Pillemer, Stanley R., Tuttleman, Marilyn, Fowler, Sarah E.·1995·Annals of Internal Medicine

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety and efficacy of minocycline in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. DESIGN: A double-blind, randomized, multicenter, 48-week trial of oral minocycline (200 mg/d) or placebo. SETTING: 6 clinical centers in the United States. PATIENTS: 219 adults with active rheumatoid arthritis who had previous limited treatment with disease-modifying drugs. MEASUREMENTS: As the primary outcomes, 60 diarthrodial joints were examined for tenderness, and 58 joints were examined for swelling (hips excluded). Grip strength, evaluator's global assessment, morning stiffness, Modified Health Assessment Questionnaire, patient's global assessment, hematocrit, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, platelet count, and IgM rheumatoid factor levels were also assessed; radiographs of both hands and wrists were taken. RESULTS: 109 and 110 patients were randomly assigned to receive minocycline and placebo, respectively. At entry, demographic, clinical, and laboratory measurements were similar in both groups. Most patients had mild to moderate disease activity and some evidence of destructive disease. At the week 48 visit, 79% of the minocycline group and 78% of the placebo group continued to receive the study medication. At 48 weeks, more patients in the minocycline group than in the placebo group showed improvement in joint swelling (54% and 39%) and joint tenderness (56% and 41%) (P < 0.023 for both comparisons). The minocycline group also showed greater improvement in hematocrit, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, platelet count, and IgM rheumatoid factor levels (all P values < 0.001), and more patients receiving minocycline had laboratory values within normal ranges at 48 weeks. For the remaining outcomes, P values ranged from 0.04 to 0.76, all greater than the critical value of 0.005 (Bonferroni adjustment for multiple comparisons). The frequency of reported side effects was similar in both groups, and no serious toxicity occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Minocycline was safe and effective for patients with mild to moderate rheumatoid arthritis. Its mechanisms of action remain to be determined.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.7326/0003-4819-122-2-199501150-00001

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Tilley, B. C., Alarcon, G. S., Heyse, S. P., Trentham, D. E., Neuner, R., Kaplan†, D. A., Clegg, D. O., Leisen, J. C. C., Buckley, L., Cooper, S. M., Duncan, H., Pillemer, S. R., Tuttleman, M., & Fowler, S. E.
Venue
Annals of Internal Medicine
Published
1995-01-15
Volume
122
Issue
2
Pages
81-89
ISSN
  • 0003-4819 (ISSN-L)
  • 1539-3704
OpenAlex
W2153594340
Cited by
341
References
0
FWCI
17.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.