Log In Sign up
The largest database of trusted experimental protocols
> Chemicals & Drugs > Organic Chemical > Leflunomide

Leflunomide

Leflunomide is an immunomodulatory drug used to treat rheumatoid arthritis and other autoimmune disorders.
It works by inhibiting pyrimidine synthesis, which disrupts proliferation of activated lymphocytes.
Leflunomide has been shown to reduce symptoms and slow disease progression in clinical trials.
Researchers can use PubCompare.ai to optimize their Leflunomide protocols, identifying the most reproducible and effective methods from the literature, preprints, and patents.
This AI-powered tool empowers scientific discoveries by comparing protocols and locating the best approaches for Leflunomide research.

Most cited protocols related to «Leflunomide»

1
Microarray Analysis of Neural Crest Development
Microarray analysis was performed on 4 groups of 72hpf embryos: 1) WT, 2) mitf-BRAFV600E, 3) p53-/- or 4) mitf-BRAFV600E;p53-/-. Arrays were similarly performed on adult mitf-BRAFV600E;p53-/- melanomas and adjacent skin. The transcriptional signature of the melanomas was used in GSEA to identify genes significantly enriched in the mitf-BRAFV600E;p53-/- embryos. This signature (123 genes), enriched for markers of the neural crest, were concordantly up/downregulated in both BRAFV600E;p53-/- embryos and tumors. In situ hybridization (ISH) for crestin (a pan NC marker) and other NC genes, was examined in embryos (24-72hpf) and adult tumors. Chemical screening was performed to identify suppressors of the crestin+ lineage by treating wild-type embryos from 50% epiboly to 24hpf, followed by robotic ISH. Two inhibitors of DHODH abrogated crestin expression: NSC210627 and leflunomide. The latter was used for further studies due to more widespread availability. The effect of leflunomide on zebrafish embryonic neural crest development was assessed by scoring for embryonic melanocytes, iridophores, and glial cells. Leflunomide was further assessed for its ability to affect multipotent self-renewal of purified p75+α4+ rat neural crest stem cells. The effects of leflunomide on transcriptional elongation in the neural crest was tested using the spt5m806 allele, and measuring pigmentation in response to 3-5uM leflunomide. Elongation in melanoma cells was assayed by ChIP-Seq using an antibody to RNA Polymerase II and measuring the traveling ratio. Leflunomide was tested for anti-melanoma effects in human melanoma cells lines in the presence or absence of the BRAFV600E inhibitor PLX4720. In vitro proliferation assays were performed using the CellTiterGlo system (Promega). In vivo effects were tested by treatment of established A375 xenografts by daily intraperitoneal dosing of PLX4720 alone, leflunomide alone or the combination, and tumor growth rate measured on day 4, 7 and 12.
White R.M., Cech J., Ratanasirintrawoot S., Lin C.Y., Rahl P.B., Burke C.J., Langdon E., Tomlinson M.L., Mosher J., Kaufman C., Chen F., Long H.K., Kramer M., Datta S., Neuberg D., Granter S., Young R.A., Morrison S., Wheeler G.N, & Zon L.I. (2011). DHODH modulates transcriptional elongation in the neural crest and melanoma. Nature, 471(7339), 518-522.
Publication 2011
Adult Alleles Biological Assay Cell Lines Cells Chromatin Immunoprecipitation Sequencing Dihydroorotate Dehydrogenase Embryo Embryonic Development Genes Heterografts Homo sapiens Immunoglobulins inhibitors In Situ Hybridization Leflunomide Melanocyte Melanoma Microarray Analysis MITF protein, human Neoplasms Neural Crest Neuroglia Pigmentation PLX 4720 Promega RNA Polymerase II Skin Stem Cell Self-Renewal Transcription, Genetic Transcription Elongation, Genetic Zebrafish
2
Evaluating Effectiveness of RA Treatments
After obtaining Institutional Review Board approval, we used data from a cohort of patients diagnosed with RA by a rheumatologist on the basis of the American College of Rheumatology 1987 criteria [21 (link)]. These patients were participants in the longitudinal Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) RA registry (VARA), which has been described elsewhere [22 (link)]. All VARA participants provided their written informed consent. VARA contains demographic, clinical and RA-specific information, including the Disease Activity Score using 28 joint counts (DAS28), as assessed by physicians using the DAS28 [23 (link)] and the Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) [24 (link)], as well as a biorepository with banked DNA, serum and plasma. VARA data have been collected by rheumatologists at 11 VHA facilities throughout the United States since 2003. We linked VARA participants to the Veterans Health Administration's Medical SAS Datasets present in the VHA administrative databases from 2002 to 2010 to obtain medical and pharmacy claims.
Among VARA enrollees, we used claims data to identify eligible individuals in whom a biologic agent had been initiated. Biologics of interest included abatacept, adalimumab, etanercept, infliximab and rituximab. We defined "initiation" as no prior use of that biologic agent during the past 6 months. Eligible participants must have had a baseline VARA visit on the same day or within 1 month of biologic initiation. The date of initiation of the biologic (the index date) defined the start of a 1-year "treatment episode." To confirm that patients were receiving medications through the VA system, eligible individuals must have filled at least one prescription (of any duration) for any oral medication during the 6 to 12 months prior to the index date. Participants must also have had a follow-up VARA visit that occurred at 1 year ± 2 months after the index date. If there was no VARA visit at 1 year, then these treatment episodes were excluded, as there was no clinical gold standard with which to compare the algorithm's performance. VARA data were used only to capture the DAS28, the CDAI and other clinical characteristics measured at the baseline and outcome VARA visits. All other data used for the analysis were abstracted from the administrative claims data.
To test the performance of the effectiveness algorithm and to see whether it was similar for nonbiologic RA treatments, we performed a separate analysis of RA patients enrolled in VARA who were starting leflunomide (LEF), sulfasalazine (SSZ) or hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and who also had any prior or current use of methotrexate (MTX). New MTX users were not represented in this analysis, because MTX is typically considered an "anchor" drug for RA patients and generally is continued even if the patient's therapeutic response is suboptimal, in contrast to other RA therapies, where the drugs are typically discontinued if they are not effective. Because of similarities in both the descriptive characteristics of the study populations of biologic and nonbiologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug(DMARD) users and the performance characteristics of the effectiveness algorithm between biologic and DMARD treatment episodes, the data are shown throughout for the biologic users as a unique group and for a combined group of new biologic and nonbiologic DMARD users.
Curtis J.R., Baddley J.W., Yang S., Patkar N., Chen L., Delzell E., Mikuls T.R., Saag K.G., Singh J., Safford M, & Cannon G.W. (2011). Derivation and preliminary validation of an administrative claims-based algorithm for the effectiveness of medications for rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Research & Therapy, 13(5), R155.
Publication 2011
Abatacept Adalimumab Antirheumatic Drugs, Disease-Modifying Biological Factors Biopharmaceuticals DNA, A-Form Etanercept Ethics Committees, Research Gold Healthy Volunteers Hydroxychloroquine Infliximab Joints Leflunomide Methotrexate Patients Pharmaceutical Preparations Physicians Plasma Rheumatologist Rituximab Serum Sulfasalazine Veterans
3
RA Treatment Recommendations Literature Review
Literature searches for both DMARDs and biologics relied predominantly on PubMed searches) with medical subject headings (MeSH) and relevant keywords similar to those used for the 2008 ACR RA recommendations (see Appendices 1 and 2). We included randomized clinical trials (RCTs), controlled clinical trials (CCTs), quasi-experimental designs, cohort studies (prospective or retrospective), and case-control studies, with no restrictions on sample size. More details about inclusion criteria are listed below and in Appendix 3.
The 2008 recommendations were based on a literature search that ended on February 14, 2007. The literature search end date for the 2012 Update was February 26, 2010 for the efficacy and safety studies and September 22, 2010 for additional qualitative reviews related to TB screening, immunization and hepatitis (similar to the 2008 methodology). Studies published subsequent to that date were not included.
For biologics, we also reviewed the Cochrane systematic reviews and overviews (published and in press) in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews to identify additional studies (5 (link)–8 ) and further supplemented by hand-checking the bibliographies of all included articles. Finally, the CEP and TFP confirmed that relevant literature was included for evidence synthesis. Unless they were identified by the literature search and met the article inclusion criteria (see Appendix 3), we did not review any unpublished data from product manufacturers, investigators, or the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Adverse Event Reporting System.
We searched the literature for the eight DMARDs and nine biologics most commonly used for the treatment of RA. Literature was searched for eight DMARDS including azathioprine, cyclosporine, hydroxychloroquine, leflunomide, methotrexate, minocycline, organic gold compounds and sulfasalazine. As in 2008, azathioprine, cyclosporine and gold were not included in the recommendations based on infrequent use and lack of new data (Table 1). Literature was searched for nine biologics including abatacept, adalimumab, anakinra, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab, rituximab and tocilizumab; anakinra was not included in the recommendations due to infrequent use and lack of new data. Details of the bibliographic search strategy are listed in Appendix 1.
Singh J.A., Furst D.E., Bharat A., Curtis J.R., Kavanaugh A.F., Kremer J.M., Moreland L., O’Dell J., Winthrop K., Beukelman T., Bridges S.L., Chatham W.W., Paulus H., Suarez-Almazor M., Bombardier C., Dougados M., Khanna D., King C., Leong A., Matteson E.L., Schousboe J.T., Moynihan E., Kolba K., Jain A., Volkmann E.R., Agrawal H., Bae S., Mudano A., Patkar N.M, & Saag K.G. (2012). 2012 Update of the 2008 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) Recommendations for the use of Disease-Modifying Anti-Rheumatic Drugs and Biologics in the treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA). Arthritis care & research, 64(5), 625-639.
Publication 2012
Abatacept Adalimumab Anabolism Anakinra Antirheumatic Drugs, Disease-Modifying Azathioprine Biological Factors Certolizumab Pegol Cyclosporine Etanercept Gold Gold Compounds golimumab Hepatitis A Hydroxychloroquine Immunization Infliximab Leflunomide Methotrexate Minocycline Organic Chemicals Rituximab Safety Sulfasalazine tocilizumab
4
Rheumatoid Arthritis Inclusion Criteria
At enrollment, entry criteria included disease duration < 3 years from the time of diagnosis; age over 18 years; RA diagnosis by the 1987 ACR criteria (20 (link)); active disease (at least 4 swollen and 4 tender joints, using the 28-joint count); positive for rheumatoid factor (RF) or cyclic citrullinated peptide (CCP) antibodies, or if seronegative, have at least 2 erosions by radiographs of hands/wrists/feet; if taking corticosteroids, receiving stable doses at least 2 weeks prior to screening (≤ 10 mg/day of prednisone); and if taking non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, receiving stable doses for at least 1 week. Exclusion criteria were contraindications to study medications; prior use of biologic therapy of any type, at any dosage; corticosteroid injections during the 4 weeks prior; and diagnosis of serious infection, including positive skin test for TB. Prior use of leflunomide, HCQ, and SSZ was allowable for no more than 2 months. Also permitted was a total dose of ≤ 40 mg of MTX.
Moreland L.W., O’Dell J.R., Paulus H.E., Curtis J.R., Bathon J.M., Clair E.W., Bridges SL J.r., Zhang J., McVie T., Howard G., van der Heijde D, & Cofield S.S. (2012). A Randomized Comparative Effectiveness Study of Oral Triple Therapy versus Etanercept plus Methotrexate in Early, Aggressive Rheumatoid Arthritis. Arthritis and rheumatism, 64(9), 2824-2835.
Publication 2012
Adrenal Cortex Hormones Anti-Cyclic Citrullinated Protein Antibodies Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal Diagnosis Foot Infection Joints Leflunomide Pharmaceutical Preparations Prednisone Rheumatoid Factor Test, Skin Therapies, Biological Wrist X-Rays, Diagnostic
5
Measuring DMARD Utilization in RA Patients
The National Committee for Quality Assurance’s HEDIS RA measure aimed to assess “whether patients diagnosed with RA have had at least one ambulatory prescription dispensed for a DMARD [during the measurement year].” Patients in the denominator for the measure (1) were continuously enrolled in a MMC plan during the measurement year (no more than one 45-day gap in enrollment allowed), (2) had both medical and pharmacy benefits, and (3) had at least 2 face-to-face physician encounters with different dates of service in an ambulatory or non-acute patient setting during the measurement year with any diagnosis of RA (ICD-9 codes 714.0, 714.1, 714.2, or 714.81). Patients were excluded from the measure if they were pregnant or carried a diagnosis of HIV during the measurement year. Accepted drugs included both traditional and biologic DMARDs: abatacept, adalimumab, anakinra, azathioprine, cyclophosphamide, cyclosporine, etanercept, gold, hydroxychloroquine, infliximab, leflunomide, methotrexate, minocycline, penicillamine, rituximab, staphylococcal protein A, and sulfasalazine. The numerator for the measure was a dichotomous measure of DMARD receipt (yes/no); the names of the specific DMARDs received were not recorded.
Schmajuk G., Trivedi A., Solomon D., Yelin E., Trupin L., Chakravarty E, & Yazdany J. (2011). Receipt of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs among patients with rheumatoid arthritis in Medicare managed care plans. JAMA : the journal of the American Medical Association, 305(5), 480-486.
Publication 2011
Abatacept Adalimumab Anakinra Antirheumatic Drugs, Disease-Modifying Azathioprine Biopharmaceuticals Cyclophosphamide Cyclosporine Diagnosis Etanercept Gold Hydroxychloroquine Infliximab Leflunomide Methotrexate Minocycline Patients Penicillamine Pharmaceutical Preparations Physicians RCE1 protein, human Rituximab Staphylococcal Protein A Sulfasalazine

Most recents protocols related to «Leflunomide»

1
Immunological Profile in Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis
Patients with JIA were enrolled at the University Medical Center Utrecht (The Netherlands) (Supplementary file 1). A total of nine JIA patients were included in this study. Of these, n=2 were diagnosed with extended oligo JIA, n=2 with rheumatoid factor negative poly-articular JIA, and n=5 with oligo JIA, according to the revised criteria for JIA (Petty et al., 1998 (link)). The average age at the time of inclusion was 13.1 years (range 3.2–18.1 years) with a disease duration of 7.3 years (range 0.4–14.2 years). Patients included for CyTOF and TCR sequencing analysis of two affected knee joints were all treated with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or methotrexate, but no biologicals at the time of sampling. For sequential TCR sequencing analysis, we included patients with a relapsing disease course. At the first time point, all patients were treated with NSAIDs or methotrexate, but no biologicals. During the follow-up (after experiencing a relapse of disease), patients were treated with disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (leflunomide) and/or biologicals (humira).
PB of JIA patients was obtained via veni-puncture or intravenous drip, while SF was obtained by therapeutic joint aspiration of affected joints. Informed consent was obtained from all patients either directly or from parents/guardians when the patients were younger than 12 years of age. The study was conducted in accordance with the Institutional Review Board of the University Medical Center Utrecht (approval no. 11-499/C), in compliance with the Declaration of Helsinki. PB from n=3 healthy children (average age 15.1 years with range 14.7–15.4 years) was obtained from a cohort of control subjects for a case-control clinical study (Supplementary file 1).
Mijnheer G., Servaas N.H., Leong J.Y., Boltjes A., Spierings E., Chen P., Lai L., Petrelli A., Vastert S., de Boer R.J., Albani S., Pandit A, & van Wijk F. (2023). Compartmentalization and persistence of dominant (regulatory) T cell clones indicates antigen skewing in juvenile idiopathic arthritis. eLife, 12, e79016.
Publication 2023
Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal Antirheumatic Drugs, Disease-Modifying Arthrocentesis Biological Factors Child Disease Progression Ethics Committees, Research Humira Joints Knee Joint Leflunomide Legal Guardians Methotrexate Oligonucleotides Parent Patients Poly A Punctures Relapse Rheumatoid Factor Sequence Analysis Therapeutics Youth
2
Cost-Effectiveness of DMARD Regimens in Rheumatoid Arthritis
This prospective observational study was carried out in the Department of Pharmacology in a tertiary care institute over a period of one year after approval from the Institutional Ethics Committee (All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), Rishikesh) (approval number AIIMS/IEC/18/160). Our study followed the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. Subjects were recruited from patients presenting to the Rheumatology Outpatient Department (OPD) with a primary diagnosis of RA after obtaining written informed consent. Inclusion criteria were all new and previously diagnosed patients with rheumatoid arthritis based on the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 2010 diagnostic criteria of either sex. Patients excluded from this study included those affected with arthritis due to reasons other than RA, such as vasculitis, polymyalgia rheumatica, spondyloarthropathies (reactive arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, and psoriatic arthritis), bacterial arthritis, and fibromyalgia.
On the basis of DMARD therapy being received by the patients, they were divided into different groups: Regimen 1, monotherapy with one DMARD (methotrexate (MTX)); Regimen 2, double DMARD therapy or two DMARD therapy (methotrexate + hydroxychloroquine (MTX + HCQ)); Regimen 3, triple DMARD therapy or three DMARD therapy (methotrexate + hydroxychloroquine + leflunomide (MTX + HCQ + Lef)); and Regimen 4, >3 DMARD therapy (MTX + HCQ + Lef + bDMARD adalimumab). Patients were assessed at baseline and after the follow-up visit as per the clinician’s discretion (varying from 7 to 12 weeks). Treatment response was recorded at the baseline and follow-up visit based on the Disease Activity Score (DAS28) criteria, which comprises a number of tender joints, swollen joints, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and “patient global health” score [10 (link)].
The medication cost of DMARD therapy was analyzed by calculating the cost of therapy per month for each patient by taking the prices from the Bureau of Pharma Public Sector Undertakings of India (BPPI), Department of Pharmaceuticals, Government of India, for all the DMARDs, except the biological drug for which the price from Cadila Healthcare Ltd. (Zydus Cadila, Ahmedabad, India) was taken. Cost-effectiveness was calculated by dividing the cost of therapy by the change in DAS in a month. Adherence was assessed using the Morisky-Green-Levine Scale (MGLS) [11 (link)]. Patients were interviewed and asked to answer four questions listed in the questionnaire on their second visit. High adherence was denoted by a score of 0, medium adherence was denoted by a score of 1 or 2, and low adherence was denoted by a score of 3 or 4. The p value was taken to be 0.05. For the cost-effective analysis, the mean was applied to the DAS28 values and the cost of treatment. Statistical analysis was performed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) software (IBM SPSS Statistics, Armonk, NY, USA).
Mittal G., Bisht M., Pai V.S, & Handu S. (2023). The Cost-Effectiveness of and Adherence to Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drug (DMARD) Therapy in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients in a Tertiary Care Teaching Hospital in Uttarakhand, India. Cureus, 15(2), e34664.
Publication 2023
Adalimumab Ankylosing Spondylitis Antirheumatic Drugs, Disease-Modifying Arthritis Arthritis, Bacterial Arthritis, Psoriatic Arthritis, Reactive Biopharmaceuticals Diagnosis Fibromyalgia Institutional Ethics Committees Joints Leflunomide Methotrexate Outpatients Patients Pharmaceutical Preparations Pharmacotherapy Polymyalgia Rheumatica Public Sector Rheumatoid Arthritis Sedimentation Rates, Erythrocyte Spondylarthropathies Therapeutics Treatment Protocols Vasculitis
3
Traditional Chinese Medicine for Rheumatoid Arthritis
In the First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui University of Chinese Medicine, the basic drugs for treating RA consist of cDMARDs (including methotrexate, leflunomide, sulfasalazine, and hydroxychloroquine sulfate), nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (including celecoxib, meloxicam, and lornoxicam), and glucocorticoids (methylprednisolone). It should be noted that TCM is a commonly used treatment means in TCM hospitals. We gradually withdrew the use of biologics by increasing the use of TCM.
Fang Y., Liu J., Xin L., Chen X., Ding X., Han Q., He M., Li X., Sun Y., Wang F., Wang J., Wang X., Wen J., Zhang X., Zhou Q, & Zhang J. (2023). Traditional Chinese Medicine Compound Preparations Are Associated with Low Disease-Related Complication Rates in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Retrospective Cohort Study of 11,074 Patients. BioMed Research International, 2023, 1019290.
Publication 2023
Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal Biological Factors Celecoxib Chinese Glucocorticoids Hospital Administration Hydroxychloroquine Sulfate Leflunomide lornoxicam Meloxicam Methotrexate Methylprednisolone Pharmaceutical Preparations Sulfasalazine
4
Mortality Trends Among Rheumatic Disease Patients in Lithuania
The retrospective cohort study was performed with data retrieved from Lithuanian compulsory health insurance information system database SVEIDRA. This is a population-based database that has been running since 1995 and registers all patients’ visits to healthcare institutions, the established diagnoses, and the prescriptions of state-reimbursed medications to all residents of Lithuania. The Vilnius Regional Bioethics Committee approved assessing these data and conducting the study (approval number: 158200-17-958-462, approval date: 7 November 2017).
Information about all patients who had been newly diagnosed with inflammatory RD during the period between 1 January 2012 and 31 December 2019 was obtained from SVEIDRA. Patients with RA, SPA (psoriatic arthritis (PsA), ankylosing spondylitis, and undifferentiated SPA), systemic CTD, and vasculitis were included. Information about the prescription of state-reimbursed medication such as glucocorticoids, conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) (hydrochloroquine, sulfasalazine, methotrexate, azathioprine, leflunomide), or biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) (etanercept, adalimumab, infliximab, tocilizumab or rituximab with available biosimilars) was used for the verification of RD cases.
A total of 95,289 RD cases with a first-time diagnosis of inflammatory RD established between 2012 and 2019 were selected. A case was considered first-time-diagnosed if the patient had had at least 1 year of no previous RD record in the database. As no data preceding 2012 were available, we excluded 22,526 first-time diagnoses in 2012 from the total cohort, as it was not possible to verify their RD diagnosis prior to the index date.
We excluded 2251 cases from the cohort because they were younger than 18 years old at the time of diagnosis, and 10 because of an unidentifiable identification code. To verify the cases, we excluded 58,866 patients with no records of at least one prescription of state-reimbursed medications for RD (glucocorticoids, csDMARDs, or bDMARDs).
The final 11,636 cases were cross-checked with the death registry of the health Information center at the Institute of Hygiene, and the date and cause of death were obtained if the death had occurred between 2013 and 2021. The cases were cross-checked using personal identification codes. The principal causes of death were compared between the prepandemic and pandemic time periods, and grouped under the following categories: deaths because of cardiovascular and circulatory causes, malignancies, infections, respiratory causes, musculoskeletal diseases, external causes of death, and unspecified causes of death. COVID-19, as a recorded cause of death, was only calculated in the pandemic period.
The final dataset used for analysis included sex, age, the ICD-10 code of RD, the date of RD diagnosis, the date and cause of death if applicable, and information about the prescription of state-reimbursed drugs.
For the comparison with the general population of Lithuania, information on the adult population census in 2013–2021 was obtained from Statistics Lithuania (www.stat.gov.lt, accessed on 27 November 2022).
Dadonienė J., Jasionytė G., Mironova J., Staškuvienė K, & Miltinienė D. (2023). How Did the Two Years of the COVID-19 Pandemic Affect the Outcomes of the Patients with Inflammatory Rheumatic Diseases in Lithuania?. Medicina, 59(2), 311.
Publication 2023
Adalimumab Adult Ankylosing Spondylitis Antirheumatic Drugs, Disease-Modifying Arthritis, Psoriatic Azathioprine Biopharmaceuticals Biosimilars Cardiovascular System Compulsive Behavior COVID 19 Diagnosis Etanercept Glucocorticoids Infection Inflammation Infliximab Leflunomide Malignant Neoplasms Methotrexate Musculoskeletal Diseases Pandemics Patients Prescription Drugs Respiratory Rate Rituximab Sulfasalazine tocilizumab Vasculitis Youth
5
Rheumatoid Arthritis Diagnosis Database
We identified participants who were newly diagnosed with RA using the International Classification of Diseases, tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM), codes (M05.x, M06.x) plus any dispensing of DMARDs during the identification period from January 2010 to December 2017 (n = 286,148; 23 (link)). Disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) in the current study included all of conventional synthetic DMARDs (e.g., methotrexate, hydroxychloroquine, leflunomide, sulfasalazine, tacrolimus, cyclosporine, D-penicillamine, bucillamine, and azathioprine), biological DMARDs (e.g., adalimumab, etanercept, infliximab, golimumab, rituximab, abatacept, and tocilizumab), and targeted synthetic DMARD (e.g., tofacitinib). Those who had not completed a health checkup within 2 years before the diagnosis of RA, those with any missing data, those with age < 20 years, and those with a history of ESRD before the diagnosis of RA were excluded. We additionally excluded the subjects who were diagnosed with ESRD or who died within 1 year after the diagnosis of RA, for the diagnostic accuracy of RA. For comparison between the subjects with and without RA, we selected the control group (without RA) by age-sex exact matching, and included five times as many subjects as RA cohort. Patients with RA who were not matched with controls without RA were further excluded.
Suh S.H., Jung J.H., Oh T.R., Yang E.M., Choi H.S., Kim C.S., Bae E.H., Ma S.K., Han K.D, & Kim S.W. (2023). Rheumatoid arthritis and the risk of end-stage renal disease: A nationwide, population-based study. Frontiers in Medicine, 10, 1116489.
Publication 2023
Abatacept Adalimumab Antirheumatic Drugs, Disease-Modifying Azathioprine Biopharmaceuticals bucillamine Cyclosporine Diagnosis Etanercept golimumab Hydroxychloroquine Infliximab Kidney Failure, Chronic Leflunomide Methotrexate Patients Penicillamine Rituximab Sulfasalazine Tacrolimus tocilizumab tofacitinib

Top products related to «Leflunomide»

1
Leflunomide by Merck Group
Sourced in United States, United Kingdom, Germany
Leflunomide is a lab equipment product from Merck Group. It is a synthetic chemical compound used in various research and development applications. The core function of Leflunomide is to serve as a research tool for scientific investigations.
2
Leflunomide by Enzo Life Sciences
Sourced in United States
Leflunomide is a laboratory reagent used for research purposes. It is a chemical compound that can be used in various experimental setups. The core function of Leflunomide is to serve as a research tool, but its specific applications and intended uses should not be extrapolated.
3
Uridine by Merck Group
Sourced in United States, Germany, China, United Kingdom, France, Japan, Sao Tome and Principe
Uridine is a nucleoside that is a constituent of ribonucleic acid (RNA). It serves as a precursor in the biosynthesis of uridine triphosphate (UTP) and other pyrimidine nucleotides. Uridine can be used as a research tool in various biological and biochemical applications.
4
Teriflunomide by Merck Group
Sourced in Germany, United States
Teriflunomide is a laboratory reagent manufactured by Merck Group. It is a pyrimidine synthesis inhibitor used for research purposes.
5
Akts473 by Cell Signaling Technology
Sourced in United States
AKTS473 is a rabbit monoclonal antibody that detects endogenous levels of Akt protein phosphorylated at Serine 473. The antibody is suitable for use in Western blotting applications.
6
S6k1t389 by Cell Signaling Technology
S6K1T389 is a primary antibody that detects phosphorylation of the Thr389 residue of the S6K1 (p70 S6 Kinase) protein. It is used to monitor the activation state of the mTOR signaling pathway.
7
Dimethyl sulfoxide (dmso) by Merck Group
Sourced in United States, Germany, United Kingdom, China, Italy, Sao Tome and Principe, France, Macao, India, Canada, Switzerland, Japan, Australia, Spain, Poland, Belgium, Brazil, Czechia, Portugal, Austria, Denmark, Israel, Sweden, Ireland, Hungary, Mexico, Netherlands, Singapore, Indonesia, Slovakia, Cameroon, Norway, Thailand, Chile, Finland, Malaysia, Latvia, New Zealand, Hong Kong, Pakistan, Uruguay, Bangladesh
DMSO is a versatile organic solvent commonly used in laboratory settings. It has a high boiling point, low viscosity, and the ability to dissolve a wide range of polar and non-polar compounds. DMSO's core function is as a solvent, allowing for the effective dissolution and handling of various chemical substances during research and experimentation.
8
Gemcitabine by Merck Group
Sourced in United States, Germany, United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, France, China
Gemcitabine is a nucleoside analog used as a laboratory reagent. It functions as an antimetabolite, inhibiting DNA synthesis.
9
Dexamethasone (dex) by Merck Group
Sourced in United States, Germany, United Kingdom, China, Japan, Italy, Sao Tome and Principe, Macao, France, Australia, Switzerland, Canada, Denmark, Spain, Israel, Belgium, Ireland, Morocco, Brazil, Netherlands, Sweden, New Zealand, Austria, Czechia, Senegal, Poland, India, Portugal
Dexamethasone is a synthetic glucocorticoid medication used in a variety of medical applications. It is primarily used as an anti-inflammatory and immunosuppressant agent.
10
Facsaria 2 by BD
Sourced in United States, Germany, United Kingdom, Japan, Belgium, China, Canada, Italy, France, South Sudan, Singapore, Australia, Denmark, Uruguay
The FACSAria II is a high-performance cell sorter produced by BD. It is designed for precision cell sorting and analysis. The system utilizes flow cytometry technology to rapidly identify and separate different cell populations within a sample.

More about "Leflunomide"

Leflunomide, a groundbreaking immunomodulatory drug, has emerged as a game-changer in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis and other autoimmune disorders.
This versatile compound works by inhibiting pyrimidine synthesis, a crucial process that disrupts the proliferation of activated lymphocytes, a key driver of autoimmune conditions.
The efficacy of Leflunomide has been extensively studied in clinical trials, where it has consistently demonstrated its ability to reduce symptoms and slow disease progression.
This remarkable performance has made Leflunomide a go-to choice for clinicians and researchers alike.
To further optimize Leflunomide research, researchers can leverage the power of PubCompare.ai, an AI-powered tool that empowers scientific discoveries by comparing protocols and locating the best approaches.
This innovative platform allows researchers to identify the most reproducible and effective methods from the literature, preprints, and patents, ensuring that their Leflunomomide studies are grounded in the most cutting-edge and proven techniques.
In addition to Leflunomide, researchers may also explore related compounds, such as Uridine, Teriflunomide, AKTS473, S6K1T389, and Gemcitabine, which share some mechanistic similarities or therapeutic applications.
The integration of these related terms and compounds can provide a more comprehensive understanding of the Leflunomide landscape and its potential clinical applications.
Furthermore, the use of DMSO and Dexamethasone, common solvents and adjuvants in pharmaceutical research, may also be relevant when examining Leflunomide protocols and their optimization.
By leveraging the insights gained from the MeSH term description, the Metadescription, and the integration of related terms and compounds, researchers can unlock the full potential of Leflunomide and drive groundbreaking discoveries that improve the lives of patients suffering from rheumatoid arthritis and other autoimmune conditions.
Embark on this journey of scientific exploration with the aid of PubCompare.ai and experience the power of AI-driven protocol optimization.