Skip to main content
You're viewing the free public version. Create a free account for full research and member tools. Join free
Research Abstract

Clinical evaluation of D-penicillamine by multicentric double-blind comparative study in chronic rheumatoid arthritis.

Shiokawa Y, Horiuchi Y, Honma M, Kageyama T, Okada T, Azuma T
Arthritis and rheumatism
Jan 1, 1977
Sources
1 min read
0:00 / 0:00
0:00 / 0:00

Sign in to access this feature

Create a free account or sign in to use AI summaries, listen to articles, download PDFs, and save to your library.

1 view
Share:

Abstract

In order to evaluate clinical efficacy of D-penicillamine (DP) a double-blind study was conducted by the Metalcaptase Research Group consisting of forty-one rheumatological centers in Japan. A total of 179 patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) was divided into two groups; one treated with 5 mg (control group) and the other with 100 mg (drug group) of DP in capsule form. The trial lasted 24 weeks. Global judgment by physicians revealed that improvement was found in 27% in the controls and 65% in the drug group. Adverse reactions occurred in 34% of the controls and 49% of the drug group. Skin rashes, taste disturbances, gastrointestinal upset and proteinuria were frequent in the drug group, but severe or fatal reactions could not be seen in this trial.

Comments

Sign in or create a free account to join the conversation.

Sign in to comment

Be the first to comment.

Trusted By Professionals and Teams:

The National Health Federation
Stand For Health Freedom
Global Healing Institute
Global Wellness Forum
MAHA Action
Myers Detox
Natural News
Mercola.com

Unlock Evidence-Based Health Research

Join 500,000+ members accessing 10,000+ natural health topics.

Subscribe to our informative Newsletter & Receive

Cancer Fighting Foods Ebook

Our newsletter serves 500,000 with essential news, research & healthy tips, daily.

Disclaimer: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of GreenMedInfo or its staff.