Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • First Release
    • Current
    • Archives
    • Collections
    • Audiovisual Rheum
    • 50th Volume Reprints
  • Resources
    • Guide for Authors
    • Submit Manuscript
    • Payment
    • Reviewers
    • Advertisers
    • Classified Ads
    • Reprints and Translations
    • Permissions
    • Meetings
    • FAQ
    • Policies
  • Subscribers
    • Subscription Information
    • Purchase Subscription
    • Your Account
    • Terms and Conditions
  • About Us
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Letter from the Editor
    • Duncan A. Gordon Award
    • Privacy/GDPR Policy
    • Accessibility
  • Contact Us
  • JRheum Supplements
  • Services

User menu

  • My Cart
  • Log In

Search

  • Advanced search
The Journal of Rheumatology
  • JRheum Supplements
  • Services
  • My Cart
  • Log In
The Journal of Rheumatology

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • First Release
    • Current
    • Archives
    • Collections
    • Audiovisual Rheum
    • 50th Volume Reprints
  • Resources
    • Guide for Authors
    • Submit Manuscript
    • Payment
    • Reviewers
    • Advertisers
    • Classified Ads
    • Reprints and Translations
    • Permissions
    • Meetings
    • FAQ
    • Policies
  • Subscribers
    • Subscription Information
    • Purchase Subscription
    • Your Account
    • Terms and Conditions
  • About Us
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Letter from the Editor
    • Duncan A. Gordon Award
    • Privacy/GDPR Policy
    • Accessibility
  • Contact Us
  • Follow Jrheum on BlueSky
  • Follow jrheum on Twitter
  • Visit jrheum on Facebook
  • Follow jrheum on LinkedIn
  • Follow jrheum on YouTube
  • Follow jrheum on Instagram
  • Follow jrheum on RSS
Abstract

Should tetracycline treatment be used more extensively for rheumatoid arthritis? Metaanalysis demonstrates clinical benefit with reduction in disease activity.

Millicent Stone, Paul R Fortin, Cesar Pacheco-Tena and Robert D Inman
The Journal of Rheumatology October 2003, 30 (10) 2112-2122;
Millicent Stone
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Paul R Fortin
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Cesar Pacheco-Tena
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Robert D Inman
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF
PreviousNext
Loading

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of tetracycline antibiotics versus control (placebo or conventional treatment) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) for the reduction of disease activity as defined by American College of Rheumatology criteria. METHODS: We searched Medline (1966-February 2002), Embase (1980-February 2002), and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (Issue 1, 2002 Cochrane Library). Reference lists of published trials were searched by hand for further identification of published reports and presentations at scientific meetings. Randomized controlled trials comparing tetracyclines to control (placebo or conventional disease modifying antirheumatic therapy) were selected for inclusion if at least one of the following outcomes was reported: tender joint count (TJC), swollen joint count, patient pain score by visual analog scale, patient global assessment of disease activity, physician global assessment of disease activity, eosinophil sedimentation rate (ESR) and C-reactive protein (CRP), joint space narrowing and erosions, adverse events, and quality of life as measured by the Health Assessment Questionnaire. Subjects were required to have RA as defined by the 1987 ARA criteria. RESULTS: Ten randomized controlled trials including 535 individuals were reviewed. Only 3 trials were considered high quality; elements of bias could not be excluded in the remainder. Tetracyclines, when administered for > or = 3 months, were associated with a significant reduction in disease activity in RA as follows: for TJC, standardized mean difference (SMD) = -0.39, 95% CI -0.74, -0.05; and for acute phase reactants, ESR, SMD = -8.96, 95% CI -14.51, -3.42. The treatment effect was more marked in the subgroup of patients with disease duration < 1 year who were seropositive. There was no absolute increased risk of adverse events associated with tetracyclines: absolute risk difference = 0.10, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.01, 0.21. No beneficial effect was seen on radiological progression of disease: for erosions, SMD = 0.17, 95% CI -0.29, 0.64. In addition, subgroup analysis excluding trials with doxycycline showed that minocycline alone had a greater effect on reduction of disease activity: for TJC, SMD = -0.69, 95% CI -0.89, -0.49; and for ESR, SMD = -10.14, 95% CI -14.72, -5.57. CONCLUSION: Tetracyclines, in particular minocycline, were associated with a clinically significant improvement in disease activity in RA with no absolute increased risk of side effects. Unfortunately, the information available was inadequate to allow a detailed analysis of individual side effects in the studies. Further research is warranted to compare these agents to newer disease modifying drugs for comparable safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness.

PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

The Journal of Rheumatology
Vol. 30, Issue 10
1 Oct 2003
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Index by Author
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about The Journal of Rheumatology.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Should tetracycline treatment be used more extensively for rheumatoid arthritis? Metaanalysis demonstrates clinical benefit with reduction in disease activity.
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from The Journal of Rheumatology
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the The Journal of Rheumatology web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Should tetracycline treatment be used more extensively for rheumatoid arthritis? Metaanalysis demonstrates clinical benefit with reduction in disease activity.
Millicent Stone, Paul R Fortin, Cesar Pacheco-Tena, Robert D Inman
The Journal of Rheumatology Oct 2003, 30 (10) 2112-2122;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

 Request Permissions

Share
Should tetracycline treatment be used more extensively for rheumatoid arthritis? Metaanalysis demonstrates clinical benefit with reduction in disease activity.
Millicent Stone, Paul R Fortin, Cesar Pacheco-Tena, Robert D Inman
The Journal of Rheumatology Oct 2003, 30 (10) 2112-2122;
del.icio.us logo Twitter logo Facebook logo  logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  •  logo
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

Cited By...

Similar Articles

Content

  • First Release
  • Current
  • Archives
  • Collections
  • Audiovisual Rheum
  • COVID-19 and Rheumatology

Resources

  • Guide for Authors
  • Submit Manuscript
  • Author Payment
  • Reviewers
  • Advertisers
  • Classified Ads
  • Reprints and Translations
  • Permissions
  • Meetings
  • FAQ
  • Policies

Subscribers

  • Subscription Information
  • Purchase Subscription
  • Your Account
  • Terms and Conditions

More

  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • My Alerts
  • My Folders
  • Privacy/GDPR Policy
  • RSS Feeds
The Journal of Rheumatology
The content of this site is intended for health care professionals.
Copyright © 2025 by The Journal of Rheumatology Publishing Co. Ltd.
Print ISSN: 0315-162X; Online ISSN: 1499-2752
Powered by HighWire