Session Title: Systemic Sclerosis & Related Disorders – Clinical Poster III
Session Type: Poster Session (Tuesday)
Session Time: 9:00AM-11:00AM
Background/Purpose: Aminaphtone treatment improves clinical symptoms of Raynaud’s phenomenon (RP) and increases peripheral blood perfusion (BP) in patients with either primary or secondary RP (1-2).The aim of this study was to assess possible interferences of different treatment backgrounds on RP related clinical symptoms as well as on skin BP in patients treated with aminaphtone, during a six-month follow-up.
Methods: Forty-six patients with active RP were enrolled during routine clinical assessment (11 primary RP, mean age 49±19 SD years, mean RP duration 6±3 years; and 35 secondary RP to systemic sclerosis (SSc), mean age 61±17 years, mean RP duration 11±9 years). Aminaphtone was orally administered 75 mg twice daily in addition to current standard treatments, and all patients were on a stable drug regimen since at least two months, which remained unmodified during the follow-up. All patients were taking aspirin. Six groups of treatment backgrounds were identified: 1) hydroxychloroquine (2 patients); 2) methotrexate (3 patients); 3) colchicine (5 patients); 4) cyclosporine A (6 patients); 5) mycophenolate (6 patients); 6) proton-pomp inhibitors (12 patients); 7) no further treatments (12 patients). Raynaud’s condition score (RCS) and both frequency and duration of Raynaud’s attacks were assessed at the same time. Blood perfusion was measured by Laser Speckle Contrast Analysis (LASCA) (3) at the level of fingertip, periungual areas, dorsum and palm of hands, and face at baseline (T0), after one (T1), four (T4), twelve (T12) and twentyfour (T24) weeks of treatment. Statistical analysis was performed by non-parametric tests.
Results: During aminaphtone treatment, a progressive statistically significant increase of blood perfusion, as well as an improvement of RP clinical symptoms (decrease of RCS, frequency and duration of RP attacks/day), were observed in all above reported seven groups of RP patients with different treatments backgrounds from T0 to T12 in all skin areas (p< 0.01). There were no statistically significant difference between the seven groups of patients concerning skin BP at different times (p=0.60). The results were similar in both primary and secondary (to SSc) RP patients (p=0.40). Aminaphtone administration had to be stopped in 2 patients due to headache, and one patient was lost during follow-up.
Conclusion: This study demonstrates that the increase of skin blood perfusion and the improvement of RP clinical symptoms are not influenced by different treatment backgrounds in RP patients treated with aminaphtone.
References. 1. Parisi S, et al. Am J Int Med 2015;3;204-9. 2. Ruaro B, et al. Front Pharmacol 2019;10:293. 3. Ruaro B, et al. Ann Rheum Dis. 2014;73:1181-5.
To cite this abstract in AMA style:Sulli A, Goegan F, Gotelli E, Patane' M, Pizzorni C, Paolino S, Alessandri E, Ruaro B. Different Treatment Backgrounds Do Not Influence Aminaphtone Efficacy in Primary and Secondary Raynaud’s Phenomenon [abstract]. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2019; 71 (suppl 10). https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/different-treatment-backgrounds-do-not-influence-aminaphtone-efficacy-in-primary-and-secondary-raynauds-phenomenon/. Accessed October 26, 2020.
« Back to 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting
ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/different-treatment-backgrounds-do-not-influence-aminaphtone-efficacy-in-primary-and-secondary-raynauds-phenomenon/