Minocycline for Scleroderma

I'm an ordinary clinical rheumatologist.  Not an academic, not a researcher, just a run-of-the-mill rheumatologist who practices what I hope is good, standard rheumatology.  This practice does not include treating scleroderma patients with antibiotics.  Should it?

After a post of mine bemoaning the lack of treatment options for scleroderma patients, my site was deluged by visitors and commentors originating from a group I had not heard of before, the Road Back foundation. In respect to scleroderma, and I believe other diseases, the group believes that antibiotics, an in particular, minocycline, are an unrecognized, underused, but highly effective treament.  The comments have ranged from the informative, to the pleading, to the accusatory. 

From  what the commenters and their links have provided, I think the major points are:

- Dr D Trentham, from Boston, published a research letter in The Lancet in 1998 where he showed that 4 of 11 patients were in complete remission after 1 year of minocycline treatment.  2 others improved and 5 did not complete the study.

- Since the publication of the study, many (?hundreds) have received the same treatment with great success.

-Minocycline is still not an accepted treatment because, among other things, doctors prefer using expensive new drugs, and no studies are being done on minocycline because, being past patent, there is no financial advantage in studying it.  Other doctors are just ignorant.

I'm going to have to rebut a few of these claims here, but we'll return to whether I should be using antibiotics further on.  First of all, minocycline is a very interesting molecule.  It pops up in rheumatology all the time, not really for it's antibiotic properties, but because it does seem to have some immune modulating activity as well as metalloproteinase inhibition, which might be useful in preventing cartilage damage.  It also causes drug induced lupus, immunomodulation gone bad.  So rheumatologists are not put off by the suggestion that minocycline might be useful, and in fact there was a period in the early nineties when, following a few positive studies, that we, me included, gave it a try.  It didn't work, or at least,  didn't work nearly as well as methotrexate, hydroxchloroquine and other drugs. 

 The study by Trentham, you must admit, was tiny by any standards.  Eleven patients, five of whom didn't finish.  Two stopped because of a scleroderma renal crisis. Yikes. Of the six that finished, however, four were considered to be in complete remission. Interesting.  Two really bad results and four really good.  Doesn't matter though because the study was so small it doesn't really mean anything.  Here,  commenters have suggested that no further research has been done because big pharma isn't interested, and doctors prefer studying new, profitable drugs.  This may be true in some areas, but not for scleroderma.  Two of the biggest, more recent studies in the area have been with methotrexate and cyclophosphamide.  These are old-timer drugs.  No money to mine here.  Even more interesting is the fact that there has been further research into minocycline treatment, using the exact same protocol.  This study was small as well, only 36 patients, and it too was not controlled.  It had 12 patients drop out, ten because of worsening disease and found no significant improvement in the others. ( I could not find this article on the Road Back website)  I didn't find any further, better studies, but this is understandable.  Scleroderma is a very rare disease and if it is to be studied, most patients have to be registered in a few select studies.  Given the above two studies, I gather the trail did not look promising enough to go further.

So in summary, doctors are not averse to minocycline, use it when studies support it, have in fact studied it in scleroderma even though there was no financial gain in doing so, and have not been impressed.

So what am I to make of the many testimonials claiming improvement and cure with minocycline?  I'm not sure. I'm certainly intrigued.  I would love for it too be true, as would all rheumatologists, but why does only one rheumatologist continue to promote it.  There have been other stories of stubborn scientists with whacky ideas that have subsequently proven true, think H pylori or prions,  but why haven't we seen more evidence coming out of Boston if there are so many dramatic results.  Until rheumatologists, scientists all, see something more substantial than the Lancet study, minocycline will probably remain nothing more than a very interesting molecule.  

PS:  If anyone is aware of more data, published or not, coming from Dr Trentham's work, I'm all ears.

Comments

[Nikki]

My boyfriend was recently prescribed minocycline oral tablets to treat "en coup de sabre," Limited Scleroderma.

After his diagnosis, the first dermatologists wanted him on Methotrexate, but I read Henry Scammell's book and found out about the minocycline through that. I was thrilled when we went for a second opinion, this new dermatologist strongly believes in AP success rate.

Can anyone give me some feedback in relation to the minocycline working for limited scleroderma and also he will be on a generic form of the minocycline- has anyone had a negative experience with the generic.

Thank you in advance for your insight.

Nikki.

[Searching]

I am a 35 year old female, married and a mother of a 4 year old son. I was diagnosed with diffuse scleroderma last July, at which time I was perscribed Methotrexate. It has helped to some degree, but I am still progressing. This disease has almost taken over my hands, my skin is tight in some areas, and some of my joints are achey. there has been no organ involvement yet,thankfully. After some reading and some research, I asked my Dr. for the minocycline. He is not opposed to trying this and perscribed the pill form(100 mg bid)and has had some sucess with it in RA. My question is--will the pill form work? I need more info. Everything that I have read says that the disease needs to be caught in an early stage and I do believe that we did catch it in time. in most cases, I am well compared to others. I have high hopes and much faith in beating this awful disease. I am not a quitter and I think that is half of the battle. The mino treatment has caught my attention on several occasions and I would like to hear more about it. All information, good or bad, is greatly appreciated. Thanks, and I will be revisiting this site soon.

[tacfit warrior review]

n 1998, the medical journal The Lancet published the results of a one-year study, headed by Harvard rheumatologist David E. Trentham testing the tetracycline Minocin (minocycline) on scleroderma patients [1]. Improvement in skin scores (a measurement of hard skin caused by the disease) was noted in all patients, with no serious side effects. Although subsequent studies have not all indicated such a remarkable achievement, more clinical studies using prolonged antibiotic therapy are sorely needed.

Systemic progressive scleroderma is a potentially fatal disease recognized for over 200 years. Scleroderma is considered incurable, but there are thousands of patients who have been helped with antibiotics.

[jannah kim]

this post is really good i would definitely recommend this to friends

[Reader in Atlanta, Georgia]

Just found your blog today. Sure wish you were still blogging. Hope this AP stuff didn't drain your enthusiasm.

Love your sense of humor. Hope you'll start posting again soon.

Reader in Atlanta, Georgia

[Acne No More Review]

Can minocycline be used in the treatment of chlamydia?
I am on minocycline 100mg for acne. Just had my boyfriend test positive for chlamydia. Usually, Doxycycline is prescribed for that. I was wondering, is Minocycline just as effective as clearing it up?

[Leo Voisey]

Stem cells are “non-specialized” cells that have the potential to form into other types of specific cells, such as blood, muscles or nerves. They are unlike "differentiated" cells which have already become whatever organ or structure they are in the body. Stem cells are present throughout our body, but more abundant in a fetus.
Medical researchers and scientists believe that stem cell therapy will, in the near future, advance medicine dramatically and change the course of disease treatment. This is because stem cells have the ability to grow into any kind of cell and, if transplanted into the body, will relocate to the damaged tissue, replacing it. For example, neural cells in the spinal cord, brain, optic nerves, or other parts of the central nervous system that have been injured can be replaced by injected stem cells. Various stem cell therapies are already practiced, a popular one being bone marrow transplants that are used to treat leukemia. In theory and in fact, lifeless cells anywhere in the body, no matter what the cause of the disease or injury, can be replaced with vigorous new cells because of the remarkable plasticity of stem cells. Biomed companies predict that with all of the research activity in stem cell therapy currently being directed toward the technology, a wider range of disease types including cancer, diabetes, spinal cord injury, and even multiple sclerosis will be effectively treated in the future. Recently announced trials are now underway to study both safety and efficacy of autologous stem cell transplantation in MS patients because of promising early results from previous trials. For more information please visit http://www.neurosurgeonindia.org/

[NeallyNeeno]

U4al0Ej (?-?) ;) (*_*) :-/ On the reezie audio isht Muggin' Town Business tramadol no prescription next day [url=http://blog.lib.ecu.edu/joynerten/wp-rss.php?tramadol-no-prescription]tramadol 100mg no prescription [/url]Catch my bop Come At Me Crooked Cosigner audio Charlie Foxtrot Grapes 69 Village (·?·; XP (+o+) (*_*) tramadol no prescription R8Mo4dc