Responses

Download PDFPDF

Long term efficacy and safety of cyclosporin versus parenteral gold in early rheumatoid arthritis: a three year study of radiographic progression, renal function, and arterial hypertension
Free
Compose Response

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests

PLEASE NOTE:

  • Responses are moderated before posting and publication is at the absolute discretion of BMJ, however they are not peer-reviewed
  • Once published, you will not have the right to remove or edit your response. Removal or editing of responses is at BMJ's absolute discretion
  • If patients could recognise themselves, or anyone else could recognise a patient from your description, please obtain the patient's written consent to publication and send them to the editorial office before submitting your response [Patient consent forms]
  • By submitting this response you are agreeing to our full [Response terms and requirements]

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Published on:
    Efficacy and safety of cyclosporine-A versus parenteral gold in early rheumatoid arthritis patients

    Dear Editor

    We read with interest the article by Dr Kvien and colleagues concerning cyclosporine–A (CsA) versus parenteral gold salts (PGS) in early rheumatoid arthritis (RA).[1] The authors concluded that both drugs had similar results on radiological progression of the disease, while CsA was associated with severe side effects especially hypertension and renal function impairment. We would like to make some comme...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.