Methotrexate versus azathioprine in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. A forty-eight-week randomized, double-blind trial

Interstitial Lung Disease in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Review

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic inflammatory autoimmune disorder. Although the joints are typically the first area affected in RA, it can also involve extra-articular regions. This article provides an overview on rheumatoid arthritis-associated interstitial lung disease (RA-ILD), a component of the disease manifestations leading to significant morbidity and mortality. Managing these pulmonary symptoms in people with RA poses a number of difficulties for medical professionals. In this review article, we shed light on the prevalence of RA-ILD and the common pulmonary manifestations of RA, while focusing on the evolving pathogenesis concepts that link them to RA's autoimmune cascade. We also address the diagnostic challenges and the available screening modalities that aid in the early recognition and effective management of these pulmonary complications. Furthermore, glucocorticoids, disease-modifying antirheumatic medications, immunosuppressive medications, and biological agents are among the pharmacological approaches that have been explored in this review study.

Musculoskeletal manifestations of systemic lupus erythematosus

MSK is the most common and impactful symptom of lupus at a population level. It has a variety of different presentations, but joint swelling is often not present despite imaging-proven synovitis. Imaging with US and MRI has been shown to improve detection of inflammation and identify treatment-responsive patients. In contrast, the SLEDAI shows poor sensitivity, specificity, and responsiveness. While BILAG and SLE-DAS are superior, they are still less accurate than imaging. These issues may explain why the evidence for conventional and biologic therapies for MSK lupus is complex. In clinical practice, physicians must take care not to underestimate MSK inflammation and consider using imaging. Future research should investigate new therapeutic targets specifically for synovitis and more sensitive outcome measures and trials to evaluate them.

Monotreatment With Conventional Antirheumatic Drugs or Glucocorticoids in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Network Meta-Analysis

Importance

This is the first network meta-analysis to assess outcomes associated with multiple conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and glucocorticoid.

Objective

To analyze clinical outcomes after treatment with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and glucocorticoid among patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

Data Sources

With no time restraint, English language articles were searched in MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central, ClinicalTrials.gov, and reference lists of relevant meta-analyses until September 15, 2022.

Study Selection

Four reviewers in pairs of 2 independently included controlled studies randomizing patients with rheumatoid arthritis to mono-conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, glucocorticoid, placebo, or nonactive treatment that recorded at least 1 outcome of tender joint count, swollen joint count, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, and C-reactive protein level. Of 1098 assessed articles, 130 articles (132 interventions) were included.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

The review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses reporting guideline, and data quality was assessed by the Cochrane risk of bias tool RoB 2. Data were extracted by a single author and checked independently by 2 authors. Data were analyzed using a random effect model, and data analysis was conducted from June 2021 to February 2023.

Main Outcomes and Measures

A protocol with hypothesis and study plan was registered before data recording. The most complete of recorded outcomes (tender joint count) was used as primary outcome, with imputations based on other outcomes to obtain a full analysis of all studies. Absolute change adjusted for baseline disease activity was assessed.

Results

A total of 29 interventions in 275 treatment groups among 132 randomized clinical trials (mean [range], 71.0% [27.0% to 100%] females in studies; mean [range] of ages in studies, 53 [36 to 70] years) were identified, which included 13 260 patients with rheumatoid arthritis. The mean (range) duration of RA was 79 (2 to 243) months, and the mean (range) disease activity score was 6.3 (4.0 to 8.8). Compared with placebo, oral methotrexate was associated with a reduced tender joint count by 5.18 joints (95% credible interval [CrI], 4.07 to 6.28 joints). Compared with methotrexate, glucocorticoid (-2.54 joints; 95% CrI, -5.16 to 0.08 joints) and remaining drugs except cyclophosphamide (6.08 joints; 95% CrI, 0.44 to 11.66 joints) were associated with similar or lower tender joint counts.

Conclusions and Relevance

This study's results support the present role of methotrexate as the primary reference conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug.

Unintentional unblinding in rheumatic disease trials

The practice of blinding treatment assignment in randomised controlled trials mitigates important biases in observational studies. Unblinding, whereby study participants or investigators become aware of treatment assignments, is an important threat to the validity of trial results. Rheumatology studies might be particularly susceptible to unblinding because rheumatic disease therapies often cause high rates of idiosyncratic side-effects and frequently rely on subjective endpoints. Despite this susceptibility, the degree to which unblinding occurs in randomised controlled trials in rheumatic diseases has rarely been assessed during trials or acknowledged as a limitation. Rheumatologists should be aware of this important threat to the validity of trial results, assessments of unblinding should be undertaken, and strategies to prevent unblinding should be deployed when feasible.

Methotrexate in generalized myasthenia gravis: a systematic review

Current myasthenia gravis guidelines recommend the use of azathioprine as first-line steroid sparing agent. However, due to its high cost, compliance to azathioprine is low in developing countries. To determine the efficacy and safety of the cheaper methotrexate as an alternative immunosuppressant, Medline/Pubmed, Embase and Cochrane databases and references were searched for clinical trials and observational studies using the search terms: "Myasthenia OR Myasthenia Gravis OR anti AchR antibody positive Myasthenia Gravis OR anti-MuSK antibody Myasthenia Gravis OR MG" AND "Methotrexate". Of 78 possible articles, only 4 were selected using the following eligibility criteria: population: generalized MG patients; intervention: methotrexate; and outcome: effectiveness, steroid sparing efficacy and adverse effects. Two clinical trials and one observational study noted improvement in different MG outcomes in patients given methotrexate. While one randomized controlled clinical trial concluded that methotrexate has no steroid sparing benefit, a single blinded clinical trial established that methotrexate was a better steroid sparing agent than azathioprine starting at 10th month of use. Adverse effects were rare with non-specific pain and elevated transaminases as the most common complaints. Based on available evidence, MTX may be a safe and effective alternative to AZA as steroid sparing agent in developing countries.

Conventional, biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs and Janus kinase inhibitors and varicella zoster virus

INTRODUCTION

The advent of biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs), and more recently of Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi), has had a major impact on the herpes zoster (HZ) reactivation, which represents an important clinical challenge in the treatment of inflammatory arthritis (IA) in patients with a complete pharmacological control of peripheral inflammation.

AREAS COVERED

In this review, we provide an overview on the effects of conventional DMARDs/ bDMARDs and JAKi on HZ reactivation. Furthermore, we underline the controversial findings and the potential management strategies. We searched PubMed, Medline, and the Cochrane Library for papers published between 1995 and February 2017.

EXPERT OPINION

The overall data showed a slightly higher risk of HZ in patients treated with bDMARDs, and more pronounced for those treated with JAKi. As management strategies, we suggest an effective vaccination campaign and a focus on early diagnosis.

Interstitial Lung Disease in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Practical Review

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a systemic inflammatory disease, which primarily causes symmetric polyarthritis. An extrarticolar involvement is common, and the commonly involved organ is lungs. Although cardiac disease is responsible for most RA-related deaths, pulmonary disease is also a major contributor, accounting for ~10-20% of all mortality. Pulmonary disease is a common (60-80% of patients with RA) extra-articular complication of RA. Optimal screening, diagnostic, and treatment strategies of pulmonary disease remain uncertain, which have been the focus of an ongoing investigation. Clinicians should regularly assess patients with RA for the signs and symptoms of pulmonary disease and, reciprocally, consider RA and other connective tissue diseases when evaluating a patient with pulmonary disease of an unknown etiology. RA directly affects all anatomic compartments of the thorax, including the lung parenchyma, large and small airways, pleura, and less commonly vessels. In addition, pulmonary infection and drug-induced lung disease associated with immunosuppressive agents used for the treatment of RA may occur.

Practical guidance for the diagnosis and management of secondary hypogammaglobulinemia: A Work Group Report of the AAAAI Primary Immunodeficiency and Altered Immune Response Committees

Secondary hypogammaglobulinemia (SHG) is characterized by reduced immunoglobulin levels due to acquired causes of decreased antibody production or increased antibody loss. Clarification regarding whether the hypogammaglobulinemia is secondary or primary is important because this has implications for evaluation and management. Prior receipt of immunosuppressive medications and/or presence of conditions associated with SHG development, including protein loss syndromes, are histories that raise suspicion for SHG. In patients with these histories, a thorough investigation of potential etiologies of SHG reviewed in this report is needed to devise an effective treatment plan focused on removal of iatrogenic causes (eg, discontinuation of an offending drug) or treatment of the underlying condition (eg, management of nephrotic syndrome). When iatrogenic causes cannot be removed or underlying conditions cannot be reversed, therapeutic options are not clearly delineated but include heightened monitoring for clinical infections, supportive antimicrobials, and in some cases, immunoglobulin replacement therapy. This report serves to summarize the existing literature regarding immunosuppressive medications and populations (autoimmune, neurologic, hematologic/oncologic, pulmonary, posttransplant, protein-losing) associated with SHG and highlights key areas for future investigation.

Treatment of early rheumatoid arthritis: Methotrexate and beyond

For the last several decades, the standard of care for the initial management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has been methotrexate. Methotrexate is effective as monotherapy and in combination with conventional, biologic, and targeted-synthetic therapies. Methotrexate is generally well-tolerated, but has important, albeit uncommon, potential side-effects including a risk of liver toxicity and cytopenias. Some studies suggest that more active monitoring in patients with fatty liver disease may be appropriate. With reassuring safety data, more rapid dose escalation and use of subcutaneous therapy may provide even greater success. Some off-target benefits such as a reduction in cardiovascular disease risk have also been demonstrated, though these studies may suffer from confounding. Recent published guidelines continue to endorse methotrexate as first-line therapy. Methotrexate is a low-cost, safe, and effective therapy for RA that should not be overlooked nor too quickly abandoned.

The beneficial effect of csDMARDs co-medication on drug persistence of first-line TNF inhibitor in rheumatoid arthritis patients: data from Czech ATTRA registry

The study aimed to compare treatment retention for first-line TNF inhibitor (TNFi) in the ATTRA registry patients receiving either combination with conventional synthetic DMARDs or TNFi as monotherapy. A retrospective multicenter study analyzed data of all adult patients with rheumatoid arthritis (n = 3032) starting TNF inhibitor as the first-line biological therapy in combination with csDMARDs or in monotherapy from January 1st 2012 to December 31st 2020. Kaplan-Meier method was employed to calculate drug retentions. Survival curves of treatment retentions were compared through Log-rank test between the studied subgroups. The hazard ratio for drug discontinuation was assessed through univariate cox regression models. In patients who started the first line TNFi therapy, the median treatment retention was 47.7 (42.2; 53.1) months for combination therapy and 22.7 (14.9; 30.6) months for TNFi monotherapy (p < 0.001). Estimated one-year survival was higher in patients on TNFi combined with csDMARDs as compared with TNFi monotherapy (75.3% vs 65.7%); two-year survival rate was 63.2% vs 49.2%, three-year survival rate was 55.4% vs 42.4% and five-year survival 44.9% vs 26.4% of patients. The estimated survival on the first TNFi was higher in patients taking combination therapy with methotrexate than with other csDMARDs (p = 0.003). Use of csDMARDs co-medication was associated with significantly better first TNFi drug survival compared to monotherapy. The combination of TNFi with MTX is more effective than the combination with leflunomide, which did not demonstrate a significant effect.

A Randomized Open-Labeled Trial of Methotrexate as a Steroid-Sparing Agent for Patients With Generalized Myasthenia Gravis

Background and Purpose

Two clinical trials assessing the steroid-sparing effect of methotrexate (MTX) yielded conflicting results. Our objective was to investigate whether MTX would show a steroid-sparing effect in the treatment of generalized myasthenia gravis (MG) patients who fitted Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America (MGFA) Class II and Class III.

Methods

We performed an 18-month prospective, randomized, open-labeled trial of prednisone combined with MTX 10 mg orally every week versus prednisone alone in 40 recently diagnosed MG patients of MGFA Class II and Class III between July 2014 and July 2018. The primary endpoint was the prednisone area under the dose–time curve (AUDTC) from months 3 to 18. Secondary endpoints included changes of the Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis Score (QMG), the Myasthenia Gravis Activity of Daily Living Score (MG-ADL), initial time of prednisone reduction, the median prednisone daily dose in each month, adverse events, and treatment failures in each group.

Results

Forty participants were included; among those, 5 individuals withdrew. A total of 35 participants completed 18 months of follow-up (18 in prednisone+MTX, 17 in prednisone group). Combined use of MTX reduced the month 3–18 prednisone AUDTC (prednisone+MTX 5,663.44 ± 1,678.08 mg, prednisone 6,683.94 ± 678.08 mg, p = 0.03, 95% confidence interval -1916.01 to -124.98). The initial times of prednisone reduction were 4.34 ± 1.44 months in the prednisone+MTX group and 5.56 ± 2.05 months in the prednisone group (p = 0.04, 95% CI -2.41 to -0.03). The median daily prednisone dose was significantly lower in the prednisone+MTX group at month 6 and months 9–18. No significant differences were found in QMG and MG-ADL scores between the two groups. No serious drug-related adverse events were observed in both groups.

Conclusions

This study provides evidence that MTX has the steroid-sparing ability in generalized MG patients of MGFA Class II and Class III.

Clinical Trial Registration

http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=10563 identifier ChiCTR-IPR-15006081.

Infection risk in sarcoidosis patients treated with methotrexate compared to azathioprine: A retrospective 'target trial' emulated with Swedish real-world data

The 6‐month infection risk was 43% lower in patients with sarcoidosis who initiated methotrexate compared to those who started azathioprine. Our findings suggest that unless contraindications exist, methotrexate should be preferred over azathioprine as the primary steroid‐sparing choice in individuals with sarcoidosis.

Background and objective

No clinical trial has examined the risk of infection associated methotrexate and azathioprine, two advocated treatments for sarcoidosis. We aimed to compare the 6‐month risk of infection after the initiation of methotrexate or azathioprine.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective target trial emulation using Swedish pre‐existing data. We searched for eligible participants who were dispensed methotrexate or azathioprine in the Prescribed Drug Register (PDR) every day between January 2007 and June 2013. Adults were eligible if they had ≥2 ICD‐coded visits for sarcoidosis in the National Patient Register (NPR) and were dispensed ≥1 systemic corticosteroid but no methotrexate or azathioprine in the past 6 months (PDR). Within 6 months of methotrexate or azathioprine initiation, diagnosis of infectious disease was identified (visit in the NPR where infectious disease was the primary diagnosis). We estimated RR and risk differences comparing methotrexate (n = 667) to azathioprine initiations (n = 259) using targeted maximum likelihood estimation (TMLE) adjusting for demographic factors, comorbidity and sarcoidosis severity proxies.

Results

There were 43 infections in the methotrexate group (adjusted 6‐month risk 6.8%) and 29 infections in the azathioprine group (12.0%). The RR for infectious disease at 6 months associated with methotrexate compared to azathioprine initiation was 0.57 (95% CI: 0.39, 0.82) and the risk difference was −5.2% (95% CI: −8.5%, −1.8%). The RR at 9 months was attenuated to 0.77 (95% CI: 0.52, 1.14).

Conclusion

Methotrexate appears to be associated with a lower risk of infection in sarcoidosis than azathioprine, but randomized trials should confirm this finding.

Management issues in rheumatoid arthritis-associated interstitial lung disease

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Summarize recent evidence on the identification and management of rheumatoid arthritis-associated interstitial lung disease (RA-ILD).

RECENT FINDINGS

Clinical and subclinical interstitial lung disease (ILD) are frequent extra-articular manifestations of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Better means of identifying and treating RA-ILD are needed to improve the prognosis, with a median survival of only 3-7 years after diagnosis. Several serum biomarkers are currently being evaluated for their ability to detect RA-ILD. Thorough evaluation and multidisciplinary discussion remains the gold standard for establishing the diagnosis of RA-ILD. Management is challenging with most RA disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) linked to pneumonitis. Methotrexate is typically avoided in clinically significant ILD, although alternative therapies including leflunomide and biologic DMARDs also carry risks in RA-ILD. Antifibrotics appear to slow the progression of ILD, and a large phase II trial exclusively in RA-ILD is underway. In addition, smoking cessation, pulmonary rehabilitation, oxygen therapy, managing comorbidities, and lung transplantation evaluation are vital to improving patient outcomes in RA-ILD.

SUMMARY

With little high-quality evidence to guide the management of RA-ILD, multidisciplinary teams with expertise in RA-ILD are highly valuable for diagnosing and treating RA-ILD. Clinical and translational research in RA-ILD is needed to fill the many evidence gaps.

Anti-HLA Class II Antibodies Correlate with C-Reactive Protein Levels in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis Associated with Interstitial Lung Disease

The pathogenesis of Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) is not fully understood, probably influenced by genetic and environmental factors. Interstitial Lung Disease (ILD) is an extra-articular manifestation of RA, which contributes significantly to morbidity and mortality. The identification of anti-HLA antibodies has been useful in the transplantation field; however, its contribution to autoimmune diseases as RA has not been fully studied. We aimed to determine the presence of anti-HLA antibodies in RA patients with and without ILD and its possible association with clinical and biochemical markers. One-hundred and forty-seven RA patients, of which 65 had ILD (RA-ILD group), were included. Sera samples for Anti-HLA Class II LABScreen panel-reactive antibodies (PRA) were analyzed. In both groups, women predominated, and lung function was worse in patients with ILD. The anti-CCP+ (UI/mL) was higher in the RA group in comparison to RA-ILD (p < 0.001). Expositional risk factors (tobacco smoking and biomass-burning smoke) were higher in RA-ILD patients. PRA+ was identified in ~25% RA-ILD patients, while ~29% in the RA group. The CRP levels have a positive correlation with the percentage of reactivity (%PRA, p = 0.02, r2 = 0.60) in the RA-ILD group. In conclusion, anti-HLA antibodies correlate with C-reactive protein levels in RA patients with ILD.

Pharmacological conditioning in the treatment of recent-onset rheumatoid arthritis: a randomized controlled trial study protocol

BACKGROUND

In pharmacological conditioning associations are formed between the effects of medication and contextual factors related to the medication. Pharmacological conditioning with placebo medication can result in comparable treatment effects and reduced side effects compared to regular treatment in various clinical populations, and may be applied to achieve enhanced drug effects. In the current study protocol, pharmacological conditioning is applied to achieve enhanced treatment effects in patients with recent-onset rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The results from this study broaden the knowledge on the potential of pharmacological conditioning and provide a potential innovative treatment option to optimize long-term pharmacological treatment effectiveness for patients with inflammatory conditions, such as recent-onset RA.

METHODS

A multicenter, randomized controlled clinical trial is conducted in patients with recent-onset RA. Participants start on standardized pharmacological treatment for 16 weeks, which consists of methotrexate (MTX) 15 mg/week and a tapered schedule of prednisone 60 mg or 30 mg. After 4 months, participants in clinical remission (based on the rheumatologist's opinion and a targeted score below 1.6 on a 44-joint disease activity score (DAS44)) are randomized to 1 of 2 groups: (1) the control group (C), which continues with a standardized treatment schedule of MTX 15 mg/week or (2) the pharmacological conditioning group (PC), which receives an MTX treatment schedule in alternating high and low dosages. In the case of persistent clinical remission after 8 months, treatment is tapered and discontinued linearly in the C group and variably in the PC group. Both groups receive the same cumulative amount of MTX during each period. Logistic regression analysis is used to compare the proportion of participants with drug-free clinical remission after 12 months between the C group and the PC group. Secondary outcome measures include clinical functioning, laboratory assessments, and self-reported measures after each 4-month period up to 18 months after study start.

DISCUSSION

The results from this study broaden the knowledge on the potential of pharmacological conditioning and provide a potential innovative treatment option to optimize long-term pharmacological treatment effectiveness in patients with inflammatory conditions, such as recent-onset RA.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Netherlands Trial Register, NL5652. Registered on 3 March 2016.

Pharmacogenetics: A strategy for personalized medicine for autoimmune diseases

For many years, a considerable number of patients with autoimmune diseases (ADs) have suffered from a lack of drug response and drug-related toxicity. Despite the emergence of new therapeutic options such as biological agents, patients continue to struggle with these problems. Unfortunately, new challenges, including the paradoxical effects of biological drugs, have complicated the situation. In recent decades, efforts have been made to predict drug response as well as drug-related side effects. Thanks to the many advances in genetics, evaluation of markers to predict drug response/toxicity before the initiation of treatment may be an avenue toward personalizing treatments. Implementing pharmacogenetics and pharmacogenomics in the clinic could improve clinical care; however, obstacles remain to effective personalized medicine for ADs. The present study attempted to clarify the concept of pharmacogenetics/pharmacogenomics for ADs. After an overview on the pathogenesis of the most common types of treatments, this paper focuses on pharmacogenetic studies related to the selected ADs. Bridging the gap between pharmacogenetics and personalized medicine is also discussed. Moreover, the advantages, disadvantages and recommendations related to making personalized medicine practical for ADs have been addressed.

The Expanding Field of Secondary Antibody Deficiency: Causes, Diagnosis, and Management

Antibody deficiency or hypogammaglobulinemia can have primary or secondary etiologies. Primary antibody deficiency (PAD) is the result of intrinsic genetic defects, whereas secondary antibody deficiency may arise as a consequence of underlying conditions or medication use. On a global level, malnutrition, HIV, and malaria are major causes of secondary immunodeficiency. In this review we consider secondary antibody deficiency, for which common causes include hematological malignancies, such as chronic lymphocytic leukemia or multiple myeloma, and their treatment, protein-losing states, and side effects of a number of immunosuppressive agents and procedures involved in solid organ transplantation. Secondary antibody deficiency is not only much more common than PAD, but is also being increasingly recognized with the wider and more prolonged use of a growing list of agents targeting B cells. SAD may thus present to a broad range of specialties and is associated with an increased risk of infection. Early diagnosis and intervention is key to avoiding morbidity and mortality. Optimizing treatment requires careful clinical and laboratory assessment and may involve close monitoring of risk parameters, vaccination, antibiotic strategies, and in some patients, immunoglobulin replacement therapy (IgRT). This review discusses the rapidly evolving list of underlying causes of secondary antibody deficiency, specifically focusing on therapies targeting B cells, alongside recent advances in screening, biomarkers of risk for the development of secondary antibody deficiency, diagnosis, monitoring, and management.

Methotrexate monotherapy and methotrexate combination therapy with traditional and biologic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs for rheumatoid arthritis: A network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Methotrexate is considered the preferred disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD) for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, but controversy exists on the additional benefits and harms of combining methotrexate with other DMARDs.

OBJECTIVES

To compare methotrexate and methotrexate-based DMARD combinations for rheumatoid arthritis in patients naïve to or with an inadequate response (IR) to methotrexate.

METHODS

We systematically identified all randomised controlled trials with methotrexate monotherapy or in combination with any currently used conventional synthetic DMARD , biologic DMARDs, or tofacitinib. Three major outcomes (ACR50 response, radiographic progression and withdrawals due to adverse events) and multiple minor outcomes were evaluated. Treatment effects were summarized using Bayesian random-effects network meta-analyses, separately for methotrexate-naïve and methotrexate-IR trials. Heterogeneity was explored through meta-regression and subgroup analyses. The risk of bias of each trial was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool, and trials at high risk of bias were excluded from the main analysis. The quality of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE approach. A comparison between two treatments was considered statistically significant if its credible interval excluded the null effect, indicating >97.5% probability that one treatment was superior.

MAIN RESULTS

158 trials with over 37,000 patients were included. Methotrexate-naïve: Several treatment combinations with methotrexate were statistically superior to oral methotrexate for ACR50 response: methotrexate + sulfasalazine + hydroxychloroquine ("triple therapy"), methotrexate + several biologics (abatacept, adalimumab, etanercept, infliximab, rituximab, tocilizumab), and tofacitinib. The estimated probability of ACR50 response was similar between these treatments (range 56-67%, moderate to high quality evidence), compared with 41% for methotrexate. Methotrexate combined with adalimumab, etanercept, certolizumab, or infliximab was statistically superior to oral methotrexate for inhibiting radiographic progression (moderate to high quality evidence) but the estimated mean change over one year with all treatments was less than the minimal clinically important difference of five units on the Sharp-van der Heijde scale. Methotrexate + azathioprine had statistically more withdrawals due to adverse events than oral methotrexate, and triple therapy had statistically fewer withdrawals due to adverse events than methotrexate + infliximab (rate ratio 0.26, 95% credible interval: 0.06 to 0.91). Methotrexate-inadequate response: In patients with an inadequate response to methotrexate, several treatments were statistically significantly superior to oral methotrexate for ACR50 response: triple therapy (moderate quality evidence), methotrexate + hydroxychloroquine (low quality evidence), methotrexate + leflunomide (moderate quality evidence), methotrexate + intramuscular gold (very low quality evidence), methotrexate + most biologics (moderate to high quality evidence), and methotrexate + tofacitinib (high quality evidence). There was a 61% probability of an ACR50 response with triple therapy, compared to a range of 27% to 64% for the combinations of methotrexate + biologic DMARDs that were statistically significantly superior to oral methotrexate. No treatment was statistically significantly superior to oral methotrexate for inhibiting radiographic progression. Methotrexate + cyclosporine and methotrexate + tocilizumab (8 mg/kg) had a statistically higher rate of withdrawals due to adverse events than oral methotrexate and methotrexate + abatacept had a statistically lower rate of withdrawals due to adverse events than several treatments.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found moderate to high quality evidence that combination therapy with methotrexate + sulfasalazine+ hydroxychloroquine (triple therapy) or methotrexate + most biologic DMARDs or tofacitinib were similarly effective in controlling disease activity and generally well tolerated in methotrexate-naïve patients or after an inadequate response to methotrexate. Methotrexate + some biologic DMARDs were superior to methotrexate in preventing joint damage in methotrexate-naïve patients, but the magnitude of these effects was small over one year.

Infectious Complications With the Use of Biologic Response Modifiers in Infants and Children

Biologic response modifiers (BRMs) are substances that interact with and modify the host immune system. BRMs that dampen the immune system are used to treat conditions such as juvenile idiopathic arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, or inflammatory bowel disease and often in combination with other immunosuppressive agents, such as methotrexate and corticosteroids. Cytokines that are targeted include tumor necrosis factor α; interleukins (ILs) 6, 12, and 23; and the receptors for IL-1α (IL-1A) and IL-1β (IL-1B) as well as other molecules. Although the risk varies with the class of BRM, patients receiving immune-dampening BRMs generally are at increased risk of infection or reactivation with mycobacterial infections (Mycobacterium tuberculosis and nontuberculous mycobacteria), some viral (herpes simplex virus, varicella-zoster virus, Epstein-Barr virus, hepatitis B) and fungal (histoplasmosis, coccidioidomycosis) infections, as well as other opportunistic infections. The use of BRMs warrants careful determination of infectious risk on the basis of history (including exposure, residence, and travel and immunization history) and selected baseline screening test results. Routine immunizations should be given at least 2 weeks (inactivated or subunit vaccines) or 4 weeks (live vaccines) before initiation of BRMs whenever feasible, and inactivated influenza vaccine should be given annually. Inactivated and subunit vaccines should be given when needed while taking BRMs, but live vaccines should be avoided unless under special circumstances in consultation with an infectious diseases specialist. If the patient develops a febrile or serious respiratory illness during BRM therapy, consideration should be given to stopping the BRM while actively searching for and treating possible infectious causes.

Methotrexate for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in the biologic era: still an "anchor" drug?

The improvement of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) management has been strictly related to methotrexate (MTX) long-term effectiveness, safety profile and its widespread use in clinical practice over the last decades. According to the results of several head-to-head comparative trials against other synthetic DMARDs, MTX has been recognised as the "anchor drug" for the treatment of RA at the end of the 1990s. The subsequent increasing knowledge in the area of RA pathophysiology has progressively expanded the arsenal of available therapeutic tools, especially by the introduction of novel drugs such as biological DMARDs. The introduction of therapies targeted to key molecules and cells involved in RA pathogenesis has significantly changed the strategies for disease management, possibly modifying the key role of MTX. This review first analyses data supporting the evolution of MTX towards the role of "anchor drug" for RA in the pre-biologic era. We will then examine how the introduction and progressive spreading of biological agents could have modified the central role of MTX in the approach to RA.

Treatment comparison in rheumatoid arthritis: head-to-head trials and innovative study designs

Over the last decades, the increasing knowledge in the area of rheumatoid arthritis has progressively expanded the arsenal of available drugs, especially with the introduction of novel targeted therapies such as biological disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). In this situation, rheumatologists are offered a wide range of treatment options, but on the other side the need for comparisons between available drugs becomes more and more crucial in order to better define the strategies for the choice and the optimal sequencing. Indirect comparisons or meta-analyses of data coming from different randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are not immune to conceptual and technical challenges and often provide inconsistent results. In this review we examine some of the possible evolutions of traditional RCTs, such as the inclusion of active comparators, aimed at individualising treatments in real-life conditions. Although head-to-head RCTs may be considered the best tool to directly compare the efficacy and safety of two different DMARDs, surprisingly only 20 studies with such design have been published in the last 25 years. Given the recent advent of the first RCTs truly comparing biological DMARDs, we also review the state of the art of head-to-head trials in RA.

Changing incidence of orthopedic surgery in rheumatic disease: contributing factors

Rheumatic diseases are multisystem conditions that predominantly affect the musculoskeletal system, leading to soft tissue and articular damage. Historically, medical therapy was able to slow, but not prevent, erosion and joint destruction, resulting in the frequent need for orthopedic procedures to maintain function and minimize pain. However, the widespread use of disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and biologic therapy over the last twenty years has resulted in a dramatic decrease in the incidence of musculoskeletal damage and impairment among these patients. This review will discuss changing patterns of orthopedic surgery among patients with rheumatic diseases, focusing on rheumatoid arthritis and systemic lupus erythematosus.

Immunosuppression for Mooren's ulcer: evaluation of the stepladder approach--topical, oral and intravenous immunosuppressive agents

AIM

To evaluate a step ladder approach for immunosuppressive regimen for Mooren's ulcer.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We retrospectively analysed patients of Mooren's ulcer presenting to a tertiary care centre in south India from 1987 to 2010. Patients were analysed for the age, disease severity at time of presentation in terms of the quadrants of peripheral corneal involvement and amount of peripheral corneal thinning. According to the disease severity, patients were instituted either topical steroids (prednisolone acetate 1%) single agent or in combination with oral steroids (prednisolone 1-1.5 mg/kg/day), oral immunomodulators (methotrexate 7.5-12.5 mg/week), intravenous pulsed methyl prednisolone 1 g or pulsed cyclophosphamide 1 g. The main outcome measure was control of disease activity.

RESULTS

Topical steroids as a single therapy had a disease resolution rate in 76% of the cases. Cases that required oral steroids, oral methotrexate, intravenous pulsed methyl prednisolone and combination of pulsed methyl prednisolone and cyclophosphamide had a resolution rate of 86%, 78.5%, 71.4% and 73.3%, respectively. The most common complication was secondary infection. Most of the cases that failed therapy had perforation of the cornea and required corneal transplantation.

CONCLUSIONS

An aggressive immunosuppressive regimen that is tailor made based on disease severity as a first line of therapy improves the chances of disease control even in cases of aggressive Mooren's ulcer.

Methotrexate: optimizing the efficacy in rheumatoid arthritis

Methotrexate (MTX) is currently the most frequently used drugs in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The drug had been synthesized in 1948 and first tests to treat patients with psoriasis and RA were published in 1951. However, until the 1980s there was only limited use of MTX in the treatment of RA. Since the 1990s MTX is the disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) of first choice for the treatment of RA in most countries worldwide. By definition, DMARDs in RA are those compounds for which an inhibiting effect on radiographic progression has been demonstrated. Several combinations of DMARDs have been tested, most commonly with MTX as the anchor drug. Regarding the route of administration of MTX there is some evidence that the parenteral route, most often performed subcutaneously, has some additional benefits over the oral route. In MTX monotherapy, dosages up to 30 mg/week are now used. There are now three main combinations that are playing an important role: MTX + sulfasalazine (SSZ) + hydroxychloroquine, MTX + leflunomide (LEF), and MTX + biologics such as antitumour necrosis factor (anti-TNF) and other new compounds which block the interleukin 6 (IL6) receptor or T-cell activation and delete B cells. Regarding clinical efficacy, MTX monotherapy has performed almost similarly well in comparison with biologic mono-therapy, both usually combined with glucocorticoids. However, structural damage is usually inhibited to a significantly greater degree with the biologics. The combination of MTX with biologics has proven superior to either agent alone in all aspects. Current strategic regimens which concentrate on systematic ways to bring patients into remission all include MTX as first choice.

Corticosteroid-sparing therapy: practice patterns among uveitis specialists

Purpose

This study aims to determine uveitis specialists’ practice patterns, preferences, and perceptions of corticosteroid-sparing therapies for the initial treatment of chronic noninfectious uveitis.

Methods

A survey was distributed to the American Uveitis Society and Proctor email listservs in order to restrict the respondents to specialists who likely have extensive experience in the use of immunomodulatory therapy. Topics included effectiveness, usage, and preferences related to seven immunomodulatory treatments.

Results

Among the 45 responders, the majority (59%) had greater than 10 years of experience treating uveitis. Methotrexate was the most commonly used initial therapy for anterior, intermediate, and posterior/panuveitis (85%, 57%, and 37%), and the most preferred for anterior (55%). Mycophenolate mofetil was the most preferred for intermediate (35%) and posterior/panuveitis (42%). Primary reasons not to prescribe a treatment were effectiveness for azathioprine, safety/tolerability for cyclosporine and cyclophosphamide, and a mixture of cost, safety/tolerability, and difficulty of administration for the biologic drugs.

Conclusions

Within the group of highly experienced uveitis specialists, methotrexate is still the most commonly used initial treatment. Although newer biologic drugs are seen as effective, they are not commonly used, or even preferred, as initial corticosteroid-sparing treatment.

A single-blinded trial of methotrexate versus azathioprine as steroid-sparing agents in generalized myasthenia gravis

Background

Long-term immunosuppression is often required in myasthenia gravis (MG). There are no published trials using methotrexate (MTX) in MG. The steroid-sparing efficacy of azathioprine (AZA) has been demonstrated after 18-months of starting therapy. However, AZA is considered expensive in Africa. We evaluated the steroid-sparing efficacy of MTX (17.5 mg weekly) compared with AZA (2.5 mg/kg daily) in subjects recently diagnosed with generalized MG by assessing their average monthly prednisone requirements.

Methods

The primary outcome was the average daily prednisone requirement by month between the two groups. Prednisone was given at the lowest dose to manage MG symptoms and adjusted as required according to protocol. Single-blinded assessments were performed 3-monthly for 2-years to determine the quantitative MG score and the MG activities of daily living score in order to determine those with minimal manifestations of MG.

Results

Thirty-one subjects (AZA n = 15; MTX n = 16) satisfied the inclusion criteria but only 24 were randomized. Baseline characteristics were similar. There was no difference between the AZA- and MTX-groups in respect of prednisone dosing (apart from months 10 and 12), in quantitative MG Score improvement, proportions in sustained remission, frequencies of MG relapses, or adverse reactions and/or withdrawals. The MTX-group received lower prednisone doses between month 10 (p = 0.047) and month 12 (p = 0.039). At month 12 the prednisone dose per kilogram bodyweight in the MTX-group (0.15 mg/kg) was half that of the AZA-group (0.31 mg/kg)(p = 0.019).

Conclusions

This study provides evidence that in patients with generalized MG methotrexate is an effective steroid-sparing agent 10 months after treatment initiation. Our data suggests that in generalized MG methotrexate has similar efficacy and tolerability to azathioprine and may be the drug of choice in financially constrained health systems.

Trial registration

SANCTR:DOH-27-0411-2436

Effectiveness of concomitant immunosuppressive therapy in suppressing the formation of antibodies to infliximab in Crohn's disease

BACKGROUND

Episodic infliximab (IFX) treatment is associated with the formation of antibodies to IFX (ATIs) in the majority of patients, which can lead to infusion reactions and a shorter duration of response. Concomitant use of immunosuppressives (IS) reduces the risk of ATI formation.

AIMS AND METHODS

To investigate which of the IS-that is, methotrexate (MTX) or azathioprine (AZA)-is most effective at reducing the risk of ATI formation, a multicentre cohort of 174 patients with Crohn's disease, treated with IFX in an on-demand schedule, was prospectively studied. Three groups were studied: no IS (n = 59), concomitant MTX (n = 50) and concomitant AZA (n = 65). ATI and IFX concentrations were measured in a blinded manner at Prometheus Laboratories before and 4 weeks after each infusion.

RESULTS

ATIs were detected in 55% (96/174) of the patients. The concomitant use of IS therapy (AZA or MTX) was associated with a lower incidence of ATIs (53/115; 46%) compared with patients not taking concomitant IS therapy (43/59; 73%; p<0.001). The incidence of ATIs was not different for the MTX group (44%) compared with the AZA group (48%). Patients not taking IS therapy had lower IFX levels (median 2.42 microg/ml (interquartile range (IQR) 1-10.8), maximum 21 microg/ml) 4 weeks after any follow-up infusion than patients taking concomitant IS therapy (median 6.45 microg/ml (IQR 3-11.6), maximum 21 microg/ml; p = 0.065), but there was no difference between MTX or AZA. In patients who developed significant ATIs >8 microg/ml during follow-up, the IFX levels 4 weeks after the first infusion were retrospectively found to be significantly lower than in patients who did not develop ATIs on follow-up or had inconclusive ATIs.

CONCLUSION

Concomitant IS therapy reduces ATI formation associated with IFX treatment and improves the pharmacokinetics of IFX. There is no difference between MTX and AZA in reducing these risks. ATI profoundly influences the pharmacokinetics of IFX. The formation of ATIs >8 microg/ml is associated with lower serum levels of IFX already at 4 weeks after its first administration.

Methotrexate and Hepatic Toxicity in??Rheumatoid Arthritis and Psoriatic Arthritis

BACKGROUND

We set out in this study to demonstrate the adverse effect profile of methotrexate when used in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) in a district general hospital population, and to investigate the effect of alcohol consumption in these patients.

METHODS

A prospective evaluation of 550 RA patients and 69 PsA patients was undertaken, controlling for confounding factors. Systematically randomised patients were further analysed regarding alcohol consumption. A transaminase level of three times the upper limit of normal on two or more occasions was taken to indicate hepatic injury.

RESULTS

Gastrointestinal disturbance was the predominant adverse effect in RA patients (9.8%); hepatic disturbance was the most frequent in PsA patients (14.5%). Both groups had hepatic enzyme elevation; PsA patients were at significantly greater risk of elevated transaminases than RA patients (14.5% vs 7.5%, respectively, chi2 = 4.017). Alcohol consumption did not correlate with hepatic injury (mean 5.15 vs 6.6 alcohol units/week consumed by RA and PsA patients, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Our data show methotrexate-treated PsA patients have a higher incidence of hepatotoxicity compared with methotrexate-treated patients with RA. It is proposed that psoriatic patients may be inherently more susceptible to methotrexate hepatotoxicity than are rheumatoid patients.

Does safety make a difference in selecting the right TNF antagonist?

Tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists are biologic response modifiers that have significantly improved the outcomes in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). At this report, safety data were collected on approximately 271,000 patients administered infliximab (as of February 2002), 121,000 patients administered etanercept (as of December 2001), and on 2400 patients who received adalimumab in trials in connection with the regulatory approval process (approval granted December 2002 in the US and September 2003 in European Union). Infliximab and etanercept have predictable and manageable safety profiles, and preliminary data suggest that the profile of adalimumab is comparable. Safety issues involving the anti-TNF agents as a class include the risk of injection-site reactions or infusion-related reactions, infection (for example, serious, opportunistic, or tubercular), malignancy, autoimmunity, and demyelinating and neurologic disorders. Injection-site and infusion-related reactions are most often easily managed and rarely lead to discontinuation of therapy. Infections can be minimized or prevented by screening and careful monitoring and follow-up; most infections respond to appropriate medical treatment. More studies are needed to evaluate the occurrence of malignancies in patients with RA to determine the potential risk posed by therapy. Antibody formation can follow the administration of any biologic agent. Although demyelinating disease has been reported with anti-TNF agents, it is not clear whether a causal relationship exists. Overall, the anti-TNF agents are well tolerated and have demonstrated a favorable benefit-to-risk profile in patients with RA.

Pharmacological treatment of established rheumatoid arthritis

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic, inflammatory condition of unknown aetiology that affects about 1% of the general population. Although the optimal care of RA patients requires various modalities, pharmacotherapy remains the cornerstone of treatment for established RA. The current therapeutic model encourages a step-up approach that safely incorporates several currently available classes of agents: non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors, glucocorticoids, disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs, and biological agents (tumour necrosis factor-alpha inhibitors and interleukin-1 receptor antagonist). Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors and glucocorticoids, which offer a quick onset of symptom relief, are used mainly as adjunctive therapies. Disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs and biologicals have been successful in altering disease outcome and slowing radiographic progression. The indications, efficacy and safety of these agents in clinical trials and practice are reviewed in this chapter.

Pharmacoeconomics of long-term treatment of rheumatoid arthritis

Rheumatoid arthritis affects ~ 1% of the population. It is associated with pain, deformity, decreased quality of life and disability that in turn affects patients' ability to work. A variety of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs are available to control the disease activity of rheumatoid arthritis. The goal of treatment is to improve patients' quality of life and prevent joint destruction. This paper reviews both the clinical aspects of frequently prescribed disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and the available cost-effectiveness information. Clinical evidence supports the effectiveness of methotrexate, etanercept, infliximab, gold, hydroxychloroquine, leflunomide, sulfasalazine, penicillamine, cyclosporin, azathioprine and corticosteroids. The last four of these are associated with greater toxicity and are only used if less toxic drugs are ineffective. The lack of published economic evaluations of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs highlights the need for such studies to allow efficacious and cost-effective drugs to be used to prevent the long-term complications of uncontrolled rheumatoid arthritis.

Unwillingness of rheumatoid arthritis patients to risk adverse effects

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate patient willingness to accept the risk of adverse effects (AEs) commonly associated with arthritis medications.

METHODS

Rheumatoid arthritis patients were asked to rate their willingness to take a medication associated with 17 specific AEs using a visual analogue scale.

RESULTS

We interviewed 100 patients. Eighty-one were currently using one or more disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and 29 had previously experienced AEs related to DMARDs. Seventy-five stated that they were doing very well or well with respect to their arthritis compared with other people their age. Thirty-five per cent of those interviewed were unwilling to accept the risk of cosmetic changes, 38% were unwilling to accept the risk of temporary discomfort and 45% were unwilling to accept the risk of major toxicity. Patients who had previously experienced AEs were more willing to accept the risk of cosmetic changes (83 vs. 58%, P=0.02), temporary discomfort (79 vs. 55%, P=0.02) and major toxicity (83 vs. 44%, P=0.001) compared with those who had not previously experienced AEs.

CONCLUSIONS

Many rheumatoid arthritis patients are very concerned about potential drug toxicity. However, risk adversity appeared to be attenuated by past experience with AEs. Our results suggest that certain patients, especially those with milder disease activity, might be reluctant to accept commonly used arthritis medications if they are fully informed of their potential toxicity.

A clinical and economic review of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs

Rheumatoid arthritis is one of the most common chronic systemic inflammatory diseases, affecting approximately 1% of the adult population. Disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) have been the mainstay of treatment for rheumatoid arthritis when combined with physical therapy and aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid) or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Recently, a number of new biological therapies have been introduced for the treatment of this condition and will have a major impact on the future management of this disabling disease. In this review, we summarise data on the efficacy and tolerability of the currently available DMARDs, including gold compounds, antimalarials, penicillamine, cytotoxic drugs (azathioprine and cyclophosphamide), sulfasalazine, methotrexate, leflunomide, cyclosporin, anti-tumour necrosis factor agents, combination therapy and apheresis. A literature review and quality assessment of economic evaluations of DMARDs is presented, illustrating that there has been a paucity of economic evaluations on these agents and showing the variable quality of those studies that are available. The manuscript also addresses the pharmacoeconomic implications of the new agents for rheumatoid arthritis; the need for formal long term economic evaluations in order to determine the cost effectiveness of these costly, but highly effective, new treatments is emphasised.

Responsiveness of the core set, response criteria, and utilities in early rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVE

Validation of responsiveness and discriminative power of the World Health Organisation/International League of Associations for Rheumatology (WHO/ILAR) core set, the American College of Rheumatology (ACR), and European League for Rheumatology (EULAR) criteria for improvement/response, and other single and combined measures (indices) in a trial in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

Ranking of measures by response (standardised response means and effect sizes) and between-group discrimination (unpaired t test and chi(2) values) at two time points in the COBRA study. This study included 155 patients with early RA randomly allocated to two treatment groups with distinct levels of expected response: combined treatment, high response; sulfasalazine treatment, moderate response.

RESULTS

At week 16, standardised response means of core set measures ranged between 0.8 and 3.5 for combined treatment and between 0.4 and 1.2 for sulfasalazine treatment (95% confidence interval +/-0.25). Performance of patient oriented measures (for example, pain, global assessment) was best when the questions were focused on the disease. The most responsive single measure was the patient's assessment of change in disease activity, at 3.5. Patient utility, a generic health status measure, was moderately (rating scale) to poorly (standard gamble) responsive. Response means of most indices (combined measures) exceeded 2.0, the simple count of core set measures improved by 20% was most responsive at 4.1. Discrimination performance yielded similar but not identical results: best discrimination between treatment groups was achieved by the EULAR response and ACR improvement criteria (at 20% and other percentage levels), the pooled index, and the disease activity score (DAS), but also by the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) and grip strength.

CONCLUSIONS

Responsiveness and discrimination between levels of response are not identical concepts, and need separate study. The WHO/ILAR core set comprises responsive measures that discriminate well between different levels of response in early RA. However, the performance of patient oriented measures is highly dependent on their format. The excellent performance of indices such as the ACR improvement and EULAR response criteria confirms that they are the preferred primary end point in RA clinical trials.

A comparison of etanercept and methotrexate in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis

BACKGROUND

Etanercept, which blocks the action of tumor necrosis factor, reduces disease activity in patients with long-standing rheumatoid arthritis. Its efficacy in reducing disease activity and preventing joint damage in patients with active early rheumatoid arthritis is unknown.

METHODS

We treated 632 patients with early rheumatoid arthritis with either twice-weekly subcutaneous etanercept (10 or 25 mg) or weekly oral methotrexate (mean, 19 mg per week) for 12 months. Clinical response was defined as the percent improvement in disease activity according to the criteria of the American College of Rheumatology. Bone erosion and joint-space narrowing were measured radiographically and scored with use of the Sharp scale. On this scale, an increase of 1 point represents one new erosion or minimal narrowing.

RESULTS

As compared with patients who received methotrexate, patients who received the 25-mg dose of etanercept had a more rapid rate of improvement, with significantly more patients having 20 percent, 50 percent, and 70 percent improvement in disease activity during the first six months (P<0.05). The mean increase in the erosion score during the first 6 months was 0.30 in the group assigned to receive 25 mg of etanercept and 0.68 in the methotrexate group (P= 0.001), and the respective increases during the first 12 months were 0.47 and 1.03 (P=0.002). Among patients who received the 25-mg dose of etanercept, 72 percent had no increase in the erosion score, as compared with 60 percent of patients in the methotrexate group (P=0.007). This group of patients also had fewer adverse events (P=0.02) and fewer infections (P= 0.006) than the group that was treated with methotrexate.

CONCLUSIONS

As compared with oral methotrexate, subcutaneous [corrected] etanercept acted more rapidly to decrease symptoms and slow joint damage in patients with early active rheumatoid arthritis.

Reduced thiopurine methyltransferase activity and development of side effects of azathioprine treatment in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate thiopurine enzyme activities for their possible value in predicting the development of azathioprine (AZA)-related toxicity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

Patients with longstanding RA (n = 33) were enrolled in a study of treatment with AZA. Before the initiation of AZA treatment and at months 1 and 6 of treatment, we measured activities of the purine key enzymes hypoxanthine guanine phosphoribosyltransferase, 5'-nucleotidase, purine nucleoside phosphorylase, and thiopurine methyltransferase (TPMT). Controls included patients with early RA (n = 24) and healthy volunteers (n = 42).

RESULTS

Fourteen of the 33 patients rapidly developed severe side effects, most frequently gastrointestinal (GI) intolerance. Compared with the other groups, the group with adverse effects had significantly lower TPMT activities (P = 0.004). Seven of 8 patients with reduced ("intermediate") baseline TPMT levels developed toxicity, resulting in a significant relationship (P = 0.005) between toxicity and "intermediate" TPMT activity. Compared with "high" activity, baseline intermediate TPMT activity gave a relative risk of 3.1 (95% confidence interval 1.6-6.2) for the development of severe toxicity with AZA treatment.

CONCLUSION

In RA patients, inherited intermediate TPMT activity seems predictive for the development of severe side effects of AZA. Clinicians should consider measuring TPMT prior to treatment initiation to improve the safety of AZA use. We hypothesize that GI intolerance may also be related to a thiopurine metabolic imbalance.

Methotrexate in rheumatoid arthritis: an update with focus on mechanisms involved in toxicity

OBJECTIVES

To provide an update of the current knowledge of the mechanism of action of low-dose methotrexate (MTX) in the treatment of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), with an emphasis on the mechanisms involved in toxicity. We also considered strategies currently used to prevent or decrease toxicity of MTX.

METHODS

We reviewed the literature dealing with the subjects of MTX treatment of RA, the mechanisms of action of low-dose MTX regarding efficacy and toxicity, and strategies used to prevent or decrease MTX toxicity.

RESULTS

MTX is a fast working and effective second-line antirheumatic agent (SLA). Its use is limited mainly because of side effects. The mechanisms of action regarding efficacy and toxicity are probably determined by different metabolic pathways. Recent data indicate that the antiinflammatory effect of MTX is mediated by adenosine. However, MTX side effects can only partly be explained by folate antagonism and may also depend on its action on other related metabolic pathways. The latter include the homocysteine-methionine-polyamine pathway and purine metabolism. Variants in these metabolic routes (ie, the C677T mutation in the methylene-tetrahydrofolate reductase [MTHFR] gene), may predispose to the development of side effects. Currently the most promising strategy to decrease or prevent toxicity of MTX is concomitant prescription of folic acid or folinic acid. Other strategies are currently under investigation.

CONCLUSIONS

MTX benefits a majority of RA patients. Approximately 30% of patients, however, abandon treatment because of drug-related side effects. Folic acid or folinic acid likely reduces MTX toxicity. More data, however, are needed to evaluate a potential detrimental effect on the antirheumatic efficacy of MTX.

Steroid-sparing alternative treatments for sarcoidosis

Alternatives to corticosteroids for the treatment of sarcoidosis are reviewed. These include cytotoxic agents such as methotrexate, azathioprine, and cyclophosphamide. In addition, agents such as hydroxychloroquine and cyclosporine are reviewed. The efficacy, toxicity, and timing of these drugs in the management of sarcoidosis is discussed.

Pulmonary function in patients receiving long-term low-dose methotrexate

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Acute interstitial pneumonitis is the main pulmonary side effect during methotrexate (MTX) treatment for rheumatoid arthritis. The aim of the study was to determine the following: (1) the incidence of MTX-induced pneumonitis during low-dose long-term MTX treatment for chronic arthritis; (2) whether periodic pulmonary function tests were useful for detecting MTX pneumonitis before clinical symptoms; and (3) whether any subclinical abnormality of pulmonary function was present in asymptomatic patients receiving MTX treatment.

DESIGN

Pulmonary function tests, including diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide (DCO) measurements, were performed in 124 patients receiving low-dose MTX for rheumatologic diseases at the time of initiating treatment, and then at 3 months, 6 months, and at 6-month intervals thereafter. Mean duration of treatment was 23 months.

RESULTS

MTX treatment was interrupted in six patients for acute onset of clinical symptoms; criteria for diagnosis of MTX pneumonitis were fullfilled in four cases (incidence: 3.2%); no risk factor could be identified. No significant decrease in pulmonary function parameters could be observed before the onset of clinical symptoms of MTX pneumonitis, and this adverse effect could not be predicted by periodic function tests. A statistically significant decrease was found in FVC (-2.2%, p=0.04), FEV1 (-5.0%, p<0.001), and diffusing capacity per alveolar volume, DCO/VA (-4.8%, p=0.03), but not DCO (-1.3%, p>0.05), in the 118 other asymptomatic patients during MTX treatment.

CONCLUSION

We found minor subclinical alterations in pulmonary function in asymptomatic patients receiving low-dose long-term MTX treatment, but periodic pulmonary function tests did not allow us to detect MTX-induced pneumonitis before clinical symptoms. Therefore, we recommend that these tests should not be systematically performed while patients are receiving treatment.

Health status response of rheumatoid arthritis to treatment with DAB486IL-2

OBJECTIVE

To examine and compare health status and disease activity changes in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in a clinical trial of the biologic agent DAB486IL-2.

METHODS

Data on 45 patients with RA who were enrolled in a multicourse, double-blind trial, consisting of a first, placebo-controlled, course followed by open-label treatment with the active agent to a total of 3 active courses, were examined for evidence of improvement in health status (measured using the 5 components of the Arthritis Impact Measurement Scales 2 [AIMS2]) and disease activity (measured using standard clinical measures and erythrocyte sedimentation rate).

RESULTS

Over a single course of treatment, DAB486IL-2-treated patients showed significant improvement relative to placebo-treated patients on the symptom and social components of AIMS2 and in patient's assessment of disease activity. With subsequent open-label courses of treatment with DAB486IL-2, all 5 AIMS2 health status components and the disease activity measures of tender and swollen joint counts, grip strength, and the observer and patient assessments showed steady and generally parallel improvement.

CONCLUSION

Short-term health status effects of this biologic agent were detected using the AIMS2.

Problems and suggested solutions in creating an archive of clinical trials data to permit later meta-analysis: an example of methotrexate trials in rheumatoid arthritis

Because data archives contain patient-based rather than study-based data, they can address meta-analytic questions on uncommon outcomes and on predefined patient subsets, questions that are difficult to address using the traditional meta-analytic approach based on grouped data. We report the tasks involved in establishing the first data archive of rheumatoid arthritis trials. In general, problems stem from the heterogeneity of trials in the archive and we suggest some solutions. In the initial phases, difficulties include recruitment and incomplete participation of trial investigators, whereas later on, other issues arise, such as quality control, coping with different dataset designs, and incomplete documentation. Other issues include heterogeneous measures, missing variables, and comparing data across different visit intervals and trial lengths. Suggested solutions include requesting trial data in predefined archive-wide structures and asking for all possible documentation for each dataset. Data cleaning is necessary, as is rescaling of variables or developing unit-free outcomes, and estimating data for missing variables. Archive design should allow for referencing a patient's data among various datasets. Although one goal is to reduce the quantity of data in the archive while retaining information content, data from early stages of archive building must be accessible for developing new analysis datasets. Documentation of archive building and software choices are discussed. Our experience suggests data archiving for meta-analysis is time consuming and expensive, yet it provides a useful method for analyzing data from multiple trials.

Infections during low-dose methotrexate treatment in rheumatoid arthritis

We studied the infection rate in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treated with low-dose methotrexate (MTX) in a 6-year open prospective study and in a 12-month randomized double blind trial comparing MTX with azathioprine (AZA) that was followed by a 3-year open prospective study. The literature on infections during low dose MTX in RA was reviewed. We also did a search for therapy-related opportunistic infections in RA and in MTX-treated psoriasis and psoriatic arthropathy patients. In our studies the infection rate during MTX treatment was higher in severe RA than in moderate RA. In severe RA there were often 2 infections simultaneously. The majority of the infections occurred in the first 1.5 years of treatment. There was no difference in the infection rate of MTX and AZA in the comparative trial. In the literature the infection rate was highest in short-term double-blind studies. Opportunistic infections are increasingly reported in RA treated with MTX and rarely with AZA, cyclosporine A, and cyclophosphamide or in MTX treated psoriasis and psoriatic arthropathy. In RA it appears that the initial period of treatment with MTX is the most vulnerable phase for infections, with the exception of opportunistic infections, which are not limited to a certain treatment period. Probably there are more MTX-associated infections in severe RA than in moderate RA.

Advances and issues in the pharmacotherapy of rheumatoid arthritis

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is an unremitting and progressive disease despite the use of second-line drugs in the majority of patients. In addition, a shortened life-span directly attributable to RA is now recognized. The additions of methotrexate and sulfasalazine to the therapeutic armamentarium represent important treatment advances during the past decade. To improve the effectiveness of second-line drug therapy, earlier intervention and use of these newer drugs in combination with older second-line drugs is being advocated. Several proposed strategies for intervening earlier, combining second-line drugs, and/or improving patient selection for second-line drug therapy are reviewed. Systematic evaluation of these strategies is needed. Controlled studies to date have not demonstrated combining second-line drugs is superior to using individual second-line agents. Future advances in optimizing patient outcomes with these drugs will require systematic screening for potentially superior treatment strategies followed by supportive proof of effectiveness in the form of large-scale studies.

Pulmonary involvement in rheumatoid arthritis

Pulmonary involvement is one of the extra-articular manifestations of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and includes pleurisy, parenchymal nodules, interstitial involvement, and airway disease. Rheumatoid pulmonary vasculitis is rare. Pulmonary disease also may be observed as a toxic event consequent to treatment for RA. Although RA is more common in women, rheumatoid lung disease occurs more frequently in men who have long-standing rheumatoid disease, positive rheumatoid factor and subcutaneous nodules. Pleural involvement, usually asymptomatic, is the most common manifestation of lung disease in RA and may occur concurrently with pulmonary nodulosis or interstitial disease. The clinical features and course of pulmonary fibrosis in RA are similar to those of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Bronchiolitis obliterans organizing pneumonia (BOOP), which has been recently described in RA patients, has nonspecific clinical features. The histological patterns correspond to proliferative bronchiolitis in the airway and organizing pneumonia in the alveoli. Obstructive lung disease in RA includes obliterative bronchiolitis (OB) and bronchiectasis. OB is an acute illness characterized histologically by a constrictive bronchiolitis. It may be idiopathic or induced by D-penicillamine or intramuscular gold compounds. Methotrexate (MTX)-pneumonitis is an uncommon complication of MTX treatment. Its clinical presentation is not specific, and diagnosis must be made after exclusion of other causes of pulmonary diseases. It is uncertain if preexisting lung disease predisposes RA patients to MTX-pneumonitis. Treatment of lung disease in RA is empirical. Corticosteroids are usually administered and immunosuppressive drugs are often added when pulmonary disease progresses and/or steroid side-effects appear.