OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a strategy based on methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR) genotype screening is more cost-effective than the conventional strategy in reducing the risk of methotrexate (MTX)-related toxicity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: We consecutively enrolled 385 patients with RA (355 female, 30 male) who had received MTX and identified toxicity associated with MTHFR C677T genotypes. We designed a hypothetical decision model to compare the genotype-based strategy with the conventional strategy. The time horizon was set as 1 year, and direct medical costs were used. The measured outcomes were the total expected cost, the effectiveness, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. RESULTS: MTHFR genotype distribution revealed 133 patients (34.6%) with 677CC, 193 (50.1%) with 677CT, and 59 (15.3%) with 677TT. A total of 154 patients (40.0%) exhibited MTX-related toxicity. Compared to RA patients with the CC genotype, the odds ratio (95% confidence interval) for risk of toxicity was 3.8 (2.29-6.33) for the CT genotype, and 4.7 (2.40-9.04) for the TT genotype. In the base-case model, the total expected cost and the probability of continuing MTX medication for the conventional and genotype-based strategies were 851,415 Korean won (710 US dollars) and 788,664 Korean won (658 US dollars), and 94.03% and 95.58%, respectively. CONCLUSION: The MTHFR C677T polymorphism may be an important predictor of MTX-related toxicity in patients with RA. The cost-effectiveness analysis suggests that the genotype-based strategy is both less costly and more effective than the conventional strategy for MTX therapy.
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a strategy based on methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR) genotype screening is more cost-effective than the conventional strategy in reducing the risk of methotrexate (MTX)-related toxicity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: We consecutively enrolled 385 patients with RA (355 female, 30 male) who had received MTX and identified toxicity associated with MTHFRC677T genotypes. We designed a hypothetical decision model to compare the genotype-based strategy with the conventional strategy. The time horizon was set as 1 year, and direct medical costs were used. The measured outcomes were the total expected cost, the effectiveness, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. RESULTS:MTHFR genotype distribution revealed 133 patients (34.6%) with 677CC, 193 (50.1%) with 677CT, and 59 (15.3%) with 677TT. A total of 154 patients (40.0%) exhibited MTX-related toxicity. Compared to RApatients with the CC genotype, the odds ratio (95% confidence interval) for risk of toxicity was 3.8 (2.29-6.33) for the CT genotype, and 4.7 (2.40-9.04) for the TT genotype. In the base-case model, the total expected cost and the probability of continuing MTX medication for the conventional and genotype-based strategies were 851,415 Korean won (710 US dollars) and 788,664 Korean won (658 US dollars), and 94.03% and 95.58%, respectively. CONCLUSION: The MTHFRC677T polymorphism may be an important predictor of MTX-related toxicity in patients with RA. The cost-effectiveness analysis suggests that the genotype-based strategy is both less costly and more effective than the conventional strategy for MTX therapy.