Glen S Hazlewood1, J Carter Thorne2, Janet E Pope3, Daming Lin4, Diane Tin2, Gilles Boire5, Boulos Haraoui6, Carol A Hitchon7, Edward C Keystone4, Shahin Jamal8, Vivian P Bykerk9. 1. Institute of Health, Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada Department of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada McCaig Institute for Bone and Joint Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. 2. Southlake Regional Health Centre, Newmarket, Ontario, Canada. 3. Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada. 4. Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 5. Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke (CHUS), Sherbrooke University, Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada. 6. University of Montreal Hospital Research Centre (CRCHUM), Montreal, Quebec, Canada. 7. University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada. 8. University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. 9. Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, New York, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the comparative effectiveness of oral versus subcutaneous methotrexate (MTX) as initial therapy for patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (ERA). METHODS: Patients with ERA (symptoms ≤1 year) initiating MTX therapy were included from a multicentre, prospective cohort study. We compared the effectiveness between starting with oral versus subcutaneous MTX over the first year. Longitudinal multivariable models, adjusted for potential baseline and time-varying confounders, were used to compare treatment changes due to inefficacy or toxicity and treatment efficacy (Disease Activity Score-28 (DAS-28), DAS-28 remission and Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI)). RESULTS: 666 patients were included (417 oral MTX, 249 subcutaneous MTX). Patients prescribed subcutaneous MTX were prescribed a higher dose of MTX (mean dose over first three months 22.3 mg vs 17.2 mg/week). At 1 year, 49% of patients initially treated with subcutaneous MTX had changed treatment compared with 77% treated with oral MTX. After adjusting for potential confounders, subcutaneous MTX was associated with a lower rate of treatment failure ((HR (95% CI) 0.55 (0.39 to 0.79)). Most treatment failures were due to inefficacy with no difference in failure due to toxicity. In multivariable models, subcutaneous MTX was also associated with lower average DAS-28 scores (mean difference (-0.38 (95% CI -0.64 to -0.10)) and a small difference in DAS-28 remission (OR 1.2 (95% CI 1.1 to 1.3)). There was no significant difference in sustained remission or HAQ-DI (p values 0.43 and 0.75). CONCLUSIONS: Initial treatment with subcutaneous MTX was associated with lower rates of treatment changes, no difference in toxicity and some improvements in disease control versus oral MTX over the first year in patients with ERA. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/
OBJECTIVE: To determine the comparative effectiveness of oral versus subcutaneous methotrexate (MTX) as initial therapy for patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (ERA). METHODS:Patients with ERA (symptoms ≤1 year) initiating MTX therapy were included from a multicentre, prospective cohort study. We compared the effectiveness between starting with oral versus subcutaneous MTX over the first year. Longitudinal multivariable models, adjusted for potential baseline and time-varying confounders, were used to compare treatment changes due to inefficacy or toxicity and treatment efficacy (Disease Activity Score-28 (DAS-28), DAS-28 remission and Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI)). RESULTS: 666 patients were included (417 oral MTX, 249 subcutaneous MTX). Patients prescribed subcutaneous MTX were prescribed a higher dose of MTX (mean dose over first three months 22.3 mg vs 17.2 mg/week). At 1 year, 49% of patients initially treated with subcutaneous MTX had changed treatment compared with 77% treated with oral MTX. After adjusting for potential confounders, subcutaneous MTX was associated with a lower rate of treatment failure ((HR (95% CI) 0.55 (0.39 to 0.79)). Most treatment failures were due to inefficacy with no difference in failure due to toxicity. In multivariable models, subcutaneous MTX was also associated with lower average DAS-28 scores (mean difference (-0.38 (95% CI -0.64 to -0.10)) and a small difference in DAS-28 remission (OR 1.2 (95% CI 1.1 to 1.3)). There was no significant difference in sustained remission or HAQ-DI (p values 0.43 and 0.75). CONCLUSIONS: Initial treatment with subcutaneous MTX was associated with lower rates of treatment changes, no difference in toxicity and some improvements in disease control versus oral MTX over the first year in patients with ERA. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/
Entities:
Keywords:
Early Rheumatoid Arthritis; Methotrexate; Outcomes research
Authors: Rakesh K Singh; Leon van Haandel; Paul Kiptoo; Mara L Becker; Teruna J Siahaan; Ryan S Funk Journal: Eur J Pharmacol Date: 2019-04-02 Impact factor: 4.432
Authors: C Fiehn; J Holle; C Iking-Konert; J Leipe; C Weseloh; M Frerix; R Alten; F Behrens; C Baerwald; J Braun; H Burkhardt; G Burmester; J Detert; M Gaubitz; A Gause; E Gromnica-Ihle; H Kellner; A Krause; J Kuipers; H-M Lorenz; U Müller-Ladner; M Nothacker; H Nüsslein; A Rubbert-Roth; M Schneider; H Schulze-Koops; S Seitz; H Sitter; C Specker; H-P Tony; S Wassenberg; J Wollenhaupt; K Krüger Journal: Z Rheumatol Date: 2018-08 Impact factor: 1.372
Authors: Gyanendra Pokharel; Rob Deardon; Sindhu R Johnson; George Tomlinson; Pauline M Hull; Glen S Hazlewood Journal: Rheumatology (Oxford) Date: 2021-08-02 Impact factor: 7.580