30
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Head-to-head, randomised, crossover study of oral versus subcutaneous methotrexate in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: drug-exposure limitations of oral methotrexate at doses ≥15 mg may be overcome with subcutaneous administration

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objective

          To compare the relative bioavailability, safety and tolerability of oral methotrexate (MTX) and subcutaneous (SC) MTX administered via an auto-injector (MTXAI) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

          Methods

          In this randomised, multicenter, open-label, three-way crossover study, patients ≥18 years with adult RA undergoing treatment with MTX for ≥3 months were assigned to receive MTX 10, 15, 20 and 25 mg weekly in a random sequence of three treatments: oral, SC into the abdomen and SC into the thigh. For 24 h after administration of each treatment, blood samples were collected for pharmacokinetic analysis and injection sites were assessed.

          Results

          Forty-seven patients completed the study. Systemic exposure of oral MTX plateaued at doses ≥15 mg/week. In contrast, SC MTX demonstrated a linear increase in systemic exposure that was greater than oral MTX at each dose. No unexpected AEs were noted for either formulation.

          Conclusions

          Unlike oral MTX, the systemic exposure of SC MTX did not plateau over the doses studied, particularly at doses ≥15 mg/week. In this study, higher systemic MTX exposure was not associated with increases in AEs. Patients with an inadequate clinical response to oral MTX may benefit from higher drug exposure by switching to SC MTX.

          Trial registration number

          NCT01618968.

          Related collections

          Most cited references6

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs

          Treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) may differ among rheumatologists and currently, clear and consensual international recommendations on RA treatment are not available. In this paper recommendations for the treatment of RA with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and glucocorticoids (GCs) that also account for strategic algorithms and deal with economic aspects, are described. The recommendations are based on evidence from five systematic literature reviews (SLRs) performed for synthetic DMARDs, biological DMARDs, GCs, treatment strategies and economic issues. The SLR-derived evidence was discussed and summarised as an expert opinion in the course of a Delphi-like process. Levels of evidence, strength of recommendations and levels of agreement were derived. Fifteen recommendations were developed covering an area from general aspects such as remission/low disease activity as treatment aim via the preference for methotrexate monotherapy with or without GCs vis-à-vis combination of synthetic DMARDs to the use of biological agents mainly in patients for whom synthetic DMARDs and tumour necrosis factor inhibitors had failed. Cost effectiveness of the treatments was additionally examined. These recommendations are intended to inform rheumatologists, patients and other stakeholders about a European consensus on the management of RA with DMARDs and GCs as well as strategies to reach optimal outcomes of RA, based on evidence and expert opinion.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Comparison of the clinical efficacy and safety of subcutaneous versus oral administration of methotrexate in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis: results of a six-month, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, controlled, phase IV trial.

            To compare the efficacy and safety of subcutaneous (SC) versus oral administration of methotrexate (MTX) in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA). MTX-naive patients with active RA (Disease Activity Score in 28 joints >or= 4) were eligible for the study if they had not previously taken biologic agents and had not taken disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs for 2 weeks prior to randomization. Patients were randomly assigned to receive 15 mg/week of MTX either orally (2 7.5-mg tablets plus a dummy prefilled syringe; n=187 patients) or SC (prefilled syringe containing 10 mg/ml plus 2 dummy tablets; n=188 patients) for 24 weeks. At week 16, patients who did not meet the American College of Rheumatology criteria for 20% improvement (ACR20) were switched from 15 mg of oral MTX to 15 mg of SC MTX and from 15 mg of SC MTX to 20 mg of SC MTX for the remaining 8 weeks, still in a blinded manner. The primary outcome was an ACR20 response at 24 weeks. At week 24, significantly more patients treated with SC MTX than with oral MTX showed ACR20 (78% versus 70%) and ACR70 (41% versus 33%) responses. Patients with a disease duration >or= 12 months had even higher ACR20 response rates (89% for SC administration and 63% for oral). In 52 of the ACR20 nonresponders (14%), treatment was switched at week 16. Changing from oral to SC MTX and from 15 mg to 20 mg of SC MTX resulted in 30% and 23% ACR20 response rates, respectively, in these patients. MTX was well tolerated. The rate of adverse events was similar in all groups. This 6-month prospective, randomized, controlled trial is the first to examine oral versus SC administration of MTX. We found that SC administration was significantly more effective than oral administration of the same MTX dosage. There was no difference in tolerability.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Bioavailability of higher dose methotrexate comparing oral and subcutaneous administration in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

              To determine the bioavailability of higher oral doses of methotrexate (MTX) in adult patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). A pharmacokinetic analysis was performed in 15 patients with RA taking a stable dose of MTX (> or = 25 mg weekly). Separated by 2 weeks, a pharmacokinetic analysis was performed in each patient after oral and subcutaneous administration of the same dose of MTX. MTX serum concentrations were measured by a fluorescence polarization immunoassay. Pharmacokinetic analysis was performed with an iterative 2-stage Bayesian population procedure, obtaining population and individual pharmacokinetic parameters. The median MTX dose was 30 mg weekly (range 25-40 mg). A 2-compartment model best described the serum MTX concentration versus time curves. The mean bioavailability after oral MTX was 0.64 (range 0.21-0.96) compared to subcutaneous administration. There was a statistically significant difference in the bioavailability of the 2 administration regimens. Bioavailability of a higher oral dose of MTX in adult patients with RA is highly variable, and on average two-thirds that of the subcutaneous administration. To improve efficacy of MTX at dosages of 25 mg weekly or more, a change to parenteral administration should be considered.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Ann Rheum Dis
                Ann. Rheum. Dis
                annrheumdis
                ard
                Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                0003-4967
                1468-2060
                August 2014
                12 April 2014
                : 73
                : 8
                : 1549-1551
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Rheumatology, University of Colorado , Denver, Colorado, USA
                [2 ]Clinical Development, Antares Pharma Inc , Ewing, New Jersey, USA
                [3 ]Medical Department, Antares Pharma Inc , Ewing, New Jersey, USA
                [4 ]University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
                Author notes

                Handling editor Tore K Kvien

                [Correspondence to ] Dr Michael H Schiff, Department of Rheumatology, University of Colorado, School of Medicine, 5400 South Monaco Street, Greenwood Village, CO 80111, USA; michael.schiff@ 123456me.com
                Article
                annrheumdis-2014-205228
                10.1136/annrheumdis-2014-205228
                4112421
                24728329
                24ecb9c2-e4c1-4fb2-a1aa-1e24fcd9cefd
                Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions

                This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 3.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/

                History
                : 10 January 2014
                : 17 March 2014
                : 22 March 2014
                Categories
                1506
                Clinical and Epidemiological Research
                Concise report
                Custom metadata
                unlocked

                Immunology
                methotrexate,pharmacokinetics,rheumatoid arthritis
                Immunology
                methotrexate, pharmacokinetics, rheumatoid arthritis

                Comments

                Comment on this article