Consider intramuscular methotrexate when oral route fails in rheumatoid
arthritis
Switching high dose oral methotrexate to the intramuscular route may improve efficacy in rheumatoid arthritis (RA).
So suggests French research published recently, although British rheumatologists
proposed this approach last year.
The researchers switched 143 patients with RA from IM to oral methotrexate
because of a shortage of the injectable formulation. Of these, 47 were
switched back to the IM form. A questionnaire was then sent to patients
to evaluate efficacy and tolerance of the different routes.
When patients were switched to the oral form, disease activity and symptoms
increased. There was also a greater frequency of gastrointestinal symptoms
though no increase in liver abnormalities. In patients switched back
to the injectable drug, disease manifestations improved and side effects
reduced. The authors urge clinicians to consider IM methotrexate when
RA remains active in spite of high doses of the oral agent.
Christopher Green, assistant director of pharmacy, Royal Liverpool and
Broadgreen University Hospital, told The Journal that many patients experienced
adverse GI effects with oral methotrexate, particularly at the time of
dosing.
“To stop what is the gold standard treatment for RA for this reason
is somewhat frustrating for all concerned, particularly if it is otherwise
working well for the patient,” he commented. He added that poor
response to the oral agent could also be due to impaired absorption.
Dr Green said that injectable methotrexate is used in the UK to varying
extents. Such use could alleviate GI side effects and also circumvent
problems associated with poor absorption from the gut. However, parenteral
methotrexate is currently unlicensed in RA. Shared care between primary
and secondary care is further complicated by the fact it is a cytotoxic
agent.
Workers at Leeds General Infirmary last year advocated trying parenteral
methotrexate before switching patients to tumour necrosis factor blockade
(Rheumatology 2003;42:1009). |