Methotrexate monotherapy versus methotrexate combination therapy with non-biologic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs for rheumatoid arthritis.
BACKGROUND
Methotrexate (MTX) is among the most effective disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with less toxicity and better tolerability.


OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of MTX monotherapy compared to MTX combination with non-biologic DMARDs in adult with RA.


METHODS
Trials were identified in MEDLINE (1950 to 2009), EMBASE (1980 to 2009), the Cochrane Controlled trials Registry (CENTRAL) (up to 2009), the American and European scientific meeting abstracts 2005-9, the reference lists of all relevant studies, letters, and review articles.


METHODS
Randomized controlled trials comparing MTX monotherapy versus MTX combined with other non-biologic DMARDs of at least 12 weeks of trial duration in adult RA patients.


METHODS
Two reviewers independently identified eligible studies,extracted the data, and assessed the risk of bias of relevant studies.The efficacy analysis was stratified into 3 groups based on previous DMARDs use: DMARD naive, MTX inadequate response, and non-MTX DMARDs inadequate response. The toxicity analysis was stratified by DMARD combination and pooled across trials for each combination. Our prespecified primary analysis was based on total withdrawal rates for efficacy or toxicity.


RESULTS
A total of 19 trials (2,025 patients) from 6,938 citations were grouped by the type of patients randomised. Trials in DMARD naive patients showed no significant advantage of the MTX combination versus monotherapy; withdrawals for lack of efficacy or toxicity were similar in both groups (risk ratio (RR) 1.16, 95% CI.0.70 to 1.93, absolute risk difference(ARD) 5%, 95%CI-3% to 13%). Trials in MTX or non-MTX DMARDs inadequate responder patients also showed no difference in withdrawal rates between the MTX combo versus mono groups with RR 0.86 95% CI 0.49 to1.51, ARD -2 %, 95% CI-13 % to 8 % and RR 0.75 95% CI 0.41 to 1.35, ARD -10%, 95% CI -31% to 11%, respectively. Significant reductions of pain and improvement in physical function (measured by Health Assessment Questionnaire or HAQ) were found in the MTX combination group, but only in MTX-inadequate responders (absolute risk difference -9.72%, 95%CI -14.7% to -4.75% for pain and mean difference (MD) -0.28, 95%CI -0.36 to -0.21 (0-3) for HAQ).


CONCLUSIONS
When the balance of efficacy and toxicity is taken into account, the moderate level of evidence from our systematic review showed no statistically significant advantage of the MTX combination versus monotherapy. Trials are needed that compare currently used MTX doses and combination therapies.
Katchamart
Wanruchada
W
Rheumatology Division, Department of Medicine, Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, 2 Prannok road, Siriraj hospital, Bangkoknoi, Bangkok, Thailand, 10700.
Trudeau
Judith
J
Phumethum
Veerapong
V
Bombardier
Claire
C
D000328:Adult; D018501:Antirheumatic Agents / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D001172:Arthritis, Rheumatoid / Q000188:drug therapy*; D004359:Drug Therapy, Combination / Q000379:methods; D006801:Humans; D008727:Methotrexate / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D016032:Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
D018501:Antirheumatic Agents; D008727:Methotrexate
Arthritis Rheum. 2006 May;54(5):1410-4
16645968
Z Rheumatol. 1993 Sep-Oct;52(5):292-6
8259721
J Rheumatol Suppl. 1992 Jan;32:74-7; discussion 77-9
1613736
Arthritis Rheum. 1997 Oct;40(10):1843-51
9336420
Ann Intern Med. 2008 Jan 15;148(2):124-34
18025440
Br J Rheumatol. 1994 Jul;33(7):651-4
7912633
Arthritis Rheum. 2003 Jan;48(1):46-53
12528102
Bangladesh Med Res Counc Bull. 2000 Apr;26(1):1-7
11192489
Br J Rheumatol. 1995 Nov;34 Suppl 2:104-8
8535640
Arthritis Rheum. 1994 Oct;37(10):1487-91
7945474
Arthritis Rheum. 1995 Jun;38(6):727-35
7779114
Clin Exp Rheumatol. 1999 Nov-Dec;17(6 Suppl 18):S66-8
10589360
Ann Intern Med. 2007 Mar 20;146(6):406-15
17371885
Br J Rheumatol. 1997 Oct;36(10):1082-8
9374925
Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2003 Nov-Dec;21(6):695-6
14740446
Clin Exp Rheumatol. 1999 Nov-Dec;17(6):699-704
10609068
Arthritis Rheum. 1992 Mar;35(3):259-69
1536666
Ann Rheum Dis. 2001 Nov;60 Suppl 3:iii51-4
11890654
Ann Rheum Dis. 2009 Jul;68(7):1105-12
19054823
Rheumatology (Oxford). 2003 Dec;42(12):1545-9
12810924
Ann Rheum Dis. 2003 Aug;62(8):764-6
12860733
Ann Intern Med. 2002 Nov 5;137(9):726-33
12416946
South Med J. 2007 Feb;100(2):135-9
17330681
Arthritis Rheum. 1995 Dec;38(12):1799-806
8849352
Rheumatology (Oxford). 2005 Nov;44(11):1414-21
16030080
Br J Rheumatol. 1998 Jun;37(6):612-9
9667614
Ann Rheum Dis. 1992 Feb;51(2):177-81
1550400
Arthritis Rheum. 2005 May;52(5):1360-70
15880810
Ann Rheum Dis. 1999 Apr;58(4):220-5
10364900
Scand J Rheumatol. 1994;23(5):231-6
7973475
Br J Rheumatol. 1994 Nov;33(11):1049-55
7981992
J Rheumatol. 1997 Oct;24(10):1896-902
9330929
Arthritis Rheum. 1996 Jan;39(1):34-40
8546736
Mod Rheumatol. 2005;15(5):323-8
17029087
Arthritis Rheum. 2006 May;54(5):1401-9
16645967
Arthritis Rheum. 2006 Feb;54(2):621-7
16447240
Arthritis Rheum. 1993 Jun;36(6):729-40
8507213
J Rheumatol Suppl. 1996 Mar;44:64-8
8833056
Lancet. 1999 May 8;353(9164):1568-73
10334255
J Rheumatol. 1998 Aug;25(8):1485-92
9712088
N Engl J Med. 1996 May 16;334(20):1287-91
8609945
J Rheumatol. 2007 Feb;34(2):316-21
17183623
Ann Rheum Dis. 2007 Feb;66(2):235-41
16926184
N Engl J Med. 1995 Jul 20;333(3):137-41
7791814
Arthritis Rheum. 1981 Oct;24(10):1308-15
7306232
Arthritis Rheum. 1995 Jan;38(1):44-8
7818570
J Rheumatol. 1993 Mar;20(3):528-30
8478864
J Rheumatol. 2004 Aug;31(8):1521-31
15290730
Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2006 May-Jun;24(3):260-7
16870092
Arthritis Rheum. 2005 Nov;52(11):3381-90
16258899
Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. 2005 Feb;19(1):147-61
15588976
J Rheumatol Suppl. 1996 Mar;44:72-4
8833058
Ann Intern Med. 1996 Apr 15;124(8):699-707
8633829