Dataset Information

Polymorphisms and Pharmacogenomics for the Clinical Efficacy of Methotrexate in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: Methotrexate (MTX) is widely used and considered a first-line disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD) for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Many of the relevant genes have been investigated to estimate the association between gene polymorphisms and MTX effectiveness in RA patients, although inconsistent results have been reported. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to identify genetic variants associated with MTX efficacy. A total of 30 publications that included 34 genes and 125 SNPs associated with the transporters, enzymes, and metabolites of MTX or the progression of RA were included in the systematic review (SR), and 21 studies were included in 9 meta-analyses. Associations between MTX response in RA patients in MTHFR 1298A?>?C (rs1801131), ATIC 347C?>?G (rs2372536), RFC-1 80G?>?A (rs1051266), SLC19A1 A?>?G (rs2838956) and SLC19A1 G?>?A (rs7499) genetic polymorphisms were found, but not observed between the MTHFR 677C?>?T (rs1801133), TYMS 28?bp VNTR (rs34743033), MTRR 66A?>?G (rs1801394), and ABCB1 3435C?>?T (rs1045642). However, for the polymorphisms not being associated following meta-analysis could still be associated if larger cohorts were used, and studies of other polymorphisms are necessary in large cohorts and a rigorous way, which may provide more accurate results for the effect of the gene polymorphisms on the MTX response.

SUBMITTER: Qiu Q

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5339794 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Polymorphisms and Pharmacogenomics for the Clinical Efficacy of Methotrexate in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Qiu Qi Q Huang Jing J Shu Xiaoming X Fan Huizheng H Zhou Youwen Y Xiao Cheng C

Scientific reports 20170307

Methotrexate (MTX) is widely used and considered a first-line disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD) for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Many of the relevant genes have been investigated to estimate the association between gene polymorphisms and MTX effectiveness in RA patients, although inconsistent results have been reported. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to identify genetic variants associated with MTX efficacy. A total of 30 publications that include ...[more]

PMID: 28266606

Similar Datasets

Project description:Objectives: We aimed to estimate the effectiveness and safety of iguratimod (IGU) monotherapy or in combination with methotrexate (MTX) in treating rheumatoid arthritis (RA) to provide an evidence-primarily-based foundation for clinical application. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of the meta-analysis using eight databases and two clinical trial websites searching for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from conception to 15 March 2022, based on outcomes of patients with RA treated with IGU. The evidence quality assessment of primary outcomes was evaluated by the GRADE tool, and RevMan 5.3 and StataMP 14.0 were used to perform this research. Results: A total of 4302 patients with RA from 38 RCTs was included in this research. Pooled results demonstrated as follows: 1) Compared with methotrexate (MTX) alone, IGU alone was superior in improving ACR20 and DAS28-ESR, while having no significant difference in ACR50 and ACR70 [ACR20: (RR 1.15, 95% CI 1.05-1.27, p = 0.004); ACR50: (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.66-1.44, p = 0.88); ACR70: (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.45-1.90, p = 0.83); DAS28-ESR: mean difference (MD) -0.15, 95% CI -0.27 to -0.03, p = 0.01]. 2) Compared with MTX alone, IGU + MTX was more effective in improving ACR20, ACR50, ACR70, and DAS28-ESR. [ACR20: (RR 1.24, 95% CI 1.14-1.35, p < 0.00001); ACR50: (RR 1.96, 95% CI 1.62-2.39, p <0.00001); ACR70: (RR 1.91, 95% CI 1.41-2.57, p < 0.0001)]; [DAS28-ESR: (MD) -1.43, 95% CI -1.73 to -1.12, p < 0.00001]. 3) Compared with MTX + leflunomide (LEF), ACR20, ACR50, ACR70, and DAS28-ESR of IGU + MTX had no significant difference [ACR20: (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.94-1.19, p = 0.38); ACR50: (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.66-1.84, p = 0.72); ACR70: (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.45-3.20, p = 0.71); DAS28-ESR: (MD -0.02, 95% CI -0.13 to -0.10, p = 0.77)]. 4) Compared with MTX + hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), IGU + MTX was superior in improving DAS28-ESR (MD -2.16, 95% CI -2.53 to -1.79, p < 0.00001). 5) Compared with MTX + tripterygium glycosides (TGs), IGU + MTX was more effective in improving DAS28-ESR (MD -0.94, 95% CI -2.36 to 0.48, p = 0.19). 6) There were no significant differences in adverse events (AEs) between the groups of IGU vs. MTX (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.71-1.31, p = 0.80), IGU + MTX vs. MTX (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.90-1.35, p = 0.34), IGU + MTX vs. MTX + HCQ (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.29-1.42, p = 0.27), and IGU + MTX vs. MTX + TGs (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.28-2.02, p = 0.57). The incidence of AEs in the IGU + MTX group was lower than the MTX + LEF group (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.71-0.98, p = 0.03). Conclusion: Compared to the MTX alone subgroup, IGU alone offers clear advantages in improving ACR20 and DAS28-ESR, despite the insufficient evidence for DAS28-ESR findings. IGU + MTX shows clear benefits in improving ACR20, ACR50, ACR70, and DAS28-ESR scores compared to standard therapies. When the intervention (IGU alone or IGU + MTX) lasted for 52 weeks, it demonstrated superior efficacy in improving ACR20 of patients without prominent adverse events. Notably, IGU or IGU + MTX has apparent advantages in improving ACR20 of first-visit RA, and IGU + MTX has obvious advantages in improving DAS28-ESR of refractory RA. Furthermore, IGU + MTX does not increase the risk of leukopenia, but it can decrease the risk of liver function tests (LFTs), regardless of the age or the stage of RA. Clinical Trial Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/#recordDetails, identifier CRD42022295217.

Project description:ObjectiveTo compare methotrexate based disease modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) treatments for rheumatoid arthritis in patients naive to or with an inadequate response to methotrexate.DesignSystematic review and Bayesian random effects network meta-analysis of trials assessing methotrexate used alone or in combination with other conventional synthetic DMARDs, biologic drugs, or tofacitinib in adult patients with rheumatoid arthritis.Data sourcesTrials were identified from Medline, Embase, and Central databases from inception to 19 January 2016; abstracts from two major rheumatology meetings from 2009 to 2015; two trial registers; and hand searches of Cochrane reviews.Study selection criteriaRandomized or quasi-randomized trials that compared methotrexate with any other DMARD or combination of DMARDs and contributed to the network of evidence between the treatments of interest.Main outcomesAmerican College of Rheumatology (ACR) 50 response (major clinical improvement), radiographic progression, and withdrawals due to adverse events. A comparison between two treatments was considered statistically significant if its credible interval excluded the null effect, indicating >97.5% probability that one treatment was superior.Results158 trials were included, with between 10 and 53 trials available for each outcome. In methotrexate naive patients, several treatments were statistically superior to oral methotrexate for ACR50 response: sulfasalazine and hydroxychloroquine ("triple therapy"), several biologics (abatacept, adalimumab, etanercept, infliximab, rituximab, tocilizumab), and tofacitinib. The estimated probability of ACR50 response was similar between these treatments (range 56-67%), compared with 41% with methotrexate. Methotrexate combined with adalimumab, etanercept, certolizumab, or infliximab was statistically superior to oral methotrexate for inhibiting radiographic progression, but the estimated mean change over one year with all treatments was less than the minimal clinically important difference of 5 units on the Sharp-van der Heijde scale. Triple therapy had statistically fewer withdrawals due to adverse events than methotrexate plus infliximab. After an inadequate response to methotrexate, several treatments were statistically superior to oral methotrexate for ACR50 response: triple therapy, methotrexate plus hydroxychloroquine, methotrexate plus leflunomide, methotrexate plus intramuscular gold, methotrexate plus most biologics, and methotrexate plus tofacitinib. The probability of response was 61% with triple therapy and ranged widely (27-70%) with other treatments. No treatment was statistically superior to oral methotrexate for inhibiting radiographic progression. Methotrexate plus abatacept had a statistically lower rate of withdrawals due to adverse events than several treatments.ConclusionsTriple therapy (methotrexate plus sulfasalazine plus hydroxychloroquine) and most regimens combining biologic DMARDs with methotrexate were effective in controlling disease activity, and all were generally well tolerated in both methotrexate naive and methotrexate exposed patients.

Dataset Information

Polymorphisms and Pharmacogenomics for the Clinical Efficacy of Methotrexate in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Publications

Polymorphisms and Pharmacogenomics for the Clinical Efficacy of Methotrexate in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets