THU0171 Effect of Fast Escalation of The Dose of Subcutaneous Methotrexate on The Need for Biological Dmards in Patients with Very Early and Established Rheumatoid Arthritis: Table 1

Use of parenteral methotrexate in rheumatic diseases: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To analyse the efficacy, adherence, patient satisfaction, safety, pharmacodynamics and cost-effectiveness of parenteral methotrexate (MTX) in patients with rheumatic diseases.

METHODS

A systematic review of literature was carried out in Medline, Embase and Cochrane Central from the beginning until June 2019. Studies including adult patients with rheumatic diseases being treated with parenteral MTX were identified and data on efficacy, adherence, satisfaction, safety, pharmacokinetics, and cost-effectiveness analysed. As for the designs, systematic reviews, clinical trials, or observational studies were permitted, including cross-sectional and small-sample studies if they were pharmacokinetic studies.

RESULTS

Out of 4160 identified articles, 80 articles were finally included. The efficacy profile of parenteral MTX seems useful in general and in those patients with insufficient response to oral MTX. The parenteral route does not seem to increase the rate or severity of adverse events due to the use of MTX. The use of parenteral MTX is an appropriate way to reduce costs in patients with inadequate response to oral MTX. Adherence and satisfaction are favoured by training programmes in the use of the parenteral route. The results in rheumatic diseases other than rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are very scarce and do not enable obtaining conclusive data.

CONCLUSIONS

Parenteral MTX can be an alternative to the use of oral MTX, due to its profile of efficacy, safety, adherence and pharmacoeconomic results, especially in those patients with RA.

Use of Parenteral Methotrexate in Rheumatic Diseases: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

To analyse the efficacy, adherence, patient satisfaction, safety, pharmacodynamics and cost-effectiveness of parenteral methotrexate (MTX) in patients with rheumatic diseases.

METHODS

A systematic review of literature was carried out in Medline, Embase and Cochrane Central from the beginning until June 2019. Studies including adult patients with rheumatic diseases being treated with parenteral MTX were identified and data on efficacy, adherence, satisfaction, safety, pharmacokinetics, and cost-effectiveness analysed. As for the designs, systematic reviews, clinical trials, or observational studies were permitted, including cross-sectional and small-sample studies if they were pharmacokinetic studies.

RESULTS

Out of 4160 identified articles, 80 articles were finally included. The efficacy profile of parenteral MTX seems useful in general and in those patients with insufficient response to oral MTX. The parenteral route does not seem to increase the rate or severity of adverse events due to the use of MTX. The use of parenteral MTX is an appropriate way to reduce costs in patients with inadequate response to oral MTX. Adherence and satisfaction are favoured by training programmes in the use of the parenteral route. The results in rheumatic diseases other than rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are very scarce and do not enable obtaining conclusive data.

CONCLUSIONS

Parenteral MTX can be an alternative to the use of oral MTX, due to its profile of efficacy, safety, adherence and pharmacoeconomic results, especially in those patients with RA.