Effects of Subcutaneous Methotrexate in Patients with Refractory Uveitis and Chorioretinitis

PURPOSE

Methotrexate (MTX) is an immunosuppressive agent used to treat noninfectious inflammatory eye conditions and is generally administered orally for ocular inflammatory diseases. When used in rheumatological diseases, subcutaneous administration has been reported to show higher efficacy than oral administration. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the effect of subcutaneous MTX in patients with refractory uveitis or choroiditis who did not respond to other immunosuppressive agents.

METHODS

A retrospective case series study was performed between January and December 2018. Patients with uveitis or chorioretinitis who showed little to no treatment response for 6 months or more with conventional immunosuppressive agents were treated with MTX, administered subcutaneously. After 6 months of treatment, patients were evaluated to determine whether complete suppression of inflammation sustained for ≥28 days was achieved in both eyes and whether improvement can be confirmed by fluorescein angiography (FAG).

RESULTS

Subcutaneous MTX treatment was performed on 18 patients: 11 had intermediate uveitis and seven had posterior uveitis. In the intermediate uveitis patient group, five patients (50% of the group excluding one patient who dropped out) showed improvement in FAG and three patients (30%) showed complete suppression of inflammation. In the posterior uveitis group, two out of seven patients (excluding two patients who dropped out) showed an improvement, two patients in the group showed little change, and one patient showed aggravation of FAG findings.

CONCLUSIONS

The study confirmed that in patients with uveitis or chorioretinitis who had a refractory response to treatment with other immunosuppressive agents, subcutaneous MTX showed improved treatment efficacy.

The evaluation of the efficacy of adalimumab in refractory non-infectious uveitis with ultra-widefield fundus fluorescein angiography

AIM

To investigate the efficacy of adalimumab in the cases with refractory non-infectious uveitis and evaluate retinal vascular leakage changes on ultra-widefield fundus fluorescein angiography.

METHODS

Twenty-three patients with refractory uveitis were included in study.

RESULTS

Forty-four eyes of 23 patients with non-infectious uveitiswere evaluated. Clinically active inflammation was present in 19 eyes (43.18%), while 25 (56.8%) were inactive. The mean drug burden was a 9.91 ± 3.78 (5-21) in baseline, 7.3 ± 4.25 at third and 8.0 ± 4.71 at sixth month (p = 0.022). The mean choroidal thickness was 256.65 ± 43.63 μm in baseline, 240.49 ± 36.73 μm at third and 224.81 ± 34.91 μm at sixth month (p ≤ 0.05). In terms of leakage extend, leakage was initially present in a mean of 2.95 ± 4.55 clock hours, 2.41 ± 3.91 at third and 1.76 ± 3.44 at sixth month (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Adalimumab was found to be effective in establishing inflammation control by reducing drug burden, controlling retinal vascular leakage and choroidal inflammation in refractory uveitis.

Golimumab in juvenile idiopathic arthritis-associated uveitis unresponsive to Adalimumab

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy of golimumab (GLM) as a treatment option for juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA)-associated uveitis refractory to adalimumab (ADA).

METHODS

Retrospective single-centre study including patients with JIA receiving GLM for active uveitis after failing ADA. JIA- and uveitis-related data, including intraocular inflammation, best-corrected visual acuity, corticosteroid-sparing potential, and ocular complications were evaluated at start of GLM treatment, at 1 month and 3 months, and every 3 months thereafter during GLM administration. We further investigated the association of response to GLM with primary and secondary failure of ADA treatment.

RESULTS

Ten patients were studied, all female (17 affected eyes, mean age 14.3 + 6.7 yrs., mean follow-up 25.2 + 21.7 mos). Two patients were switched to GLM because of primary non-response to ADA. Eight were switched because of loss of response (LOR). In 5 of the latter LOR was associated with neutralizing anti-ADA-antibodies. Response to GLM was observed in all 8 patients with LOR, while the 2 patients with primary non-response to ADA also did not respond to GLM. Three of the 8 responders experienced LOR. At the end of follow-up 4 of the 5 remaining responders had achieved complete response. One had achieved partial response.

CONCLUSION

GLM is an efficacious therapeutic option in patients who experience LOR to ADA. Our data indicate that patients without primary response to ADA should be rather switched to a biologic agent with a different mode of action instead of further blocking the TNF-alpha pathway.