Abstract
Purpose
Evidence regarding the relationship between red blood cell methotrexate polyglutamate concentration and response to treatment and adverse drug reactions in patients using methotrexate for inflammatory arthropathies is complex and in some respects appears conflicting. Accordingly, we undertook a systematic analysis of available evidence to determine the clinical utility of dosing methotrexate to a target red blood cell methotrexate polyglutamate concentration.
Methods
A systematic literature review was conducted to identify all studies that had reported an association between red blood cell methotrexate polyglutamate concentration and disease activity or adverse drug reactions in users of methotrexate for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, juvenile idiopathic arthritis or psoriatic arthritis.
Results
No randomised controlled trials were identified. Thirteen studies (ten in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and three in patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis) were identified. All studies evaluated an association between red blood cell methotrexate polyglutamate concentration and response to treatment, and eight evaluated an association with toxicity. Eight studies identified lower disease activity with at least one higher red blood cell methotrexate polyglutamate concentration, although there was at least moderate potential for bias in all of these studies. Relatively large increases in concentration appeared to be required to produce a meaningful reduction in disease activity. Only one study identified an association between red blood cell methotrexate polyglutamate concentration and methotrexate-induced side effects, although studies were likely underpowered to detect this type of association.
Conclusions
The manner in which data were presented in the included studies had many limitations that hampered its conclusive assessment, but red blood cell methotrexate polyglutamate concentrations appear to be a potentially useful guide to treatment in patients with inflammatory arthropathies, but the specific polyglutamate that should be monitored and how monitoring could be integrated into treat-to-target approaches should be clarified before it can be routinely implemented.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Methotrexate (MTX) is one of the most widely used disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). MTX is also used for several other inflammatory diseases, including juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), psoriatic arthritis, polymyositis, systemic lupus erythematosus, and ankylosing spondylitis [1, 2].
MTX is actively transported into cells by the reduced folate carrier. Glutamic acid residues are added to MTX by the enzyme folyl-polyglutamate synthetase to form MTX polyglutamates (MTXGlu-n) [3]. There are several subtypes that are collectively referred to as MTXGlu-n, where n represents the number of glutamic acid residues that have been covalently attached to the MTX, noting that MTX itself contains one glutamic acid residue. Throughout this manuscript, MTXGlu-n is used to refer generically to MTX polyglutamates. With low-dose MTX therapy as used in inflammatory arthropathies, metabolites up to MTXGlu5 are detected in most patients [4].
One of the purported mechanisms of action of MTX in inflammatory arthropathies is inhibition of dihydrofolate reductase. Compared to MTX, longer-chained MTX polyglutamates (i.e. MTXGlu3–5) are more potent inhibitors since they have a greater affinity for and slower dissociation from dihydrofolate reductase [5–7]. MTXGlu-n also inhibit methylene-tetrahydrofolate reductase, an enzyme responsible for converting 5-10-methylene-tetrahydrofolate reductase to 5-methyl-tetrahydrofolate, the primary circulating precursor of the active folate cofactors required for synthesis of purine bases [3]. Whereas unchanged MTX exits cells relatively rapidly, the polyglutamate metabolites are retained within cells for a longer period of time. In red blood cells (RBC), MTXGlu-n accumulate with half-lives ranging from 1.9 to 45.2 weeks, and with a constant dose of MTX, steady state is reached after 6 to 149 weeks [4, 8]. These characteristics lead to a prolongation of MTX effect beyond the time that parent MTX has been lost from intracellular and extracellular milieu [7, 9].
Given the above characteristics, it has been proposed that RBCMTXGlu-n concentrations may be a useful parameter for monitoring and adjusting MTX dose [10], although the primary site of action of MTXGlu-n is more likely to be within white blood cells [11]. Concentrations within RBC have been more commonly investigated as RBC are more abundant and therefore suited to measurement of intracellular drug concentrations, especially in circumstances where sensitivity may be limiting. Data are conflicting regarding the relationship between RBC MTXGlu-n concentration and MTX efficacy and/or toxicity [8], and the applicability of using these concentrations to personalise MTX therapy is therefore uncertain.
To investigate the utility and limitations of guiding MTX dosing with RBC MTXGlu-n concentrations, we performed a systematic literature review of the evidence supporting personalised MTX dosing based upon RBC MTXGlu-n concentrations in patients with inflammatory arthropathies.
Methods
Studies involving participants with inflammatory arthropathies such as RA, JIA or psoriatic arthritis were considered eligible. There were no restrictions regarding the age or gender of study participants, the dose, duration or route of MTX administration, concurrent therapy (e.g. DMARDs, corticosteroids, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or folic acid), efficacy or toxicity criteria nor the language or geographical location of the primary study.
Inclusion criteria
-
1.
Studies including patients treated with MTX for RA, JIA or psoriatic arthritis as confirmed by standard diagnostic criteria.
-
2.
At least one measurement of RBCMTXGlu-n concentration whilst taking MTX.
-
3.
Exposure or concentration of RBCMTXGlu-n correlated with a change in one or more disease activity measures or side effects.
Exclusion criteria
-
1.
Inaccessible abstract or insufficient data within the abstract.
-
2.
Inaccessible full conference presentations.
Medline, Embase and Web of Science were searched for relevant studies. To investigate publication bias, we also searched the Australian and New Zealand, US National Institutes of Health and the EU Clinical Trials registries.
The search strategy was as follows: (Rheumatoid Arthritis OR Arthritis OR Arthriti*) AND (Polyglutamate OR polyglutamic acid OR methotrexate polyglutamate OR MTX polyglutamate OR RBC methotrexate) AND (Role* OR Utilit* OR efficacy OR Response OR DAS28 OR disease activity OR ACR20 OR ACR50 OR ACR70 OR EULAR Response OR toxicity OR adverse drug reaction OR side effect OR liver toxicity). MeSH and Emtree terms were utilised where possible, and references of selected studies were hand searched to identify any further relevant studies.
Eligibility assessment was performed by the lead author (HJM) under the supervision of the senior author (MW). Assessment of relevance was initially conducted using study titles, then abstract and full-text reports. Disagreements were resolved by consensus. References of selected studies were hand searched to identify any further relevant studies. Data were extracted according to a standardised list of items.
The risk of bias for each identified study was formally assessed by MH and MW with the Quality in Prognostic Studies (QuIPS) tool [12], and identified studies were stratified according to study population, quality and design. As the primary evidence of clinical utility would be provided from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compare RBC MTXGlu-n concentration guided MTX dosing with conventional MTX dosing, these were considered to be the most preferable source of evidence. Secondary sources of evidence were observational studies (prospective cohort studies in preference to cross-sectional or case-control studies) that examined the relationship between RBC MTXGlu-n concentration and MTX efficacy and/or toxicity.
Where possible, we estimated the impact of changing RBC MTXGlu-n concentration(s) on disease activity measures by calculating the effect of doubling the median concentration of RBC MTXGlu-n using the median concentrations and regression coefficients (and corresponding 95 % confidence intervals (CIs)) that were reported in the identified studies.
Results
Identification of studies for the systematic review is outlined in Fig. 1.
Study characteristics and assessment of bias
Of the 13 studies included, 10 included patients with RA and 3 included patients with JIA (Table 1). No RCTs were identified which compared RBCMTXGlu-n guided MTX dosing to standard dosing, and direct estimation of the clinical utility of a targeted RBCMTXGlu-n approach was therefore not possible. All 13 observational studies investigated a correlation between RBCMTXGlu-n and efficacy and, 8 investigated a correlation between RBCMTXGlu-n and toxicity.
Assessment of risk of bias (Table 2) identified confounding variables and statistical analysis and reporting as the main areas where bias was potentially introduced. There was significant heterogeneity with regard to baseline patient, disease and treatment characteristics, and outcome measures between studies (Supplementary Table 1).
Efficacy
Four of the prospective cohort studies reported point estimates (3 linear and 1 logistic regression) for the association between one or more RBC MTXGlu-n concentration and a composite measure of disease activity at one or more time points, and 2 studies reported results using Spearman’s rho coefficients. The linear regression coefficients and corresponding 95 % confidence intervals associated with disease activity measures (DAS28 in the R-MTX and treatment in Rotterdam studies [13] and log10 JADAS-27 in Bulatovic Calasan et al. [14]) are presented in Fig. 2. The R-MTX and treatment in Rotterdam studies included a longitudinal analysis which considered RBCMTXGlu-n concentration and DAS28 at the corresponding time [13], and in Bulatovic Calasan et al. [14], the longitudinal analysis determined the association between the single RBCMTXGlu-n concentration and the JADAS-27 across the first year of treatment (Fig. 2). In Dervieux et al. (2006), logistic regression analysis identified a trend for individuals with lower RBC MTXGlu3 concentrations to be less likely to achieve moderate or good EULAR response after 4 months of MTX treatment (β = 0.034, 95 % CI −0.006 to 0.074, p = 0.095) [15].
In the studies that reported associations with Spearmans rho coefficients, Hobl et al. reported that maximum concentration of RBCMTXGlu2 after 5 and 10 weeks of therapy was significantly associated with the change in DAS28 over 16 weeks (Table 3) [16]. In this study, the association between maximal concentration of RBCMTXGlu1 and RBCMTXGlu3 was not significant—no quantitative estimate of the effect size was available (personal communication, E Hobl). In Stamp et al., 24 weeks after changing from oral to subcutaneous MTX, the change in DAS28 was significantly associated with RBCMTXGlu5 and RBCMTXGlu3–5 concentration, but not other shorter chain RBC MTXGlu-n concentrations (Table 3) [17].
Of the seven cross-sectional studies identified, three (all in patients with RA) reported an association between RBCMTXGlu-n concentration and response to treatment and/or at least one measure of disease activity [10, 18, 19]. Angelis-Stoforidis et al. reported that RBCMTXGlu-total concentration (mean ± standard deviation) was significantly higher in responders (60.9 ± 19.1 nmol/L) and partial responders (50.9 ± 23.4 nmol/L, as determined by physicians’ global clinical assessment) compared to non-responders (21.5 ± 10.7 nmol/L, p < 0.001) [10]. In studies by Dervieux et al. (2004 and 2005), linear regression analysis identified that RBC MTXGlu3 concentration was associated with reduced counts of 22 joints for tenderness (β = −0.048 (95 % CI −0.094 to −0.002) and β = −0.050 (95 % CI −0.080 to −0.020)) and swelling (β = −0.045 (95 % CI −0.083 to −0.007) and β = −0.022 (95 % CI −0.048 to 0.004)), respectively, and physician assessment of disease activity (β = −0.026 (95 % CI −0.042 to −0.010) and β = −0.0257 (95 % CI −0.0377 to −0.0137)) [18, 19].
Of the remaining four cross-sectional studies, two (1 in 145 patients with RA [20], the other in 104 patients with JIA [21, 22]) did not identify a significant correlation between RBC MTXGlu-n concentration and either response to MTX or any measure of disease activity, although no quantitative estimate of the effect size was available. In 30 patients with JIA, Dolezalova et al. reported that the RBC MTXGlu-total concentration (mean ± standard deviation) in non-responders and responders, respectively, was 227.6 ± 161.9 and 188.8 ± 245.8 nmol/L, p = 0.72 [21, 22]. Finally, using Spearmans’ rho coefficients, Stamp et al. (2010) reported that in 192 individuals with RA, those with higher RBC MTXGlu3, RBC MTXGlu4, RBC MTXGlu5, RBC MTXGlu1–5 and RBC MTXGlu3–5 concentration had higher disease activity as measured by DAS28 (Table 3) [23].
Effect of changing RBC MTXGlu-n concentration on disease activity
Five studies (three prospective cohort [13, 14] and two cross-sectional studies [18, 19]) included linear regression equations that allowed an approximate assessment of the projected impact of changes of RBC MTXGlu-n concentration on disease activity, four in patients with RA and one in patients with JIA. The projected change in disease activity scores associated with RBC MTXGlu-n concentrations is shown in Fig. 3. The maximum predicted reduction in DAS28 in the R-MTX study was 24 % (95 % CI 8 to 40 %) with doubling RBC MTXGlu1–5 concentration after 3 months, and in the treatment in Rotterdam study, it was 21 % (95 % CI 10 to 33 %) with RBC MTXGlu3 concentration after 6 months [13]. For example, data from the R-MTX study indicates that the typical patient had a DAS28 of 2.92 and RBC MTXGlu1–5 concentration of 117 nmol/L after 3 months of MTX therapy, if this concentration was 234 nmol/L, but it would be expected that their DAS28 would be 2.22 (95 % CI 1.75 to 2.69), representing a reduction of 24 % (95 % CI 8 to 40 %). In the one study in JIA, the largest predicted reduction in JADAS-27 was 31 % (95 % CI 0 to 42 %) with RBC MTXGlu1–5 concentration after 3 months [14]. In the cross-sectional studies reported by Dervieux et al. (2004 and 2005), the estimated benefit with a doubling of RBC MTXGlu3 concentration in tender joint count (45 % (95 % CI 7 to 83 %) and 50 % (95 % CI 20 to 80 %), respectively), swollen joint count (48 % (95 % CI 2 to 94 %) and 18 % (95 % CI −3 to 38 %), respectively) and physician assessment of disease activity (30 % (95 % CI 11 to 48 %) and 29 % (95 % CI 16 to 43 %), respectively) were greater than with the prospective cohort studies [18, 19].
Toxicity
Four of the eight studies in which correlations between RBC MTXGlu-n concentration and MTX toxicity were sought were prospective cohort studies (three in patients with RA and one in patients with JIA, Table 4) [13–15]. None of these studies reported a significant association between RBC MTXGlu-n concentration and adverse effects. Specifically, the odds ratio in the R-MTX study describing the association between RBC MTXGlu1–5 concentration and occurrence of toxicity in the first 3 months of treatment was 1.00 (95 % CI 0.99 to 1.01). They reported that the results were similar after 6 and 9 months of treatment and for all individual RBC MTXGlu-n, and results in the treatment in Rotterdam cohort were also similar [13]. Stamp et al. (2011) reported the association between RBC MTXGlu-n concentration and side effects as ‘not significant’, and in the trial including patients with JIA, Bulatovic Calasan et al. [14] reported that the odds ratio for the association between MTX intolerance and RBC MTXGlu1–5 concentration was 0.99 (95 % CI 1.00 to 1.01, p = 0.72).
Two additional cross-sectional studies in RA patients did not identify a significant association with toxicity [10, 23]. One cross-sectional study in 30 JIA patients reported that the RBC MTXGlu-total concentration in those with and without gastrointestinal side effects was (mean ± standard deviation) 340.7 ± 329.7 versus 186.1 ± 186.1 nmol/L (p = 0.23) [22], whereas another study with 93 JIA patients found that those with gastrointestinal side effects (determined by symptoms at the time of taking the blood sample or by historical change in folic acid dose) had higher RBC MTXGlu3–5 concentrations (mean ± SD concentration in those with and without gastrointestinal intolerance was 159.2 ± 134.4 vs 107 ± 85.2 nmol/L, p = 0.013) [21].
Seven studies analysed the association between hepatotoxicity and RBC MTXGlu-n concentration (four in patients with RA and three in patients with JIA) [10, 13–15, 21, 22]. The definition of hepatotoxicity was variable between studies. In patients with RA, two studies defined hepatotoxicity as alanine aminotransferase (ALT) three times the upper limit of normal [13], one as aspartate aminotransferase (AST) above the upper limit of normal [15] and another as liver function test abnormalities necessitating cessation or dosage change [10]. In studies that included patients with JIA, two studies defined hepatotoxicity as liver enzyme values above the normal range [21, 22], and the other as ALT and/or AST two times the upper limit of normal [14]. In the R-MTX study, the odds ratio describing the association with no hepatotoxicity was 0.92 (95 % CI 0.80 to 1.05), and results were said to be similar after 6 and 9 months, and the results in the treatment in Rotterdam study were described as comparable [13]. In only one of these studies, conducted in 93 JIA patients, the concentration of RBC MTXGlu3–5 was higher in the 13 individuals with LFTs above the upper limit of normal (there were no elevations more than twice the upper limit of normal) compared to those with normal LFTs (mean ± standard deviation 173 ± 162.9 vs 111.8 ± 85.5 nmol/L, p = 0.03). Of note, Bulatovic Calasan et al. showed a positive trend for association between hepatotoxicity (ALT and/or AST two times the upper limit of normal) and RBC MTXGlu-total concentration (OR = 1.02, 95 % CI 1.00 to 1.04, p = 0.08) in 113 JIA patients [14]. The remaining two studies reported the relationship with hepatotoxicity as ‘not statistically significant’—no quantitative estimate of the effect size was available [10, 15].
Discussion
Identified studies that investigated the association between RBC MTXGlu-n concentration and disease activity in inflammatory arthropathies were heterogeneous with respect to study design, concurrent treatments, duration of disease and MTX treatment at enrolment, the RBC MTXGlu-n concentration measured (and reported), statistical methods and tools used to measure response/disease activity. Linear regression estimates suggested that doubling RBC MTXGlu-n concentration may lead to potentially worthwhile reductions in disease activity, but since oral MTX bioavailability reduces with higher doses, doubling RBC MTXGlu-n concentrations may require even greater increases in oral doses or a greater reliance on parenteral administration [24].
The strengths of this systematic review are the broad inclusion criteria and overall search strategy (including searches of clinical trial registries to minimise reporting bias) and the attempt to synthesise the magnitude of benefit that could be expected with concentration guided dosing. Regardless, reporting bias could not be avoided, and it is still possible that the search strategy did not detect all of the relevant reports.
Weaknesses include the heterogeneity in the disease activity scales, methods of analysis and reporting of RBC MTXGlu-n concentrations within the included studies, and as such, we were unable to provide simple and/or consistent assessments (such as regression coefficients with 95 % confidence intervals) of the outcome of each trial. We also chose to use the QuIPS tool to determine the risk of bias for the included studies, whereas others may prefer to use (either instead of or in addition to) a tool for therapeutic studies such as the GRADE criteria [25].
The better quality cohort studies tended to find positive relationships between RBC MTXGlu-n concentration and disease activity, and the results from the cross-sectional studies were more variable. Robust historical data are necessary for these cross-sectional studies, as baseline disease activity is a significant predictor of future disease activity scores [26]. Another limitation of the cross-sectional design may be the practice of up-titrating MTX dose until either the desired response is achieved or until toxicity develops. This practice will result in individuals with more responsive disease receiving less drug (and hence having lower concentrations), and those with less responsive disease or inherent resistance to MTX may be taking higher doses (and have higher concentrations). The degree of dose titration prior to study entry may therefore impact significantly upon findings, such that a negative correlation between RBC MTXGlu-n concentration and disease activity, as seen by Stamp et al. [23], may be a likely outcome. The negative findings in two cross-sectional studies should therefore be considered in this light, and not detract from the more positive results from the cohort studies.
To define the potential value of RBC MTXGlu-n concentration, the most important and/or relevant individual or group of RBC MTXGlu-n derivative(s) should be identified. In this review, there was substantial heterogeneity of the RBC MTXGlu-n species that were associated with disease activity, and this represents a significant limitation in the published literature and represents a significant barrier to routine implementation of RBC MTXGlu-n guided dosing. The potential to assess correlations of response and/or toxicity with a large number of single or groups of RBC MTXGlu-n derivatives over multiple time points introduces the potential for error due to multiple hypothesis testing and reporting bias. The total and relative concentration of each RBC MTXGlu-n derivative depends on MTX dose, route and duration of administration and genetic polymorphisms in enzymes involved in the polyglutamation process [4, 17, 18, 27, 28]. The RBC MTXGlu-n derivative most associated with future disease activity may depend upon these variables and could even be dynamic over time, and these relationships need to be clarified via future research.
A number of other factors that can influence response and toxicity following MTX administration were either not captured or were variably reported in the included studies, including prior and concomitant DMARDs, use of corticosteroids, duration of disease and disease activity and presence of rheumatoid factor, anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide antibodies and/or shared epitope [26]. Standardisation and/or correction for these factors are essential for understanding the relationship between RBC MTXGlu-n concentrations and response to MTX across the spectrum of uses in RA and JIA populations.
The overall evidence suggests that RBC MTXGlu-n concentration is unlikely to be a useful predictor of MTX toxicity. The rate of serious toxicity (e.g. hepatotoxicity, haematological toxicity and pneumonitis) is relatively low, and permanent discontinuation occurs in about 10 % of individuals [29]; so, very large patient numbers would be required to identify concentration-toxicity relationships. Given that hepatic fibrosis and cirrhosis appear to be more common with higher cumulative MTX doses [30], it is reasonable to speculate that these serious hepatic toxicities would be related to long-term exposure of high RBC MTXGlu-n concentrations. However, most of the studies included in this review did not include either adequate patient numbers or sufficiently long-term follow-up to assess this association.
Modest liver enzyme elevations (i.e. up to 3 times the upper limit of normal) secondary to MTX are relatively common in patients with RA, but their association with hepatic fibrosis/cirrhosis is unclear, and elevated liver enzymes necessitate cessation in <10 % of patients and generally resolve spontaneously without MTX dose adjustment [30]. Although data in patients with JIA are less abundant, liver function test abnormalities in these patients appear to be less common [31, 32]. There were little data identified to support an association between RBC MTXGlu-n concentration and elevated liver enzymes in RA patients, but in those with JIA, we found one study with a significant association [21] and another with a non-significant trend [14]. This may be noteworthy, and further evaluation of this issue in JIA patients appears to be justified.
More common but less serious toxicities such as nausea and fatigue are subjective, and since cross-sectional studies will tend to select for ‘tolerant’ individuals, these should be assessed prospectively. It should also be recognised that RBC MTXGlu-n concentration may not be a useful marker for some or all MTX-induced toxicities. For example, gastro-intestinal toxicity tends to occur in 24 h after MTX administration. This temporal association and the putative mechanism of nausea and vomiting being direct interaction of plasma MTX with the chemoreceptor trigger zone suggest that RBC MTXGlu-n concentration is not likely to be a predictor of this adverse effect. Similarly, mechanisms of uptake (and efflux) into/from blood cells versus hepatocytes may differ, and there is no evidence to suggest that intracellular concentrations in different cell types are correlated. A relationship between RBC MTXGlu-n concentration and various toxicities would therefore appear to be difficult to establish, and it appears unlikely that RBC MTXGlu-n concentration will be more useful than traditional markers or predictors (e.g. MTX dose and liver function tests) of toxicity.
To demonstrate clinical applicability, it will be essential to demonstrate a clear benefit for the measurement of RBC MTXGlu-n concentration as a biomarker over and above that achieved with ‘conventional’ predictors of efficacy. Furthermore, how this assay aligns with current treatment strategies, such as ‘treat-to-target’, will need to be defined since none of the studies identified compared MTX dosing to a targeted RBC MTXGlu-n concentration with standard MTX dosing, and thus, no direct evidence was identified to support the clinical utility of such an approach.
Additional prospective studies in MTX naïve early RA or JIA patients are required to clarify RBC MTXGlu-n concentration-response and concentration-toxicity relationships (including the best MTXGlu-n derivative(s) to monitor). This systematic review has demonstrated that inconsistent and incomplete reporting has hampered overall interpretation of the data. In the future, results should be presented numerically as point estimates with associated uncertainty (either confidence intervals or standard errors), rather than p values and/or as non-significant. Furthermore, results should include univariate and multivariate analysis where the association is corrected for known confounders, and the relationship between each RBC MTXGlu-n metabolite and efficacy and/or toxicity should be reported so that meta-analysis is facilitated. Response would ideally be measured by accepted composite measures of disease activity such as JADAS, DAS and/or ACR/EULAR response criteria [33]. Supplementary and on-line data repositories that are available for many journals should be used to present all of this data so that it can be evaluated comprehensively. Such data may form the basis for an RCT comparing the effect of pharmacokinetically informed and conventional dosing of MTX on short- and long-term outcomes in RA patients. Finally, current studies have assumed a linear relationship between RBC MTXGlu-n and outcome, but drug concentration and drug toxicity more typically follow non-linear (sigmoidal) relationships. Investigation of these potentially informative non-linear relationships would be a useful advance in future studies.
In conclusion, there is some encouraging evidence of a relationship between the concentrations of various species of RBC MTXGlu-n and response to MTX, but the derivative(s) that should be monitored are unclear and need to be established prior to routine implementation of RBC MTXGlu-n concentration guided dosing. Relatively large increases in concentration appear to be required to achieve significant reductions in disease activity, and the place of RBC MTXGlu-n concentration guided dosing in the era or treat to target therapy with combination DMARDs must be established.
Abbreviations
- MTX:
-
Methotrexate
- DMARD:
-
Disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug
- RA:
-
Rheumatoid arthritis
- JIA:
-
Juvenile idiopathic arthritis
- MTXGlu-n :
-
Methotrexate polyglutamate
- RBC:
-
Red blood cell
- NSAIDs:
-
Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs
- DAS28:
-
28-Joint Disease Activity Score
- JADAS-27:
-
27-Joint Juvenile Arthritis Disease Activity Score
- QuIPS:
-
Quality in prognostic studies
- RCT:
-
Randomised controlled trial
- ALT:
-
Alanine transferase
- AST:
-
Aspartate transferase
- LFTs:
-
Liver function tests
- ACR:
-
American College of Rheumatology
- EULAR:
-
European League Against Rheumatism
References
Boehm IB, Boehm GA, Bauer R (1998) Management of cutaneous lupus erythematosus with low-dose methotrexate: indication for modulation of inflammatory mechanisms. Rheumatol Int 18(2):59–62. doi:10.1007/s002960050058
Gonzalez-Lopez L, Garcia-Gonzalez A, Vazquez-Del-Mercado M, Muñoz-Valle JF, Gamez-Nava JI (2004) Efficacy of methotrexate in ankylosing spondylitis: a randomized, double blind, placebo controlled trial. J Rheumatol 31(8):1568–1574
Chabner BA, Allegra CJ, Curt GA, Clendeninn NJ, Baram J, Koizumi S, Drake JC, Jolivet J (1985) Polyglutamation of methotrexate. Is methotrexate a prodrug? J Clin Invest 76(3):907–912. doi:10.1172/JCI112088
Dalrymple JM, Stamp LK, O’Donnell JL, Chapman PT, Zhang M, Barclay ML (2008) Pharmacokinetics of oral methotrexate in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 58(11):3299–3308. doi:10.1002/art.24034
Jacobs SA, Adamson RH, Chabner BA, Derr CJ, Johns DG (1975) Stoichiometric inhibition of mammalian dihydrofolate reductase by the γ-glutamyl metabolite of methotrexate, 4-amino-4-deoxy-N10-methylpteroylglutamyl-γ-glutamate. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 63(3):692–698. doi:10.1016/S0006-291X(75)80439-6
Fry DW, Yalowich JC, Goldman ID (1982) Rapid formation of poly-gamma-glutamyl derivatives of methotrexate and their association with dihydrofolate reductase as assessed by high pressure liquid chromatography in the Ehrlich ascites tumor cell in vitro. J Biol Chem 257(4):1890–1896
Jolivet J, Chabner BA (1983) Intracellular pharmacokinetics of methotrexate polyglutamates in human breast cancer cells. Selective retention and less dissociable binding of 4-NH2-10-CH3-pteroylglutamate4 and 4-NH2-10-CH3-pteroylglutamate5 to dihydrofolate reductase. J Clin Invest 72(3):773–778. doi:10.1172/JCI111048
Danila MI, Hughes LB, Brown EE, Morgan SL, Baggott JE, Arnett DK, Bridges SL Jr (2010) Measurement of erythrocyte methotrexate polyglutamate levels: ready for clinical use in rheumatoid arthritis? Curr Rheumatol Rep 12(5):342–347
Galivan J, Nimec Z (1983) Effects of folinic acid on hepatoma cells containing methotrexate polyglutamates. Cancer Res 43(2):551–555
Angelis-Stoforidis P, Vajda FJ, Christophidis N (1999) Methotrexate polyglutamate levels in circulating erythrocytes and polymorphs correlate with clinical efficacy in rheumatoid arthritis. Clin Exp Rheumatol 17(3):313–320
Korell J, Duffull SB, Dalrymple JM, Drake J, Zhang M, Barclay ML, Stamp LK (2014) Comparison of intracellular methotrexate kinetics in red blood cells with the kinetics in other cell types. Br J Clin Pharmacol 77(3):493–497. doi:10.1111/bcp.12209
Hayden JA, van der Windt DA, Cartwright JL, Cote P, Bombardier C (2013) Assessing bias in studies of prognostic factors. Ann Intern Med 158(4):280–286. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-158-4-201302190-00009
de Rotte MC, den Boer E, de Jong PH, Pluijm SM, Bulatovic Calasan M, Weel AE, Huisman AM, Gerards AH, van Schaeybroeck B, Wulffraat NM, Lindemans J, Hazes JM, de Jonge R (2015) Methotrexate polyglutamates in erythrocytes are associated with lower disease activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 74(2):408–414. doi:10.1136/annrheumdis-2013-203725
Bulatovic Calasan M, den Boer E, de Rotte MC, Vastert SJ, Kamphuis S, de Jonge R, Wulffraat NM (2015) Methotrexate polyglutamates in erythrocytes are associated with lower disease activity in juvenile idiopathic arthritis patients. Ann Rheum Dis 74(2):402–407. doi:10.1136/annrheumdis-2013-203723
Dervieux T, Greenstein N, Kremer J (2006) Pharmacogenomic and metabolic biomarkers in the folate pathway and their association with methotrexate effects during dosage escalation in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 54(10):3095–3103
Hobl EL, Jilma B, Erlacher L, Duhm B, Mustak M, Broll H, Hogger P, Rizovski B, Mader RM (2012) A short-chain methotrexate polyglutamate as outcome parameter in rheumatoid arthritis patients receiving methotrexate. Clin Exp Rheumatol 30(2):156–163
Stamp LK, Barclay ML, O’Donnell JL, Zhang M, Drake J, Frampton C, Chapman PT (2011) Effects of changing from oral to subcutaneous methotrexate on red blood cell methotrexate polyglutamate concentrations and disease activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol 38(12):2540–2547. doi:10.3899/jrheum.110481
Dervieux T, Furst D, Lein DO, Capps R, Smith K, Caldwell J, Kremer J (2005) Pharmacogenetic and metabolite measurements are associated with clinical status in patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with methotrexate: results of a multicentred cross sectional observational study. Ann Rheum Dis 64(8):1180–1185
Dervieux T, Furst D, Lein DO, Capps R, Smith K, Walsh M, Kremer J (2004) Polyglutamation of methotrexate with common polymorphisms in reduced folate carrier, aminoimidazole carboxamide ribonucleotide transformylase, and thymidylate synthase are associated with methotrexate effects in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 50(9):2766–2774. doi:10.1002/art.20460
Ando Y, Shimada H, Matsumoto N, Hirota T, Oribe M, Otsuka E, Ishii K, Morimoto T, Ohashi K, Ieiri I (2013) Role of methotrexate polyglutamation and reduced folate carrier 1 (RFC1) gene polymorphisms in clinical assessment indexes. Drug Metab Pharmacokinet 28(5):442–445
Dolezalova P, Krijt J, Chladek J, Nemcova D, Hoza J (2005) Adenosine and methotrexate polyglutamate concentrations in patients with juvenile arthritis. Rheumatology 44(1):74–79
Stamp LK, O’Donnell JL, Chapman PT, Zhang M, James J, Frampton C, Barclay ML (2010) Methotrexate polyglutamate concentrations are not associated with disease control in rheumatoid arthritis patients receiving long-term methotrexate therapy. Arthritis Rheum 62(2):359–368. doi:10.1002/art.27201
Becker ML, Gaedigk R, van Haandel L, Thomas B, Lasky A, Hoeltzel M, Dai H, Stobaugh J, Leeder JS (2011) The effect of genotype on methotrexate polyglutamate variability in juvenile idiopathic arthritis and association with drug response. Arthritis Rheum 63(1):276–285
Hoekstra M, Haagsma C, Neef C, Proost J, Knuif A, van de Laar M (2004) Bioavailability of higher dose methotrexate comparing oral and subcutaneous administration in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol 31(4):645–648
Balshem H, Helfand M, Schunemann HJ, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Brozek J, Vist GE, Falck-Ytter Y, Meerpohl J, Norris S, Guyatt GH (2011) GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol 64(4):401–406. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.07.015
Katchamart W, Johnson S, Lin HJ, Phumethum V, Salliot C, Bombardier C (2010) Predictors for remission in rheumatoid arthritis patients: a systematic review. Arthritis Care Res 62(8):1128–1143. doi:10.1002/acr.20188
Kung TN, Dennis J, Ma Y, Xie G, Bykerk V, Pope J, Thorne C, Keystone E, Siminovitch KA, Gagnon F (2014) RFC1 80G>A is a genetic determinant of methotrexate efficacy in rheumatoid arthritis: a human genome epidemiologic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. Arthritis Rheumatol 66(5):1111–1120. doi:10.1002/art.38331
Stamp LK, Roberts RL (2011) Effect of genetic polymorphisms in the folate pathway on methotrexate therapy in rheumatic diseases. Pharmacogenomics 12(10):1449–1463. doi:10.2217/pgs.11.86
Salliot C, van der Heijde D (2009) Long-term safety of methotrexate monotherapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic literature research. Ann Rheum Dis 68(7):1100–1104. doi:10.1136/ard.2008.093690
Visser K, van der Heijde DM (2009) Risk and management of liver toxicity during methotrexate treatment in rheumatoid and psoriatic arthritis: a systematic review of the literature. Clin Exp Rheumatol 27(6):1017–1025
Kocharla L, Taylor J, Weiler T, Ting TV, Luggen M, Brunner HI (2009) Monitoring methotrexate toxicity in juvenile idiopathic arthritis. J Rheumatol 36(12):2813–2818. doi:10.3899/jrheum.090482
Schmeling H, Foeldvari I, Horneff G (2014) A39: efficacy and safety of methotrexate in oligoarticular persistent juvenile idiopathic arthritis. Arthritis Rheumatol 66(Suppl 11):S59. doi:10.1002/art.38455
Felson DT, Smolen JS, Wells G, Zhang B, van Tuyl LH, Funovits J, Aletaha D, Allaart CF, Bathon J, Bombardieri S, Brooks P, Brown A, Matucci-Cerinic M, Choi H, Combe B, de Wit M, Dougados M, Emery P, Furst D, Gomez-Reino J, Hawker G, Keystone E, Khanna D, Kirwan J, Kvien TK, Landewe R, Listing J, Michaud K, Martin-Mola E, Montie P, Pincus T, Richards P, Siegel JN, Simon LS, Sokka T, Strand V, Tugwell P, Tyndall A, van der Heijde D, Verstappen S, White B, Wolfe F, Zink A, Boers M (2011) American College of Rheumatology/European League against Rheumatism provisional definition of remission in rheumatoid arthritis for clinical trials. Ann Rheum Dis 70(3):404–413. doi:10.1136/ard.2011.149765
Acknowledgments
No funding was received in relation to the preparation of this manuscript.
Conflict of interests
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interests in relation to this manuscript.
Contributions of authors’ statement
HJM, MJS and MDW contributed to design of the study, HJM and MDW undertook database searches and data extraction, and all authors contributed to analysis of results and write-up of final manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
ESM 1
(DOCX 21 kb)
ESM 2
(DOCX 15 kb)
Supplementary Table 1
(DOC 39 kb)
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Mohamed, H.J., Sorich, M.J., Kowalski, S.M. et al. The role and utility of measuring red blood cell methotrexate polyglutamate concentrations in inflammatory arthropathies—a systematic review. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 71, 411–423 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00228-015-1819-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00228-015-1819-x