-
Oral regimen for high dose methotrexate urine alkalinization: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Daru : Journal of Faculty of Pharmacy,... Jun 2024Urine alkalinization prevents nephrotoxicity in patients receiving high-dose methotrexate (HDMTX). While the standard approach involves IV sodium bicarbonate,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
Urine alkalinization prevents nephrotoxicity in patients receiving high-dose methotrexate (HDMTX). While the standard approach involves IV sodium bicarbonate, alternative oral bicarbonate regimens are crucial in drug shortages and outpatient settings. This study aims to review the efficacy and safety of such regimens.
METHODS
PubMed, WOS, and Scopus were systematically searched using the PRISMA protocol for relevant studies involving human subjects, including randomized clinical trials, retrospective, prospective, cohort, case reports, and case series studies. There were no restrictions on language, time, or age group. Qualified and eligible papers were used to extract data on efficacy and safety indicators, and the final relevant records were assessed for quality using the Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies-of Interventions (ROBINS-I) assessment tool.
RESULTS
12 studies with 1212 participants were included in the systematic review, with pooled data from 8 studies used for meta-analysis. No significant differences in mean differences (MDs) or odds ratio (OR) were found after the oral bicarbonate regimen, except for when urine pH fell to < 7 (MD: 0.91, 95% CI: 0.32, 1.5, P < 0.05) and the incidence of diarrhea (OR: 2.92, 95% CI: 1.69, 5.05, P < 0.05).
CONCLUSION
An oral bicarbonate regimen is a safe and effective way to alkalize HDMTX urine, providing a viable and cost-effective alternative to IV protocols. Further prospective multicenter studies are necessary. Systematic review registration identifier: CRD42023379666.
Topics: Humans; Methotrexate; Administration, Oral; Sodium Bicarbonate; Hydrogen-Ion Concentration; Urine
PubMed: 38233724
DOI: 10.1007/s40199-023-00499-3 -
Urology Jun 2024To determine whether neoadjuvant gemcitabine and cisplatin (GC) vs dose-dense methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (ddMVAC) before radical cystectomy... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
To determine whether neoadjuvant gemcitabine and cisplatin (GC) vs dose-dense methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (ddMVAC) before radical cystectomy improves overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and pathologic complete response (pCR) for patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer with secondary analyses of pathological downstaging and toxicity.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
This systematic review and meta-analysis identified studies of patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer treated with neoadjuvant GC compared to ddMVAC from PubMed, Web of Science, and EMBASE. Random-effect models for pooled log-transformed hazard ratios (HR) for OS and PFS and pooled odds ratios for pCR and downstaging were developed using the generic inverse variance method and Mantel-Haenszel method, respectively.
RESULTS
Ten studies were identified (4 OS, 2 PFS, and 6 pCR clinical endpoints). Neoadjuvant ddMVAC improved OS (HR 0.71 [95% confidence intervals 0.56; 0.90]), PFS (HR 0.76 [95% confidence intervals 0.60; 0.97]), and pathological downstaging (odds ratio 1.34 [95% confidence interval 1.01; 1.78]) as compared to GC. There was no significant difference between regimens for pCR rates (odds ratio 1.38 [95% confidence interval 0.90; 2.12]). Treatment toxicity was greater with ddMVAC. Limitations result from differences in number of ddMVAC cycles and patient selection between studies.
CONCLUSION
Neoadjuvant ddMVAC is associated with improved OS and PFS vs gemcitabine/cisplatin for patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer before radical cystectomy. Although rates of pathological complete response were not significantly different, pathological downstaging correlated with OS. ddMVAC should be preferred over gemcitabine/cisplatin for patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer who can tolerate its greater toxicity.
Topics: Urinary Bladder Neoplasms; Humans; Cisplatin; Neoadjuvant Therapy; Neoplasm Invasiveness; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Gemcitabine; Deoxycytidine; Cystectomy; Doxorubicin; Vinblastine; Methotrexate; Chemotherapy, Adjuvant
PubMed: 38685388
DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2024.04.034 -
Immunotherapy Feb 2024Oral conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs), especially methotrexate, are the cornerstone of treating psoriatic arthritis (PsA). The... (Review)
Review
Oral conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs), especially methotrexate, are the cornerstone of treating psoriatic arthritis (PsA). The use of csDMARDs with biologics has increased their efficacy in psoriasis. However, the combination of two oral DMARDs in patients with PsA has not been adequately reviewed. In this study, we explore the combinational use of methotrexate with DMARDs in PsA patients. A review was conducted using Medline (PubMed), Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library, covering articles up to February 2023. Nine studies comprising 1993 participants were included. The evidence supporting combination therapy remains limited. Combinational therapy could be considered in patients with inadequate response to monotherapy or no access to biologics.
Topics: Humans; Antirheumatic Agents; Methotrexate; Arthritis, Psoriatic; Psoriasis; Biological Products
PubMed: 38112064
DOI: 10.2217/imt-2023-0139 -
Transplant Immunology Aug 2023COVID-19 vaccines exhibit high levels of immunogenicity in the overall population. Data on the effects of immunomodulators on the consequences of COVID-19 in patients... (Review)
Review
The effects of methotrexate on the immune responses to the COVID-19 vaccines in the patients with immune-mediated inflammatory disease: A systematic review of clinical evidence.
COVID-19 vaccines exhibit high levels of immunogenicity in the overall population. Data on the effects of immunomodulators on the consequences of COVID-19 in patients with Immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) remains scarce. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the immune responses to the COVID-19 vaccines in IMID patients receiving methotrexate (MTX) compared to healthy individuals. A comprehensive literature search was carried out using electronic databases such as PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Embase up to August 2022 to identify eligible RCTs evaluating the effect of MTX on immune responses in patients with COVID-19. The PRISMA checklist protocol was applied for the quality assessment of the selected trials. Our findings demonstrated that MTX lowered the responses of T cells and antibodies in IMID patients compared to healthy controls. We also discovered that young age (<60 years) was the main parameter influencing the antibody response after vaccination, while MTX had little effect. Following vaccination, MTX-hold and age were considered the main factors influencing the antibody response. In patients older than 60 years of age, the time point of 10 days of MTX discontinuation was critical to boosting the humoral response to anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG. Because many IMID patients did not have adequate humoral and cellular responses, our findings highlighted the importance of second or booster doses of vaccine and temporary MTX discontinuation. As a result, it implies that individuals with IMIDs should be subjected to more research, particularly humoral and cellular immunity efficiency trials after COVID-19 vaccination, until credible information is achieved.
Topics: Humans; Infant, Newborn; Middle Aged; COVID-19 Vaccines; COVID-19; Methotrexate; Immunomodulating Agents; Immunoglobulin G; Antibodies, Viral; Immunity, Cellular
PubMed: 37236514
DOI: 10.1016/j.trim.2023.101858 -
Clinical Rheumatology Jul 2024Immunosuppressants, such as methotrexate (MTX), can suppress the COVID-19 vaccine response in patients with autoimmune diseases. Thus, this study aims to evaluate the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Immunosuppressants, such as methotrexate (MTX), can suppress the COVID-19 vaccine response in patients with autoimmune diseases. Thus, this study aims to evaluate the effects of MTX hold following COVID-19 vaccination on vaccine efficacy response. A systematic review and meta-analysis of relevant studies retrieved from Web of Science, SCOPUS, PubMed, and CENTRAL from inception until Oct 1, 2023, was conducted. Covidence was used to screen the eligible articles, and all relevant outcomes data were synthesized using risk ratios (RRs) or standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) in meta-analysis models within RevMan 5.4. PROSPERO ID: CRD42024511628. Four studies with a total of 762 patients with autoimmune inflammatory disorders were included. Holding MTX following the COVID-19 vaccination for approximately 2 weeks was associated with significantly higher antibody titer (SMD: 0.70, 95% CI [0.54, 0.87], P < 0.00001). However, the flare rate was significantly higher in the MTX hold group based on CDAI > 10 or DAS28-CRP > 1.2 either after 1st dose (RR: 2.49 with 95% CI [1.39, 4.47], P = 0.002) or 2nd dose (RR: 2.16 with 95% CI [1.37, 3.41], P = 0.0009) and self-reported disease flare (RR: 1.71 with 95% CI [1.35, 2.17], P < 0.00001). Holding MTX for 2 weeks after the COVID-19 vaccination resulted in significantly higher antibody titer but also had a higher disease flare rate, necessitating cautious clinical monitoring during this period. There is still a need to investigate safer MTX hold duration, considering patients' vulnerability to COVID-19, disease status, and demographics while adopting this strategy.
Topics: Humans; Methotrexate; COVID-19 Vaccines; COVID-19; Autoimmune Diseases; Immunosuppressive Agents; SARS-CoV-2; Vaccine Efficacy
PubMed: 38802670
DOI: 10.1007/s10067-024-07013-3 -
World Journal of Surgical Oncology Jan 2024We aimed to provide a reference based on evidence for an individualized clinical medication of high-dose methotrexate (HD-MTX) in osteosarcoma patients by evaluating the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
We aimed to provide a reference based on evidence for an individualized clinical medication of high-dose methotrexate (HD-MTX) in osteosarcoma patients by evaluating the effect of gene polymorphism on adverse reactions of HD-MTX usage.
METHODS
Several databases were combed for research on the association between gene polymorphisms and adverse reactions to HD-MTX up to January 2023. A meta-analysis and/or descriptive analysis on the incidence of HD-MTX-related adverse reactions were conducted by using clinical studies meeting inclusion criteria.
RESULTS
Twelve studies involving 889 patients were included. There were 8, 6, 5, and 4 studies related to MTHFR C677T, MTHFR A1298C, RFC1 G80A, and MDR1 C3435T polymorphisms, respectively. The results of the meta-analysis showed that the MTHFR C677T polymorphism was associated with G3-4 hepatotoxicity, G3-4 nephrotoxicity, G3-4 gastrointestinal toxicity, and G3-4 mucositis under the recessive genetic model (MM vs. Mm/mm). Limited research showed that MTHFR C677T was associated with G3-4 nephrotoxicity in the allelic genetic model (M vs. m). MTHFR A1298C polymorphism was associated with a decreased risk of adverse reactions to HD-MTX usage, without statistical significance. This review's descriptive analysis showed no significant correlation between the RFC1 G80A, and MDR1 C3435T polymorphism and adverse reactions of HD-MTX.
CONCLUSION
The MTHFR C677T mutation may enhance the risk of HD-MTX adverse reactions in osteosarcoma patients. Existing studies have not found a significant correlation between the MTHFR A1298C, RFC1 G80A, and MDR1 C3435T polymorphism and adverse reactions caused by HD-MTX. Lastly, this conclusion was limited because of few studies.
Topics: Humans; Methotrexate; Polymorphism, Genetic; Alleles; Methylenetetrahydrofolate Reductase (NADPH2); Osteosarcoma; Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide; Genotype
PubMed: 38212758
DOI: 10.1186/s12957-023-03287-0 -
Modern Rheumatology Dec 2023In the current study, we aimed to investigate the effect of smoking on inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX-IR) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
In the current study, we aimed to investigate the effect of smoking on inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX-IR) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science until 6 June 2022. Observational or interventional studies investigating MTX-IR in RA patients based on smoking status were included. Two independent reviewers assessed the risk of bias and the certainty of the evidence using the Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies-of Interventions and Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation tools, respectively.
RESULTS
We included 23 studies in the systematic review and 13 in the meta-analysis. Of the 13 included studies, 6 had a moderate risk, 3 had a serious risk, and 4 had a critical risk of bias. The overall random-effect meta-analysis suggested that smokers were 58% more likely to be MTX-IR when compared with nonsmokers [odds ratio (OR) 1.58, 95% confidence interval 1.21-2.06; P = .001; I2 = 69.3%]. The common-effect meta-analysis of the adjusted ORs demonstrated an overall OR of 2.69 (1.88-3.83; P < .001; I2 = 27.1%).
CONCLUSIONS
The current study showed that smoking is a significant predictor of MTX-IR, especially in disease-modifying antirheumatic drug-naïve early RA patients, as most of the included studies in the meta-analysis consisted of this population.
Topics: Humans; Methotrexate; Smoking; Arthritis, Rheumatoid; Antirheumatic Agents; Drug Therapy, Combination
PubMed: 36688574
DOI: 10.1093/mr/road013 -
Advances in Clinical and Experimental... May 2024Osteosarcoma is a pleomorphic cancer that frequently affects children and teenagers. Although several chemotherapy regimens have been utilized for many years, the best... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Osteosarcoma is a pleomorphic cancer that frequently affects children and teenagers. Although several chemotherapy regimens have been utilized for many years, the best therapeutic option for the treatment of osteosarcoma has not yet been determined.
OBJECTIVES
This meta-analysis was designed to assess the clinical efficacy of a high-dose methotrexate, doxorubicin and cisplatin (MAP) regimen and compare its survival outcomes with those of other chemotherapy strategies in patients diagnosed with osteosarcoma.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
We systematically searched databases, namely Embase, the Cochrane Library and PubMed, up to August 2022, for relevant studies investigating the impact of the MAP chemotherapy protocol on survival among patients with osteosarcoma. The odds ratio (OR) pooled estimates and their 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated.
RESULTS
Twelve studies including 4102 patients were eligible for analysis in this study. The estimated pooled ORs of the 3-year overall survival (OS) and event-free survival (EFS) were OR = 1.08 (95% CI: 0.72-1.62, p = 0.70) and OR = 1.04 (95% CI: 0.81-1.32, p = 0.78, respectively). The 5-year OS and EFS were OR = 0.87 (95% CI: 0.62-1.23, p = 0.42) and OR = 1.13 (95% CI: 0.76-1.68, p = 0.54), respectively, with no statistical differences. The subgroup analysis of MAP compared to a 2-drug regimen (doxorubicin and cisplatin) revealed a significant difference between the 2 chemotherapy strategy groups in 3-year OS rates (OR = 0.72 (95% CI: 0.56-0.92, p = 0.009)) and 5-year EFS rates (OR = 0.57 (95% CI: 0.43-0.76, p < 0.001)).
CONCLUSION
The MAP chemotherapy strategy for osteosarcoma showed superiority over other regimens, especially over the 2-drug regimen (doxorubicin/cisplatin), in terms of better prognosis and safety.
Topics: Osteosarcoma; Humans; Cisplatin; Doxorubicin; Bone Neoplasms; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Methotrexate; Treatment Outcome; Antineoplastic Agents
PubMed: 37747442
DOI: 10.17219/acem/170098 -
Arthritis Care & Research Aug 2023Whereas in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis much evidence exists on the effects of current pharmacologic treatment on clinical outcomes, little is known about the...
OBJECTIVE
Whereas in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis much evidence exists on the effects of current pharmacologic treatment on clinical outcomes, little is known about the effects on patient-reported outcomes. This systematic review aims to evaluate the effects of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) on the patient-relevant domains of pain, fatigue, activity limitation, overall emotional and physical health impact, and work/school/housework ability and productivity.
METHODS
A literature search was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials wherein registered DMARDs were compared with placebo or methotrexate and reported the effects on patient-reported outcomes included in the International Consortium of Health Outcomes Measurement standard set for inflammatory arthritis. Random effects meta-analyses using the standardized mean differences of change scores as the effect measure were performed for the domains of pain, fatigue, and activity limitation, comparing DMARDs with placebo and methotrexate. The other 2 domains were presented narratively.
RESULTS
Across the 5 domains, 69 records belonging to 52 studies were identified. All meta-analyses showed a decrease of burden when DMARDs were compared with placebo (standardized mean differences [95% confidence interval] in pain -0.80 [-0.99, -0.61], fatigue -0.48 [-0.64, -0.32], and activity limitation -0.56 [- 0.63, -0.49]) and when compared with methotrexate (-0.55 [-0.70, -0.41), -0.44 [-0.55, -0.33], and - 0.37 [-0.44, -0.30], respectively).
CONCLUSION
DMARDs decrease the burden in all the domains that are relevant to patients. Effect sizes may be influenced by DMARD type. Therefore, in the decision for rheumatoid arthritis treatment, patient-reported outcomes should be taken into account.
Topics: Humans; Antirheumatic Agents; Methotrexate; Arthritis, Rheumatoid
PubMed: 35657611
DOI: 10.1002/acr.24965 -
European Journal of Human Genetics :... Feb 2024The Dutch Pharmacogenetics Working Group (DPWG) aims to facilitate PGx implementation by developing evidence-based pharmacogenetics guidelines to optimize...
The Dutch Pharmacogenetics Working Group (DPWG) aims to facilitate PGx implementation by developing evidence-based pharmacogenetics guidelines to optimize pharmacotherapy. This guideline describes the gene-drug interaction of ABCG2 with allopurinol, HLA-B with allopurinol, MTHFR with folic acid, and MTHFR with methotrexate, relevant for the treatment of gout, cancer, and rheumatoid arthritis. A systematic review was performed based on which pharmacotherapeutic recommendations were developed. Allopurinol is less effective in patients with the ABCG2 p.(Gln141Lys) variant. In HLA-B*58:01 carriers, the risk of severe cutaneous adverse events associated with allopurinol is strongly increased. The DPWG recommends using a higher allopurinol dose in patients with the ABCG2 p.(Gln141Lys) variant. For HLA-B*58:01 positive patients the DPWG recommends choosing an alternative (for instance febuxostat). The DPWG indicates that another option would be to precede treatment with allopurinol tolerance induction. Genotyping of ABCG2 in patients starting on allopurinol was judged to be 'potentially beneficial' for drug effectiveness, meaning genotyping can be considered on an individual patient basis. Genotyping for HLA-B*58:01 in patients starting on allopurinol was judged to be 'beneficial' for drug safety, meaning it is advised to consider genotyping the patient before (or directly after) drug therapy has been initiated. For MTHFR-folic acid there is evidence for a gene-drug interaction, but there is insufficient evidence for a clinical effect that makes therapy adjustment useful. Finally, for MTHFR-methotrexate there is insufficient evidence for a gene-drug interaction.
Topics: Humans; Allopurinol; ATP Binding Cassette Transporter, Subfamily G, Member 2; Drug Interactions; Folic Acid; Gout Suppressants; HLA-B Antigens; Methotrexate; Methylenetetrahydrofolate Reductase (NADPH2); Neoplasm Proteins; Pharmacogenetics
PubMed: 36056234
DOI: 10.1038/s41431-022-01180-0