ACR Meeting Abstracts

ACR Meeting Abstracts

  • Meetings
    • ACR Convergence 2024
    • ACR Convergence 2023
    • 2023 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • ACR Convergence 2022
    • ACR Convergence 2021
    • ACR Convergence 2020
    • 2020 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting
    • 2018-2009 Meetings
    • Download Abstracts
  • Keyword Index
  • Advanced Search
  • Your Favorites
    • Favorites
    • Login
    • View and print all favorites
    • Clear all your favorites
  • ACR Meetings

Abstract Number: 1310

Comparison of Two Methotrexate Initiation Strategies in Rheumatoid Arthritis in Current Practice

Paola Vidal-Montal1, Alice Combier2, Alexia STEELANDT2, Marion THOMAS2, Javier Narvaez3, Joan Miquel Nolla1, Yannick ALLANORE4 and Jerome AVOUAC5, 1Department of Rheumatology, Hospital Universitario de Bellvitge, Barcelona, Spain, 2HOPITAL COCHIN AP-HP, Service de Rhumatologie, Paris, France, 3Hospital Universitario de Bellvitge, Barcelona, Spain, 4Université Paris Cité, Paris, France, 5Rheumatology A Department, Hôpital Cochin, AP-HP Centre - Université Paris Cité, Paris, France

Meeting: ACR Convergence 2023

Keywords: rheumatoid arthritis, X-ray

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
Session Information

Date: Monday, November 13, 2023

Title: (1308–1344) RA – Treatments Poster II

Session Type: Poster Session B

Session Time: 9:00AM-11:00AM

Background/Purpose: To compare the efficacy and tolerance at 3 and 6 months of two methotrexate (MTX) initiation strategies in rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Methods: Retrospective,monocentric,cross-sectionalstudy including patients with RA who initiated MTX as first-line therapy during the last 2 years according to one of the following 2 strategies: a “conventional” strategy (CS) defined by an initiation of oral MTX at a dose of 10-15 mg/week or an “aggressive” strategy (AS), defined by an initiation of subcutaneous (SC) MTX at a dose of 15 mg/week SC or >15 mg/week either orally or SC. Each strategy allowed the possibility to increase the doses and/or switch to the SC route at 3 months. Efficacy was assessed at 3 and 6 months using the DAS28-CRP. The tolerance of each strategy was also assessed at month 3 and 6.

Results: We included 101 patients (85 women) with a mean age of 55±12 years and disease duration of 5±6 months. The frequency of rheumatoid factors, anti-CCP antibodies and erosions was 83%, 81% and 38% respectively. 61 patients initiated MTX according to the CS, with an increase of dose and/or a switch to the SC route at 3 months for 31 patients, and 40 patients started treatment according to the AS, with an increase of dose and/or switch to the SC route at 3 months for 14 patients. There was no difference between these 2 groups in terms of age, gender, disease duration, antibody status, frequency of bone erosions, body mass index, comorbidities and disease activity at baseline. Efficacy at 3 months was significantly higher with the AS (reduction of the DAS28-CRP from 4.34±0.91 to 2.39±0.75, mean difference of 1.95±1.21, p< 0.001) compared to the CS (reduction of the DAS28-CRP from 4.09±0.62 to 2.88±0.73, mean difference of 1.21±0.90, p=0.12) (Figure 1). The improvement of tender/swollen joint counts, patient global assessment and CRP levels was also significantly more important at 3 months with the AS (Table 1). At 6 months, although the DAS28-CRP was similar in the 2 groups (Figure 1), less patients from the AS subgroup required an escalation to a targeted biologic/synthetic therapy compared to the CS (12/40, 30% vs. 29/61, 48%, p=0.073). The frequency of digestive side effects at 3 months was significantly lower in the AS (3/40, 7,5% vs. 16/61, 26%, p=0.021). The frequency of hepatic cytolysis at 3 month was higher in the AS (4/40, 10% vs. 1/61,1,6%, p=0.057). The frequency of asthenia at 3 months was similar in both groups (7/4, 18% vs. 6/61, 10%, p=0.25). Only one infection was observed in the CS and no hematological side effect was recorded. At 6 months, the cumulative incidence of side effects was 23% with the AS compared to 46% with the CS (p=0.015). Only one treatment discontinuation was noted in the AS subgroup vs. 9 in the CS subgroup (p=0.042).

Conclusion: This study suggests that it is possible to use a more aggressive initiation strategy of MTX in RA in routine clinical practice. This strategy allows to obtain an earlier clinical response and it is associated with a better tolerance than the conventional strategy. These results need to be confirmed in prospective studies.

Supporting image 1

Table 1: Evaluation of efficacy parameter at 3 months according to the methotrexate initiation strategy

Supporting image 2

Figure 1: Evolution at 3 and 6 months of DAS28-CRP index according to the methotrexate initiation strategy


Disclosures: P. Vidal-Montal: None; A. Combier: None; A. STEELANDT: None; M. THOMAS: None; J. Narvaez: None; J. Nolla: None; Y. ALLANORE: AbbVie/Abbott, 2, Alpine Immunoscience, 5, AstraZeneca, 2, Bayer, 2, Boehringer-Ingelheim, 2, Janssen, 2, Medsenic, 2, 5, Mylan, 2, OSE Immunotherapeutics, 5, Prometeus, 2, Roche, 2, Sanofi, 2; J. AVOUAC: AbbVie, 1, 2, 4, 6, BMS, 4, 5, 6, Fresenius Kabi, 4, 5, Galapagos, 1, 2, 4, 6, Lilly, 6, Novartis, 5, 6, Pfizer, 5, 6, Sanofi, 4, 6.

To cite this abstract in AMA style:

Vidal-Montal P, Combier A, STEELANDT A, THOMAS M, Narvaez J, Nolla J, ALLANORE Y, AVOUAC J. Comparison of Two Methotrexate Initiation Strategies in Rheumatoid Arthritis in Current Practice [abstract]. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2023; 75 (suppl 9). https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/comparison-of-two-methotrexate-initiation-strategies-in-rheumatoid-arthritis-in-current-practice/. Accessed .
  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print

« Back to ACR Convergence 2023

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/comparison-of-two-methotrexate-initiation-strategies-in-rheumatoid-arthritis-in-current-practice/

Advanced Search

Your Favorites

You can save and print a list of your favorite abstracts during your browser session by clicking the “Favorite” button at the bottom of any abstract. View your favorites »

All abstracts accepted to ACR Convergence are under media embargo once the ACR has notified presenters of their abstract’s acceptance. They may be presented at other meetings or published as manuscripts after this time but should not be discussed in non-scholarly venues or outlets. The following embargo policies are strictly enforced by the ACR.

Accepted abstracts are made available to the public online in advance of the meeting and are published in a special online supplement of our scientific journal, Arthritis & Rheumatology. Information contained in those abstracts may not be released until the abstracts appear online. In an exception to the media embargo, academic institutions, private organizations, and companies with products whose value may be influenced by information contained in an abstract may issue a press release to coincide with the availability of an ACR abstract on the ACR website. However, the ACR continues to require that information that goes beyond that contained in the abstract (e.g., discussion of the abstract done as part of editorial news coverage) is under media embargo until 10:00 AM ET on November 14, 2024. Journalists with access to embargoed information cannot release articles or editorial news coverage before this time. Editorial news coverage is considered original articles/videos developed by employed journalists to report facts, commentary, and subject matter expert quotes in a narrative form using a variety of sources (e.g., research, announcements, press releases, events, etc.).

Violation of this policy may result in the abstract being withdrawn from the meeting and other measures deemed appropriate. Authors are responsible for notifying colleagues, institutions, communications firms, and all other stakeholders related to the development or promotion of the abstract about this policy. If you have questions about the ACR abstract embargo policy, please contact ACR abstracts staff at [email protected].

Wiley

  • Online Journal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Permissions Policies
  • Cookie Preferences

© Copyright 2025 American College of Rheumatology