Abstract
BACKGROUND:
Methotrexate, a toxic antimetabolite that limits cellular reproduction by acting as an antagonist to folic acid, has been used to control autoimmune disease with different results. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of low dose Methotrexate in the relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS).
METHODS:
Eighty patients with definite RRMS aged 15 to 55 years were randomly allocated to receive a 12-month treatment course of either oral Methotrexate (7.5 mg/week) or intramuscular Interferon β-1α (30 μg/week). Response to treatment was assessed at 12 months after start of therapy.
RESULTS:
The results of the study demonstrated significant reduction in relapse rate in both groups (p < 0.01). In 40 patients treated by Methotrexate, the mean value (SD) of relapse rate decreased from 1.75 (0.74) to 0.97 (0.83) (p < 0.01). Correspondingly, the mean value (SD) of relapse rate in patients treated by Interferon β-1α decreased from 1.52 (0.59) to 0.57 (0.78) (p < 0.01). Decrease of relapse rate in Interferon β-1α group was more than that in the other group (p = 0.06).
CONCLUSIONS:
This study suggests that although treatment with Methotrexate may significantly reduce relapse rate and slow progression of disease in patients with RRMS, its efficacy is less than Interferon β-1α and it may be better used as add-on therapy.
KEYWORDS: Multiple Sclerosis, Methotrexate, Interferon Beta
Multiple sclerosis (MS), the most prevalent chronic neurologic disease, is an inflammatory, demyelinating, immune-mediated disease affecting young adults and often associated with significant disability and impaired quality of life.1–3 Disease modifying therapies only slow the progression of the disease, therefore, symptom management must have a long-term consideration.4
At present, there is no cure for MS and prime task of treatment is to prevent the relapses and to slow down the neurological deterioration. Despite extensive research to develop effective pharmacological treatments to alleviate exacerbation and chronic neurological damage in MS, current available drugs have limited efficacy and considerable adverse effects.5,6
At present, three Interferon beta (IFNβ) formulations, and glatiramer acetate are used as the first step of treatment with only partially effect on reducing disease activity in relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS). Tysabri and Mitoxantrone are used as the second line in patients with worsening RRMS.7–9 These drugs are expensive with only modest benefit and show no or little efficacy or are not well tolerated in many patients.5,6,10,11
Because of these limitations, most of patients initially or after some duration of therapy request for more potent, less expensive and friendly useable substitution. Recently, frequent studies are performed on oral drugs that most of them are immunosuppressive or immunomodulative (such as Daclizumab, Fingolimod, Laquinimod, Alemtuzumab, Rituximab and …).7,12–14
Immunosuppressive drugs were used in treatment of MS patients according to hypothesis of central nervous system inflammation in MS pathophysiology.15 Recently, oral Methotrexate (MTX) was used in treatment of progressive MS without significant side effects.10,16,17 This was used as a potent immuno-suppressive drug from 30 years ago in the treatment of MS and about 10 percent of MS patients received this drug for treatment.8,15,18 Methotrexate with effect on immune system prevents inflammation and by this way affects the MS disease course.19
Multiple studies were performed to evaluate efficacy and safety of Methotrexate in treatment of MS patients with inconsistent results.17,20,21 In some studies, Methotrexate was recommended as second line in treatment of MS as combination therapy,22 and in some studies the effect of drug is questionable;23,24 however, there is limited evidence of its efficacy in MS patients, so this study was designed to evaluate efficacy of low dose Methotrexate in prevention of MS progression in Iranian RRMS patients compared to IFNβ-1α.
Methods
This randomized single-blind clinical trial was done to compare the effect of low dose Methotrexate and weekly injection of Interferon β-1α (Cinnovex) on the prevention of MS progression.
Patients
There were 80 MS patients recruited from neurology outpatient clinics of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences in 2007. Entry criteria included men and women 15-55 years with a clinical definite RRMS according to McDonald criteria:25 with ≥ 2 relapses within the 2-years prior to study, stable neurological functioning for at least one month prior to study entry and have an expanded disability status scale (EDSS)26 score ≤ 4 and a willingness to continue current medications for the duration of the study. Exclusion criteria included evidence of substantial psychiatric, cardiac, endocrinological, hematologic, hepatic, renal, or metabolic disease and pregnancy or lactation as determined by history, physical examination, and screening blood tests. Women of child-bearing potential had to practice a clinically accepted method of contraception.
Tenets of current version of the Declaration of Helsinki were followed, institutional ethical committee approval was granted, and the nature of the trial was explained to the patient. After a detailed discussion with the neurologist, patients made a final decision and each patient signed an informed consent.
Randomization Scheme
A total of 97 patients were eligible for study. 17 patients were excluded because they refused entry or discontinuing treatment. Ultimately, eighty patients, 25 men (31.2%) and 55 women (68.8%) completed their treatments without interruption and were assigned randomly and equally to one of the two self-administered treatment groups. Patients were randomized according to a preexisting list produced by a computer program that differed from a random number generator only in that it assigned equal numbers of patients into each treatment group. The first treatment group received 7.5 mg of oral Methotrexate weekly (with 1 mg daily folic acid supplementation) for 12-months. The second group received 30 μg weekly intramuscular Interferon β-1α (Cinnovex) for 12-months. Patients were allowed access to their routine symptomatic therapy. Compliance with study treatment was established by asking the patients about missed doses. In the month preceding the trial, all patients had a pre-treatment evaluation that consisted of obtaining demographic data, complete neurologic and medical history, physical and neurologic examination, and previous treatment. Every 3 months, laboratory tests including CBC, LFT, BUN, creatinine, and albumin were checked in all patients
Patient Evaluation
The trial was single-blinded and physician (MRS) who assessed the outcome was not aware of type of treatment of every patient. Patients were evaluated at baseline and 12-months after the start of the therapy by a neurologist to evaluate the development of side effects of the medications, compliance of the patients, and efficacy parameters. Assessment of the course of the disease was done by change in EDSS and number of relapses.
Statistical Analysis
Statistical analysis was based on an intention-to-treat principle. Comparison between groups receiving Methotrexate and Interferon β-1α was made using t-test for independent samples; comparisons between before and 12-months after treatment within each group were done by paired student's t-test. Comparisons between proportions were done by chi-square or Fisher's exact test. Results are expressed as mean (SD) and P<0.05 was considered statistically significant. All statistical tests were two-sided. The analyses were done on a personal computer using SPSS for Windows (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL).
Results
Ultimately 80 patients who met the entry criteria were enrolled for the study and completed 12 months treatment. The two treatment groups were generally well matched at baseline with regard to age, gender, duration of disease, EDSS, and relapses in previous year before study. The patients had a mean (SD) age of 34.25 (8.34) years in MTX group and 30.75(8.75) in INF group without significant differences between the two groups (p < 0.05).
Mean (SD) EDSS at the start of treatment with first and second groups was 2.32 (0.96) and 2.02 (0.65), respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between them (Table 1). Treatment was well tolerated. Changes of mean EDSS and number of relapses before and after receiving Methotrexate or Interferon β-1α are shown in Table 2.
Table 1.
Characteristics of patients by treatment group at baseline
Table 2.
Comparison of Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) and relapse rate before and after treatment with Methotrexate and Interferon β-1α
In both groups, the average EDSS score did not significantly change before and after treatment (p = 0.82). The average EDSS score increased from baseline by 0.05 point (95% CI; 0.18, 0.38) in Methotrexate, compared to a decrease of 0.04 point (95% CI; 0.09, 0.37) in Interferon β-1α group. After 12-month treatment in the Methotrexate group, the mean (SD) relapse rate decreased from 1.75 (0.74) at baseline to 0.97 (0.83) at the end of study period (p < 0.01).
Correspondingly, in the Interferon β-1α group, the mean (SD) relapse rate decreased from 1.52 (0.59) at baseline to 0.57 (0.78) at the end of study (p < 0.01).
The overall cross-tab analysis revealed significant decrease of relapses in both groups without any statistically differences between them (Table 2), and although EDSS increased slightly in Methotrexate group compared with Interferon β-1α group, there was no significant difference in disability changes before and after treatment.
Discussion
In current study, although oral administration of low dose Methotrexate over 12-months significantly decreased the relapse rate in RRMS patients, this efficacy was less than that in iterferon β-1α group.
No unusual or unexpected safety risks were found with our patients and the spectrum of most frequent adverse events was similar to previous studies such as the study of Goodkin that was reported no major side effect during 36 months treatment by Methotrexate.27 In our study, gastrointestinal symptoms were the most common side effects and no major side effect was reported such as those in previous studies.28–30 Headache and fever were the most common side effects of Interferon β-1α group after injection. There was not any discontinuation of drugs among patients of the two groups according to the side effects.
The results of this study were similar to the previous study that showed a trend towards fewer relapse in the RRMS.31 An open-label study was performed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of combination therapy with weekly oral Methotrexate (20 mg) and Interferon b-la (IFNb-la) in patients with MS;32 44% reduction in the number of Gadolinium -enhanced lesions on MRI scan was observed during combination therapy (p = 0.02). There was a trend towards fewer exacerbations too and the results of study suggested this combination therapy may be safe and well tolerated. According to a clinical trial of Methotrexate for progressive MS,27 there were significant differences between Methotrexate and placebo treated groups.
In another study, Methotrexate was effective as add-on treatment in preventing progression in patients with poor responses to Interferon-b treatment alone.17
The mechanism of action of Methotrexate on MS has not been fully elucidated yet. MS have been identified as Thl-mediated autoimmune diseases.33 In contrast, Th2-mediated responses have beneficial effects on the severity and progression of the disease,34,35 and are one of the major mechanisms underlying Agspecific immune tolerance induction.36–39 Methotrexate competitively and reversibly inhibits dihydrofolate reductase (DHFR), an enzyme that participates in the tetrahydrofolate synthesis.
Lower doses of Methotrexate have been shown to be effective for the management of some disease such as rheumatoid arthritis, Crohn's disease, and MS. In these cases, inhibition of DHFR is not thought to be the main mechanism, but rather the inhibition of enzymes involved in purine metabolism, leading to accumulation of adenosine, or the inhibition of T cell activation and suppression of intercellular adhesion molecule expression by T cells to inhibit acute autoimmune attack on the central nervous system. Therefore, previously mentioned side effects with high dose of Methotrexate are not expected to occur with low dose administration for MS treatment.
This trial showed effectiveness of Methotrexate in RRMS but less than that of Interferon β-1α. There was limitation in keeping patients blind because of the different administration rout of drugs (intramuscular injection vs. oral administration) So, we tried to do randomization carefully as Schultz and co-workers reported that careful randomization is more important than a double-blind design.36
Conclusion
This comparative trial suggested that although Methotrexate may reduce the relapses of RRMS and slow down the neurological deterioration, its efficacy is less than Interferon β-1α. So, it can be used as an add-on therapy in RRMS. Further studies, with longer follow-ups are needed to assess this finding.
Authors’ Contributions
Both authors have carried out the study, participated in the design of the study and acquisition of data performed the statistical analysis and wrote the manuscript. Both authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the Isfahan University of Medical Sciences and the School of Medicine.
Footnotes
Conflict of Interests
Authors have no conflict of interests.
References
- 1.Clanet MG, Brassat D. The management of multiple sclerosis patients. Curr Opin Neurol. 2000;13(3):263–70. doi: 10.1097/00019052-200006000-00005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Nicholas R, Chataway J. Multiple sclerosis. Clin Evid (Online) 2007 Aug 15;:pii–1202. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Richards RG, Sampson FC, Beard SM, Tappenden P. A review of the natural history and epidemiology of multiple sclerosis: implications for resource allocation and health economic models. Health Technol Assess. 2002;6(10):1–73. doi: 10.3310/hta6100. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Polman CH, Uitdehaag BM. Drug treatment of multiple sclerosis. West J Med. 2000;173(6):398–402. doi: 10.1136/ewjm.173.6.398. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Galetta SL, Markowitz C. US FDA-approved disease-modifying treatments for multiple sclerosis: review of adverse effect profiles. CNS Drugs. 2005;19(3):239–52. doi: 10.2165/00023210-200519030-00005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Miller A. Current and investigational therapies used to alter the course of disease in multiple sclerosis. South Med J. 1997;90(4):367–75. doi: 10.1097/00007611-199704000-00001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Myhr KM. Pharmacological treatment of multiple sclerosis. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 2010;130(5):490–2. doi: 10.4045/tidsskr.09.1126. [In Spanish] [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Ransohoff RM. PML risk and natalizumab: more questions than answers. Lancet Neurol. 2010;9(3):231–3. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(10)70025-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Scott LJ, Figgitt DP. Mitoxantrone: a review of its use in multiple sclerosis. CNS Drugs. 2004;18(6):379–96. doi: 10.2165/00023210-200418060-00010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Le Page E, Leray E, Taurin G, Coustans M, Chaperon J, Morrissey SP. Mitoxantrone as induction treatment in aggressive relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis: treatment response factors in a 5 year follow-up observational study of 100 consecutive patients. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2008;79(1):52–6. doi: 10.1136/jnnp.2007.124958. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.O’Connor PW. Use of natalizumab in multiple sclerosis patients. Can J Neurol Sci. 2010;37(1):98–104. doi: 10.1017/s0317167100009720. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Menge T, Weber MS, Hemmer B, Kieseier BC, von Budingen HC, Warnke C. Disease-modifying agents for multiple sclerosis: recent advances and future prospects. Drugs. 2008;68(17):2445–68. doi: 10.2165/0003495-200868170-00004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Preiningerova J. Oral laquinimod therapy in relapsing multiple sclerosis. Expert Opin Investig Drugs. 2009;18(7):985–9. doi: 10.1517/13543780903044944. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Warnke C, Meyer Zu HG, Hartung HP, Stuve O, Kieseier BC. Review of teriflunomide and its potential in the treatment of multiple sclerosis. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2009;5:333–40. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Zaffaroni M, Ghezzi A, Comi G. Intensive immunosuppression in multiple sclerosis. Neurol Sci. 2006;27(Suppl 1):S13–7. doi: 10.1007/s10072-006-0539-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Goodkin DE, Rudick RA, VanderBrug MS, Daughtry MM, Van Dyke C. Low-dose oral methotrexate in chronic progressive multiple sclerosis: analyses of serial MRIs. Neurology. 1996;47(5):1153–7. doi: 10.1212/wnl.47.5.1153. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Lugaresi A, Caporale C, Farina D, Marzoli F, Bonanni L, Muraro PA, et al. Low-dose oral methotrexate treatment in chronic progressive multiple sclerosis. Neurol Sci. 2001;22(2):209–10. doi: 10.1007/s100720170026. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Gray OM, McDonnell GV, Forbes RB. A systematic review of oral methotrexate for multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler. 2006;12(4):507–10. doi: 10.1191/1352458506ms1299oa. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Johnston A, Gudjonsson JE, Sigmundsdottir H, Ludviksson BR, Valdimarsson H. The anti-inflammatory action of methotrexate is not mediated by lymphocyte apoptosis, but by the suppression of activation and adhesion molecules. Clin Immunol. 2005;114(2):154–63. doi: 10.1016/j.clim.2004.09.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Jeffery DR. Use of combination therapy with immunomodulators and immunosuppressants in treating multiple sclerosis. Neurology. 2004;63(12 Suppl 6):S41–6. doi: 10.1212/wnl.63.12_suppl_6.s41. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Hommes OR, Weiner HL. Results of an international questionnaire on immunosuppressive treatment of multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler. 2002;8(2):139–41. doi: 10.1191/1352458502ms791oa. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Fernandez O, Fernandez V, De Ramon E. Azathioprine and methotrexate in multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Sci. 2004;223(1):29–34. doi: 10.1016/j.jns.2004.04.016. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Bryant J, Clegg A, Milne R. Systematic review of immunomodulatory drugs for the treatment of people with multiple sclerosis: Is there good quality evidence on effectiveness and cost? J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2001;70(5):574–9. doi: 10.1136/jnnp.70.5.574. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Leary SM, Thompson AJ. Primary progressive multiple sclerosis: current and future treatment options. CNS Drugs. 2005;19(5):369–76. doi: 10.2165/00023210-200519050-00001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Poser CM, Paty DW, Scheinberg L, McDonald WI, Davis FA, Ebers GC, et al. New diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: guidelines for research protocols. Ann Neurol. 1983;13(3):227–31. doi: 10.1002/ana.410130302. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Kurtzke JF. Rating neurologic impairment in multiple sclerosis: an expanded disability status scale (EDSS) Neurology. 1983;33(11):1444–52. doi: 10.1212/wnl.33.11.1444. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Goodkin DE, Rudick RA, VanderBrug MS, Daughtry MM, Schwetz KM, Fischer J, et al. Low-dose (7.5 mg) oral methotrexate reduces the rate of progression in chronic progressive multiple sclerosis. Ann Neurol. 1995;37(1):30–40. doi: 10.1002/ana.410370108. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Bernatsky S, Ehrmann FD. Discontinuation of methotrexate therapy in older patients with newly diagnosed rheumatoid arthritis: analysis of administrative health databases in Quebec, Canada. Drugs Aging. 2008;25(10):879–84. doi: 10.2165/00002512-200825100-00007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Florea A, Job-Deslandre C. [Rheumatoid arthritis and pregnancy] Presse Med. 2008;37(11):1644–51. doi: 10.1016/j.lpm.2008.06.015. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Lacaille D, Guh DP, Abrahamowicz M, Anis AH, Esdaile JM. Use of nonbiologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and risk of infection in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 2008;59(8):1074–81. doi: 10.1002/art.23913. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Currier RD, Haerer AF, Meydrech EF. Low dose oral methotrexate treatment of multiple sclerosis: a pilot study. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1993;56(11):1217–8. doi: 10.1136/jnnp.56.11.1217. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Calabresi PA, Wilterdink JL, Rogg JM, Mills P, Webb A, Whartenby KA. An open-label trial of combination therapy with interferon beta-1a and oral methotrexate in MS. Neurology. 2002;58(2):314–7. doi: 10.1212/wnl.58.2.314. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Steinman L. Assessment of animal models for MS and demyelinating disease in the design of rational therapy. Neuron. 1999;24(3):511–4. doi: 10.1016/s0896-6273(00)81107-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.McDevitt H. Specific antigen vaccination to treat autoimmune disease. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004;101(Suppl 2):14627–30. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0405235101. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Olsson T. Cytokine-producing cells in experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis and multiple sclerosis. Neurology. 1995;45(6 Suppl 6):S11–5. doi: 10.1212/wnl.45.6_suppl_6.s11. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Cua DJ, Hinton DR, Stohlman SA. Self-antigen-induced Th2 responses in experimental allergic encephalomyelitis (EAE)-resistant mice. Th2-mediated suppression of autoimmune disease. J Immunol. 1995;155(8):4052–9. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Weiner HL, Friedman A, Miller A, Khoury SJ, al Sabbagh A, Santos L, et al. Oral tolerance: immunologic mechanisms and treatment of animal and human organ-specific autoimmune diseases by oral administration of autoantigens. Annu Rev Immunol. 1994;12:809–37. doi: 10.1146/annurev.iy.12.040194.004113. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Zhang GX, Xu H, Kishi M, Calida D, Rostami A. The role of IL-12 in the induction of intravenous tolerance in experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis. J Immunol. 2002;168(5):2501–7. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.168.5.2501. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.Zhang GX, Yu S, Li Y, Ventura ES, Gran B, Rostami A. A paradoxical role of APCs in the induction of intravenous tolerance in experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis. J Neuroimmunol. 2005;161(1-2):101–12. doi: 10.1016/j.jneuroim.2004.12.017. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]