Methotrexate versus conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in the treatment of non-anterior sarcoidosis-associated uveitis

Abstract

Aims: To compare the safety and efficacy of methotrexate (MTX), mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) and azathioprine (AZA) in non-anterior sarcoidosis-associated uveitis.

Methods: Retrospective study including non-anterior sarcoidosis-associated uveitis according to the revised International Workshop on Ocular Sarcoidosis criteria. The primary outcome was defined as the median time to relapse or occurrence of serious adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation.

Results: 58 patients with non-anterior sarcoidosis-associated uveitis (MTX (n=33), MMF (n=16) and AZA (n=9)) were included. The time to treatment failure (ie, primary outcome) after adjustment for corticosteroids dose and the presence of vasculitis was significantly higher with MTX (median time of 34.5 months with MTX (IQR: 11.8 -not reached) vs 8.4 months (3.1-22.9) with MMF and 16.8 months (8.0-90.1) with AZA (p=0.020)). The risk of relapse at 12 months was more than twice lower in MTX as compared with MMF (p=0.046). Low visual acuity at the last visit was significantly lower with MTX (4% vs 9% in MMF vs 57% in AZA group (p=0.008)). Regarding all 75 lines of treatment (MTX (n=39), MMF (n=24) and AZA (n=12)), MTX was more effective than MMF and AZA to obtain treatment response at 3 months (OR 10.85; 95% CI 1.13 to 104.6; p=0.039). Significant corticosteroid-sparing effect at 12 months (p=0.035) was only observed under MTX. Serious adverse events were observed in 6/39 (15%), 5/24 (21%) and 2/12 (17%) with MTX, MMF and AZA, respectively.

Conclusion: In non-anterior sarcoidosis-associated uveitis, MTX seems to be more efficient compared with AZA and MMF and with an acceptable safety profile.

Keywords: Drugs; Immunology; Inflammation; Macula; Treatment Medical.