Objectives:To develop evidence-based recommendations for the use of methotrexate in daily clinical practice in rheumatic disorders.Methods:751 rheumatologists from 17 countries participated in the 3E (Evidence, Expertise, Exchange) Initiative of 2007–8 consisting of three separate rounds of discussions and Delphi votes. Ten clinical questions concerning the use of methotrexate in rheumatic disorders were formulated. A systematic literature search in Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library and 2005–7 American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism meeting abstracts was conducted. Selected articles were systematically reviewed and the evidence was appraised according to the Oxford levels of evidence. Each country elaborated a set of national recommendations. Finally, multinational recommendations were formulated and agreement among the participants and the potential impact on their clinical practice was assessed.Results:A total of 16 979 references was identified, of which 304 articles were included in the systematic reviews. Ten multinational key recommendations on the use of methotrexate were formulated. Nine recommendations were specific for rheumatoid arthritis (RA), including the work-up before initiating methotrexate, optimal dosage and route, use of folic acid, monitoring, management of hepatotoxicity, long-term safety, mono versus combination therapy and management in the perioperative period and before/during pregnancy. One recommendation concerned methotrexate as a steroid-sparing agent in other rheumatic diseases.Conclusions:Ten recommendations for the use of methotrexate in daily clinical practice focussed on RA were developed, which are evidence based and supported by a large panel of rheumatologists, enhancing their validity and practical use.

Objective: To elaborate recommendations for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in Brazil. Method: Literature review with articles' selection based on evidence and the expert opinion of the Rheumatoid Arthritis Committee of the Brazilian Society of Rheumatology. Results and conclusions: 1) The therapeutic decision should be shared with the patient; 2) immediately after the diagnosis, a disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) should be prescribed, and the treatment adjusted to achieve remission; 3) treatment should be conducted by a rheumatologist; 4) the initial treatment includes synthetic DMARDs; 5) methotrexate is the drug of choice; 6) patients who fail to respond after two schedules of synthetic DMARDs should be assessed for the use of biologic DMARDs; 7) exceptionally, biologic DMARDs can be considered earlier; 8) anti-TNF agents are preferentially recommended as the initial biologic therapy; 9) after therapeutic failure of a fi rst biologic DMARD, other biologics can be used; 10) cyclophosphamide and azathioprine can be used in severe extra-articular manifestations; 11) oral corticoid is recommended at low doses and for short periods of time; 12) non-steroidal anti-infl ammatory drugs should always be prescribed in association with a DMARD; 13) clinical assessments should be performed on a monthly basis at the beginning of treatment; 14) physical therapy, rehabilitation, and occupational therapy are indicated; 15) surgical treatment is recommended to correct sequelae; 16) alternative therapy does not replace traditional therapy; 17) family planning is recommended; 18) the active search and management of comorbidities are recommended; 19) the patient's vaccination status should be recorded and updated; 20) endemic-epidemic transmissible diseases should be investigated and treated

No abstract

The objective of this document is to provide a comprehensive update of the recommendations of Brazilian Society of Rheumatology on drug treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), based on a systematic literature review and on the opinion of a panel of rheumatologists. Four general principles and eleven recommendations were approved. General principles: RA treatment should (1) preferably consist of a multidisciplinary approach coordinated by a rheumatologist, (2) include counseling on lifestyle habits, strict control of comorbidities, and updates of the vaccination record, (3) be based on decisions shared by the patient and the physician after clarification about the disease and the available therapeutic options; (4) the goal is sustained clinical remission or, when this is not feasible, low disease activity. Recommendations: (1) the first line of treatment should be a csDMARD, started as soon as the diagnosis of RA is established; (2) methotrexate (MTX) is the first-choice csDMARD; (3) the combination of two or more csDMARDs, including MTX, may be used as the first line of treatment; (4) after failure of first-line therapy with MTX, the therapeutic strategies include combining MTX with another csDMARD (leflunomide), with two csDMARDs (hydroxychloroquine and sulfasalazine), or switching MTX for another csDMARD (leflunomide or sulfasalazine) alone; (5) after failure of two schemes with csDMARDs, a bDMARD may be preferably used or, alternatively a tsDMARD, preferably combined, in both cases, with a csDMARD; (6) the different bDMARDs in combination with MTX have similar efficacy, and therefore, the therapeutic choice should take into account the peculiarities of each drug in terms of safety and cost; (7) the combination of a bDMARD and MTX is preferred over the use of a bDMARD alone; (8) in case of failure of an initial treatment scheme with a bDMARD, a scheme with another bDMARD can be used; in cases of failure with a TNFi, a second bDMARD of the same class or with another mechanism of action is effective and safe; (9) tofacitinib can be used to treat RA after failure of bDMARD; (10) corticosteroids, preferably at low doses for the shortest possible time, should be considered during periods of disease activity, and the risk-benefit ratio should also be considered; (11) reducing or spacing out bDMARD doses is possible in patients in sustained remission.

No abstract

High tumor markers were frequently found in RA patients, even with controlled disease and were not related to actual cancer. Therefore, small increases of these markers in RA cases probably do not warrant a search for an occult neoplasm.

Treatment survival with biological therapy may be influenced by many factors, and it seems to be different among various rheumatic diseases and biological agents. The goal of the study was to compare the drug survival and the causes of discontinuation of anti-tumoral necrosis factor (anti-TNF) therapy in ankylosing spondylitis (AS) with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Study participants were a cohort from the Brazilian Registry of Biological Therapies in Rheumatic Diseases (BIOBADABRASIL) between 2008 and 2012. The observation time was up to 4 years following the introduction of the first treatment. Gender, age, disease duration, disease activity, comorbidities, and concomitant therapies were assessed. A total of 1303 patients were included: 372 had AS and 931 had RA in which 38.7 % (n = 504) used infliximab (IFX), 34.9 % (n = 455) used adalimumab (ADA), and 26.4 % (n = 344) used etanercept (ETA). The anti-TNF drug survival of patients with AS was 63.08 months (confidence interval (CI) 60.24, 65.92) and patients with RA was 47.5 months (CI 45.65, 49.36). It was significant higher in AS (log-rank; p ≤ 0.001). Patients with RA discontinued anti-TNF more than patients with AS when adjusted to gender and corticosteroid. The adjHR (95 % CI) was 1.6 (1.14, 2.31). Female patients who were also corticosteroid users, but not of advanced age, have shown lower survival for both diseases (log-rank, p ≤ 0.001). The discontinuation rate of IFX, but not of ADA or ETA, was significantly higher in RA than in SA; HR (95 % CI) was 2.49 (1.46, 4.24). The main causes of discontinuation were ineffectiveness and adverse event in both diseases. AS patients have better drug survival adjusted to gender, age, and corticosteroid. This results appear to be related to the disease mechanism.

The incidence of tuberculosis was higher among users of synthetic DMARDs and anti-TNF than among users of synthetic DMARDs and synthetic DMARDs and non-anti-TNF biologics and also occurred later, suggesting infection during treatment and no screening failure.