Journal of Clinical Outcomes Management. 2016 June;23(6)
References
Case Continued
The patient initially responded to oral corticosteroids with symptomatic and physiological improvement. However, the clinical benefit did not last for more than 3 months. Follow-up chest radiograph demonstrated worsening parenchymal opacities ( Figure 3 ) and ACE level showed persistent elevation. Hence, second-line treatment with anti-metabolites was discussed with the patient.
What are the preferred pharmacological agents for second-line treatment in sarcoidosis?
Alternative immunosuppression should be considered in the following circumstances in patients diagnosed with sarcoidosis:
Failure or less than optimal response to oral corticosteroids
Use as a steroid-sparing agent in patients requiring high doses of steroids for symptomatic control
Failure to tolerate corticosteroids due to significant adverse effects such as excessive weight gain, steroid-induced psychosis, osteoporosis, and worsening diabetic control
A small trial of 11 patients examined azathioprine as a steroid-sparing agent and found it as an acceptable immunosuppressive agent for that purpose [19]. It was associated with good safety profile and adherence to treatment was 82% (9 out of 11 patients). However, the small sample size makes it difficult to draw firm conclusions from the findings of this study. In another trial evaluating methotrexate as a steroid-sparing agent in the first year after the diagnosis of sarcoidosis, Baughman and colleagues [20] reported that methotrexate is an attractive alternative to other immunosuppressive agents in term of a steroid sparer. In this double-blind randomized controlled trial (RCT), 15 patients were studied with at least 6 months of treatment with methotrexate vs placebo. There was a significantly reduced dosage of prednisolone observed in methotrexate group. However, the difference was not significant when data were analyzed for all patients, including the dropouts. More recently, a large international retrospective cohort study of 200 patients with sarcoidosis demonstrated that both methotrexate and azathioprine have similar efficacy and steroid-sparing capacity in sarcoidosis [21]. However, infection rates were significantly higher in the azathioprine group as compared to methotrexate (34.6% vs. 18.1%, P = 0.01). Hence methotrexate should be considered as a preferred second-line agent in sarcoidosis after detailed discussion about potential side effects.
Case Continued
The patient was started on methotrexate after discussion about the potential adverse effects of bone marrow suppression, hepatotoxicity, and pneumonitis. He was screened for latent tuberculosis and viral hepatitis prior to starting methotrexate. The dosage was 7.5 mg per week along with folic acid once a week. We gradually increase the dose in increments of 2.5 mg every 2 weeks with a view to reach 15 mg every week as maintenance therapy. In severely obese patients, a dose of up to 20 mg weekly is occasionally considered if 15 mg is suboptimal after careful clinical assessment.
The patient failed to make significant progress after being on methotrexate for a period of 6 months and lung function tests continued to demonstrate a persistent decline with symptomatic worsening of dyspnea and cough.
What are treatment options in refractory sarcoidosis?
Options to consider in the setting of refractory sarcoidosis are leflunomide, hydroxychloroquine, or combination therapy of methotrexate and leflunomide. Leflunomide has been shown to be of similar efficacy to methotrexate as demonstrated by a retrospective analysis of 32 patients treated with the drug in a tertiary care center [22]. Complete or partial response was noted in 12 of 17 patients treated solely with leflunomide and 13 of 15 treated in conjunction with methotrexate. Hence, combination therapy has been suggested as a viable option for these patients who fail to respond to initial glucocorticoid agents and alternative immunosuppressive drugs, as combination therapy may enhance efficacy with reduced toxicity if considered in a rational manner after careful selection of patients [23].