Low dose mycophenolate mofetil versus cyclophosphamide in the induction therapy of lupus nephritis in Nepalese population: a randomized control trial

Arun Sedhain, Rajani Hada, Rajendra K Agrawal, Gandhi R Bhattarai, Anil Baral, Arun Sedhain, Rajani Hada, Rajendra K Agrawal, Gandhi R Bhattarai, Anil Baral

Abstract

Background: The management of proliferative lupus nephritis (LN) comprises timely and coordinated immunosuppressive therapy. This study aimed to evaluate and compare the effectiveness and safety profile of low dose mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) and cyclophosphamide (CYC) in induction therapy of LN in Nepalese population.

Methods: We conducted a prospective, open-label, randomized trial over a period of one and half years. Forty-nine patients with class III to V lupus nephritis were enrolled, out of which 42 patients (21 in each group) could complete the study. CYC was given intravenously as a monthly pulse and MMF was administered orally in the tablet form in the maximum daily dose of 1.5 g in two divided doses.

Results: The mean age of the patients was 25.43 ± 10.17 years with female to male ratio of 7.3:1. Mean baseline serum creatinine was 1.58 ± 1.38 mg/dL and eGFR was 62.38 ± 26.76 ml/min/1.73m2. Mean 24-h urinary protein was 4.35 ± 3.71 g per 1.73 m2 body surface area. At 6 months, serum creatinine (mg/dL) decreased from 1.73 to 0.96 in CYC and from 1.24 to 0.91 in the MMF group with improvement in eGFR (ml/min/1.73 m2) from 60.33 to 88.52 in CYC and from 64.42 to 89.09 in MMF group. Twenty-four-hour urinary protein (gm/1.73m2) reduced from 4.47 to 0.94 in CYC and from 4.5 to 0.62 in the MMF group. Primary end point was achieved in higher percentage of patients with MMF than CYC (28.6% vs. 19%) while equal proportion of patients (67% in each group) achieved secondary end point in both groups. Number of non-responders was higher in CYC group than in the MMF group (14.3% vs. 4.8%). There was no difference in the rate of achievement of secondary end point in both CYC and MMF groups (3.16 vs. 3.05 months). The occurrence of adverse events was higher in the CYC than in MMF group (56 vs. 15 events).

Conclusion: Present study has concluded that MMF, used in relatively lower dose, is equally effective in inducing remission with reduction of proteinuria and improvement of kidney function with lesser adverse events than CYC in the induction therapy of proliferative lupus nephritis.

Trial registration: Retrospectively registered to ClinicalTrials.gov PRS. NCT03200002 (Registered date: June 28, 2017).

Keywords: Cyclophosphamide; Induction therapy; Lupus nephritis; Mycophenolate mofetil.

Conflict of interest statement

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Ethical approval was obtained from the Institutional Review Board of National Academy of Medical Sciences (NAMS), Kathmandu, Nepal. Patients gave informed written consent to participate in the study. Written informed consent was also obtained from the parents of the participants below 18 years of age.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

AS is employed by Chitwan Medical College and does not have financial benefits in participating in the study.

RH, RKA and AB are employed by the Government of Nepal and currently posted at National Academy of Medical Sciences and have not received any financial benefits for getting involved in the study.

GRB is employed by UnitedHealth Group and also owns company stocks. No financial benefits are received in participating in this study.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flowchart showing patient randomization and follow-up. SLE- Systemic lupus erythematosus, LN- Lupus Nephritis, ACR- American college of rheumatology, CYC- cyclophosphamide, MMF- mycophenolate mofetil
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Changes in serum creatinine, serum albumin and 24-h proteinuria and achievement of secondary end point over the 6-month induction period. Serum creatinine expressed in mg/dL, 24-h proteinuria expressed in gram/day, serum albumin expressed in gram per dL and achievement of secondary end point in numbers. CYC- cyclophosphamide, MMF- Mycophenolate mofetil. a Change in serum creatinine. b Change in 24-h proteinuria. c Change in serum albumin. d Achievement of secondary end point

References

    1. Bomback AS, Appel GB. Updates on the treatment of lupus nephritis. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2010;21:2028–2035. doi: 10.1681/ASN.2010050472.
    1. D'Cruz DP, Khamashta MA, Hughes GR. Systemic lupus erythematosus. Lancet. 2007;369:587–596. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60279-7.
    1. Austin IIIHA, Klippel JH, Balow JE, le Riche NG, Steinberg AD, Plotz PH, et al. Therapy of lupus nephritis. Controlled trial of prednisone and cytotoxic drugs. N Engl J Med. 1986;314:614–619. doi: 10.1056/NEJM198603063141004.
    1. Gourley MF, Austin HA, 3rd, Scott D, Yarboro CH, Vaughan EM, Muir J, et al. Methylprednisolone and cyclophosphamide, alone or in combination, in patients with lupus nephritis. A randomized, controlled trial. Ann Intern Med. 1996;125:549–557. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-125-7-199610010-00003.
    1. Houssiau FA, Vasconcelos C, D’Cruz D, Sebastiani GD, Garrido Ed Ede R, Danieli MG, et al. Immunosuppressive therapy in lupus nephritis: the euro-lupus nephritis trial, a randomized trial of low-dose versus high-dose intravenous cyclophosphamide. Arthritis Rheum. 2002;46:2121–2131. doi: 10.1002/art.10461.
    1. Boumpas DT, Austin HA 3rd, Vaughn EM, Klippel JH, Steinberg AD, Yarboro CH, et al. Controlled trial of pulse methylprednisolone versus two regimens of pulse cyclophosphamide in severe lupus nephritis. Lancet. 1992;340:741–45.
    1. Ponticelli C. Treatment of lupus nephritis: the advantages of a flexible approach. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 1997;12:2057–2059. doi: 10.1093/ndt/12.10.2057.
    1. Chan TM, Li FK, Tang CS, Wong RW, Fang GX, Ji YL, Lau CS, Wong AK, Tong MK, Chan KW, Lai KN. Efficacy of mycophenolate mofetil in patients with diffuse proliferative lupus nephritis. Hong Kong-Guangzhou nephrology study group. N Engl J Med. 2000;343:1156–1162. doi: 10.1056/NEJM200010193431604.
    1. Ye Z, Tan YH, Hong XP, et al. MMF vs CTX in the treatment of severe SLE patients. Lupus. 2001;10(Suppl 1):S99, 274.
    1. Ong LM, Hooi LS, Lim TO, Goh BL, Ahmad G, Ghazalli R, et al. Randomized controlled trial of pulse intravenous cyclophosphamide versus mycophenolate mofetil in the induction therapy of proliferative lupus nephritis. Nephrology, (Carlton). 2005;10:504–10.
    1. Lee Y, Woo JH, Choi S, Ji J, Song G. Induction and maintenance therapy for lupus nephritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lupus. 2010;19:703–710. doi: 10.1177/0961203309357763.
    1. Appel GB, Contreras G, Dooley MA, Ginzler EM, Isenberg D, Jayne D, Li LS, Mysler E, Sanchez-Guerrero J, Solomons N, Wofsy D. Mycophenolate mofetil versus cyclophosphamide for induction treatment of lupus nephritis. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2009;20:1103–1112. doi: 10.1681/ASN.2008101028.
    1. Hochberg MC. Updating the American College of Rheumatology revised criteria for the classification of systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheum. 1997;40:1725. doi: 10.1002/art.1780400928.
    1. Weening JJ, D’Agati VD, Schwartz MM, et al. The classification of glomerulonephritis in systemic lupus erythematosus revisited. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2004;15:241–250. doi: 10.1097/01.ASN.0000108969.21691.5D.
    1. Peake M, Whiting M. Measurement of serum creatinine – current status and future goals. Clin Biochem Rev. 2006;27(4):173–184.
    1. Levey AS, Coresh J, Greene T, Stevens LA, Zhang YL, Hendriksen S, Kusek JW, Van Lente F. Using standardized serum creatinine values in the modification of diet in renal disease study equation for estimating glomerular filtration rate. Ann Intern Med. 2006;145:247–254. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-145-4-200608150-00004.
    1. Petri M, Orbai AM, Alarco’n GS, Gordon C, Merrill JT, Fortin PR, et al. Derivation and validation of the systemic lupus international collaborating clinics classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheum. 2012;64(8):2677–2686. doi: 10.1002/art.34473.
    1. Bhat P, Radhakrishnan J. B lymphocytes and lupus nephritis: new insights into pathogenesis and targeted therapies. Kidney Int. 2008;73:261–268. doi: 10.1038/sj.ki.5002663.
    1. Bagavant H, Kalantarinia K, Scindia Y, et al. Novel therapeutic approaches to lupus glomerulonephritis: translating animal models to clinical practice. Am J Kidney Dis. 2011;57:498–507. doi: 10.1053/j.ajkd.2010.10.052.
    1. Houssiau FA, Vasconcelos C, D’Cruz D, et al. The 10-year follow-up data of the euro-lupus nephritis trial comparing low-dose and high-dose intravenous cyclophosphamide. Ann Rheum Dis. 2009;69:61–64. doi: 10.1136/ard.2008.102533.
    1. Walsh M, James M, Jayne D, Tonelli M, Manns BJ, Hemmelgarn BR. Mycophenolate mofetil for induction therapy of lupus nephritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2007;2:968–975. doi: 10.2215/CJN.01200307.
    1. Zhu B, Chen N, Lin Y, Ren H, Zhang W, Wang W, et al. Mycophenolate mofetil in induction and maintenance therapy of severe lupus nephritis: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2007;22:1933–1942. doi: 10.1093/ndt/gfm066.
    1. Henderson LK, Masson P, Craig JC, Roberts MA, Flanc RS, Strippoli GF, Webster AC. Induction and maintenance treatment of proliferative lupus nephritis: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Am J Kidney Dis. 2013;61:74. doi: 10.1053/j.ajkd.2012.08.041.
    1. Ginzler EM, Dooley MA, Aranow C, et al. Mycophenolate mofetil or intravenous cyclophosphamide for lupus nephritis. N Engl J Med. 2005;353:2219–2228. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa043731.
    1. Rathi M, Goyal A, Ajay Jaryal A, Sharma A, Gupta PK, Ramachandran R, et al. Comparison of low-dose intravenous cyclophosphamide with oral mycophenolate mofetil in the treatment of lupus nephritis. Kidney Int. 2016;89:235–242. doi: 10.1038/ki.2015.318.
    1. Najafi CC, Korbet SM, Lewis EJ, Schwartz MM, Reichlin M, Evans J, Collaborative study group Significance of histologic patterns of glomerular injury upon the long-term prognosis in severe lupus glomerulonephritis. Kidney Int. 2000;59:2156–2163. doi: 10.1046/j.1523-1755.2001.00730.x.
    1. Kamanamool N, McEvoy M, Attia J, Ingsathit A, Ngamjanyaporn P, Thakkinstian A. Efficacy and adverse events of mycophenolate mofetil versus cyclophosphamide for induction therapy of lupus nephritis: systematic review and meta-analysis. Medicine (Baltimore). 2010;89(4):227–35.
    1. Alamoudi OSB, Attar SM. Pulmonary manifestations in systemic lupus erythematosus: association with disease activity. Respirology. 2015;20:474–480. doi: 10.1111/resp.12473.

Source: PubMed

3
Iratkozz fel