The Efficacy of Induction Treatment with a Cyclophosphamide- or Mycophenolate Mofetil-Based Regimen for Active Lupus Nephritis in Thailand: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Glomerular diseases Pub Date : 2025-02-28 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1159/000545014
Panuvich Poungsuwan, Ouppatham Supasyndh, Bancha Satirapoj
{"title":"The Efficacy of Induction Treatment with a Cyclophosphamide- or Mycophenolate Mofetil-Based Regimen for Active Lupus Nephritis in Thailand: A Retrospective Cohort Study.","authors":"Panuvich Poungsuwan, Ouppatham Supasyndh, Bancha Satirapoj","doi":"10.1159/000545014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Treating lupus nephritis is vital to reducing morbidity and mortality. In Thailand, comparative data on intravenous cyclophosphamide- and mycophenolate mofetil (MMF)-based induction therapies are limited. This study assessed renal remission outcomes for these regimens.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We analyzed renal and patient outcomes in 89 individuals with biopsy-proven active lupus nephritis treated at Phramongkutklao Hospital between 2020 and 2023. Among the cohort, 55 patients received a cyclophosphamide regimen, and 34 were treated with an MMF regimen.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Baseline clinical characteristics were comparable between the two groups, except for higher hematuria and renal activity index, as well as lower C3 complement levels and renal chronicity in the cyclophosphamide group. The average doses administered were 0.55 ± 0.12 g/m<sup>2</sup> per dose for intravenous cyclophosphamide and 2.15 ± 0.31 g/day for MMF. By the 24th week, the overall remission rate (complete and partial remission) was 81.8% (45 patients) in the cyclophosphamide group and 85.3% (29 patients) in the MMF group (relative risk 1.01, 95% CI 0.82-1.23, <i>p</i> = 0.949). Proteinuria reduction from baseline at the 24th week was -54.1 ± 93.3% in the cyclophosphamide group and -69.4 ± 22.2% in the MMF group (relative risk 1.01, 95% CI 0.99-1.01, <i>p</i> = 0.465). Adverse events were similar across the two regimens. However, 1 patient in the cyclophosphamide group died, and three required dialysis.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Induction therapy with cyclophosphamide- and MMF-based regimens demonstrated comparable efficacy and safety in achieving renal remission in patients with active lupus nephritis.</p>","PeriodicalId":73177,"journal":{"name":"Glomerular diseases","volume":"5 1","pages":"151-157"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11961155/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Glomerular diseases","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000545014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Treating lupus nephritis is vital to reducing morbidity and mortality. In Thailand, comparative data on intravenous cyclophosphamide- and mycophenolate mofetil (MMF)-based induction therapies are limited. This study assessed renal remission outcomes for these regimens.

Methods: We analyzed renal and patient outcomes in 89 individuals with biopsy-proven active lupus nephritis treated at Phramongkutklao Hospital between 2020 and 2023. Among the cohort, 55 patients received a cyclophosphamide regimen, and 34 were treated with an MMF regimen.

Results: Baseline clinical characteristics were comparable between the two groups, except for higher hematuria and renal activity index, as well as lower C3 complement levels and renal chronicity in the cyclophosphamide group. The average doses administered were 0.55 ± 0.12 g/m2 per dose for intravenous cyclophosphamide and 2.15 ± 0.31 g/day for MMF. By the 24th week, the overall remission rate (complete and partial remission) was 81.8% (45 patients) in the cyclophosphamide group and 85.3% (29 patients) in the MMF group (relative risk 1.01, 95% CI 0.82-1.23, p = 0.949). Proteinuria reduction from baseline at the 24th week was -54.1 ± 93.3% in the cyclophosphamide group and -69.4 ± 22.2% in the MMF group (relative risk 1.01, 95% CI 0.99-1.01, p = 0.465). Adverse events were similar across the two regimens. However, 1 patient in the cyclophosphamide group died, and three required dialysis.

Conclusion: Induction therapy with cyclophosphamide- and MMF-based regimens demonstrated comparable efficacy and safety in achieving renal remission in patients with active lupus nephritis.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
泰国以环磷酰胺或霉酚酸酯为基础的方案诱导治疗活动性狼疮肾炎的疗效:一项回顾性队列研究。
导言:治疗狼疮肾炎对降低发病率和死亡率至关重要。在泰国,以环磷酰胺和霉酚酸酯(MMF)为基础的静脉诱导疗法的比较数据十分有限。本研究评估了这些疗法的肾功能缓解结果:我们分析了2020年至2023年期间在Phramongkutklao医院接受治疗的89名经活检证实的活动性狼疮肾炎患者的肾脏和患者预后。其中,55 名患者接受了环磷酰胺治疗,34 名患者接受了 MMF 治疗:两组患者的基线临床特征相当,只是环磷酰胺组患者的血尿和肾活动指数较高,C3补体水平和肾慢性化程度较低。静脉注射环磷酰胺的平均剂量为每次 0.55 ± 0.12 克/平方米,MMF 为每天 2.15 ± 0.31 克。第24周时,环磷酰胺组的总体缓解率(完全缓解和部分缓解)为81.8%(45名患者),MMF组为85.3%(29名患者)(相对风险1.01,95% CI 0.82-1.23,P = 0.949)。第24周时,环磷酰胺组的蛋白尿较基线下降了-54.1 ± 93.3%,MMF组为-69.4 ± 22.2%(相对风险1.01,95% CI 0.99-1.01,p = 0.465)。两种治疗方案的不良反应相似。然而,环磷酰胺组有1名患者死亡,3名患者需要透析:结论:以环磷酰胺和MMF为基础的诱导疗法在实现活动性狼疮肾炎患者肾脏缓解方面的疗效和安全性相当。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Shifting Sands or ANCA-ed in Place? The Epidemiology of ANCA-Associated Vasculitis over 2 Decades at a Large Tertiary Centre. Evaluating the Potential Role of Corticosteroids in Post-Infectious Glomerulonephritis. Evaluation of Biopsy-Based Molecular Risk Prediction in Crescentic Glomerulonephritis. NELL1-Associated Membranous Nephropathy in a Patient with Papillary Thyroid Carcinoma: A Case Report and Literature Review. Histopathological Features of Sickle Cell Nephropathy in the Arab-Indian Haplotype.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1