Risk Assessment of Cyclophosphamide and Mycophenolate Mofetil after Induction Treatment of Lupus Nephritis: A Single Center Quasi-Experimental Study

Rosanna Bintey Kamal
{"title":"Risk Assessment of Cyclophosphamide and Mycophenolate Mofetil after Induction Treatment of Lupus Nephritis: A Single Center Quasi-Experimental Study","authors":"Rosanna Bintey Kamal","doi":"10.3329/cmoshmcj.v22i1.67831","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: The comparative safety of immunosuppressive drugs such as cyclophosphamide and mycophenolate mofetil for patients with lupus nephritis remains controversial. The study aimed to investigate the specific side effects of cyclophosphamide and mycophenolate mofetil in lupus nephritis patient after induction treatment. \nMaterials and methods: It was a quasi-experimental study performed in the Department of Nephrology of Chittagong Medical College Hospital. A total of 100 patients of lupus nephritis who fulfilled the designated criteria were enrolled in this study by non-probability voluntary sampling method. The treatment was given on patient’s choice. After screening and treatment initiation, patients were assessed at 12 and 24 weeks. All the data were compiled in a structured case record form. \nResults: In the present study 48 patients (53.3%) in mycophenolate mofetil group and 42 patients (46.7%) in intravenous cyclophosphamide group completed 24 weeks of induction treatment of lupus nephritis. Infections were common in both treatment groups but significantly higher with intravenous cyclophosphamide group ((33.3% vs. 8.3%). Upper gastrointestinal syndrome occurred with 20(41%) patients in mycophenolate mofetil group and 7(16.7%) patients in intravenous cyclophosphamide group (RR=5.8333). Regarding other adverse effect, 10 patients of intravenous cyclophosphamide and two patients of mycophenolate mofetil group had amenorrhea (23.8% vs.4.2%). Alopecia (11.9%) was seen only by intravenous cyclophosphamide group ((RR=0.0798). \nConclusion: Induction therapy with Mycophenolate mofetil was superior to intravenous cyclophosphamide in lupus nephritis in this study. Mycophenolate mofetil appeared to be better tolerated than cyclophosphamide. \nChatt Maa Shi Hosp Med Coll J; Vol.22 (1); January 2023; Page 28-32","PeriodicalId":9788,"journal":{"name":"Chattagram Maa-O-Shishu Hospital Medical College Journal","volume":"11 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chattagram Maa-O-Shishu Hospital Medical College Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3329/cmoshmcj.v22i1.67831","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The comparative safety of immunosuppressive drugs such as cyclophosphamide and mycophenolate mofetil for patients with lupus nephritis remains controversial. The study aimed to investigate the specific side effects of cyclophosphamide and mycophenolate mofetil in lupus nephritis patient after induction treatment. Materials and methods: It was a quasi-experimental study performed in the Department of Nephrology of Chittagong Medical College Hospital. A total of 100 patients of lupus nephritis who fulfilled the designated criteria were enrolled in this study by non-probability voluntary sampling method. The treatment was given on patient’s choice. After screening and treatment initiation, patients were assessed at 12 and 24 weeks. All the data were compiled in a structured case record form. Results: In the present study 48 patients (53.3%) in mycophenolate mofetil group and 42 patients (46.7%) in intravenous cyclophosphamide group completed 24 weeks of induction treatment of lupus nephritis. Infections were common in both treatment groups but significantly higher with intravenous cyclophosphamide group ((33.3% vs. 8.3%). Upper gastrointestinal syndrome occurred with 20(41%) patients in mycophenolate mofetil group and 7(16.7%) patients in intravenous cyclophosphamide group (RR=5.8333). Regarding other adverse effect, 10 patients of intravenous cyclophosphamide and two patients of mycophenolate mofetil group had amenorrhea (23.8% vs.4.2%). Alopecia (11.9%) was seen only by intravenous cyclophosphamide group ((RR=0.0798). Conclusion: Induction therapy with Mycophenolate mofetil was superior to intravenous cyclophosphamide in lupus nephritis in this study. Mycophenolate mofetil appeared to be better tolerated than cyclophosphamide. Chatt Maa Shi Hosp Med Coll J; Vol.22 (1); January 2023; Page 28-32
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
环磷酰胺和霉酚酸酯诱导治疗狼疮性肾炎后的风险评估:单中心准实验研究
背景:免疫抑制药物如环磷酰胺和霉酚酸酯治疗狼疮性肾炎患者的相对安全性仍存在争议。本研究旨在探讨环磷酰胺和霉酚酸酯在狼疮性肾炎患者诱导治疗后的特异性副作用。材料与方法:在吉大港医学院附属医院肾内科进行准实验研究。采用非概率自愿抽样的方法,对100例符合指定标准的狼疮性肾炎患者进行研究。根据病人的选择给予治疗。在筛查和治疗开始后,患者在12周和24周进行评估。所有数据以结构化病例记录形式汇编。结果:本研究中,霉酚酸酯组48例(53.3%),环磷酰胺组42例(46.7%)完成了24周狼疮性肾炎诱导治疗。两组患者均有感染,但静脉注射环磷酰胺组感染率明显高于对照组(33.3% vs. 8.3%)。霉酚酸酯组出现上消化道综合征20例(41%),静脉环磷酰胺组出现上消化道综合征7例(16.7%)(RR=5.8333)。其他不良反应方面,静脉注射环磷酰胺组10例闭经,霉酚酸酯组2例闭经(23.8% vs.4.2%)。仅静脉注射环磷酰胺组出现脱发(11.9%)(RR=0.0798)。结论:应用霉酚酸酯诱导治疗狼疮性肾炎优于静脉注射环磷酰胺。霉酚酸酯似乎比环磷酰胺耐受性更好。上海医科大学医学院;工程系(1);2023年1月;页面28-32
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
Clinical Predictors of Sodium Disturbance in Children Presenting with Acute Watery Diarrhea in a Tertiary Hospital of Bangladesh Advanced Abdominal Pregnancy of 32 Weeks with Alive Baby: A Rare Event Cognitive Status In Thalassemia Editor’s Role on Plagiarism Measles Infection and Vaccination Status against Measles in Children during 2019-2020: A Hospital Based Study in Chattogram
×
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:481959085
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