Explore the vast range of titles available.

In this double-blind, randomized trial, mycophenolate mofetil was superior to azathioprine for maintaining a renal response and preventing relapse in patients with lupus nephritis who had had a response to induction therapy. Systemic lupus erythematosus is an autoimmune disorder often characterized by the development of glomerulonephritis. 1 Renal involvement remains the strongest predictor of morbidity and mortality among patients with lupus, 1 and despite improvements in the management of lupus, the incidence of end-stage renal disease has not declined. 2 Management of lupus nephritis consists of induction therapy to achieve remission and long-term maintenance therapy to prevent relapse, progression to end-stage renal disease, and death. 3 However, the options for long-term therapy remain controversial. Treatment options include glucocorticoids and the immunosuppressive agents cyclophosphamide, azathioprine, and mycophenolate mofetil. These drugs have considerable toxicity and are not effective . . .

ObjectiveTo compare the efficacy of tacrolimus (TAC) and mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) for the initial therapy of lupus nephritis (LN).Study designThis is an open randomised controlled parallel group study.MethodsAdult patients with biopsy-confirmed active LN (class III/IV/V) were randomised to receive prednisolone (0.6 mg/kg/day for 6 weeks and tapered) in combination with either TAC (0.06–0.1 mg/kg/day) or MMF (2–3 g/day) for 6 months. Good responders were shifted to azathioprine for maintenance. The primary outcome was the rate of complete renal response (CR) at 6 months and the secondary outcomes included partial renal response, renal flares and decline of renal function over time.Results150 patients (92% women; aged 35.5±12.8 years; 81% class III/IV) were randomised (76 MMF, 74 TAC). At month 6, the rate of CR was 59% in the MMF and 62% in the TAC group (treatment difference: 3.0% (−12%, 18%); p=0.71). Major infective episodes occurred in 9.2% patients treated with MMF and in 5.4% patients treated with TAC (p=0.53). Maintenance therapy with azathioprine was given to 79% patients. After 60.8±26 months, proteinuric and nephritic renal flares developed in 24% and 18% of patients in the MMF group and 35% (p=0.12) and 27% (p=0.21) in the TAC group, respectively. The cumulative incidence of a composite outcome of decline of creatinine clearance by ≥30%, development of chronic kidney disease stage 4/5 or death was 21% in the MMF and 22% in the TAC group of patients (p=0.35).ConclusionsTAC is non-inferior to MMF, when combined with prednisolone, for induction therapy of active LN. With azathioprine maintenance for 5 years, a non-significant trend of higher incidence of renal flares and renal function decline is observed with the TAC regimen.Trial registration numberHospital Authority Research Ethics Committee Clinical Trial Registry (HARECCTR0500018; Hong Kong) and US ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00371319).

Background Long-term immunosuppressive treatment does not efficiently prevent relapses of lupus nephritis (LN). This investigator-initiated randomised trial tested whether mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) was superior to azathioprine (AZA) as maintenance treatment. Methods A total of 105 patients with lupus with proliferative LN were included. All received three daily intravenous pulses of 750 mg methylprednisolone, followed by oral glucocorticoids and six fortnightly cyclophosphamide intravenous pulses of 500 mg. Based on randomisation performed at baseline, AZA (target dose: 2 mg/kg/day) or MMF (target dose: 2 g/day) was given at week 12. Analyses were by intent to treat. Time to renal flare was the primary end point. Mean (SD) follow-up of the intent-to-treat population was 48 (14) months. Results The baseline clinical, biological and pathological characteristics of patients allocated to AZA or MMF did not differ. Renal flares were observed in 13 (25%) AZA-treated and 10 (19%) MMF-treated patients. Time to renal flare, to severe systemic flare, to benign flare and to renal remission did not statistically differ. Over a 3-year period, 24 h proteinuria, serum creatinine, serum albumin, serum C3, haemoglobin and global disease activity scores improved similarly in both groups. Doubling of serum creatinine occurred in four AZA-treated and three MMF-treated patients. Adverse events did not differ between the groups except for haematological cytopenias, which were statistically more frequent in the AZA group (p=0.03) but led only one patient to drop out. Conclusions Fewer renal flares were observed in patients receiving MMF but the difference did not reach statistical significance.

In this trial, obinutuzumab, a humanized type II anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody, plus standard therapy provided significantly better renal responses than standard therapy alone in patients with lupus nephritis.

This NIH-funded multicenter randomized study of focal segmental glomerulosclerosis (FSGS) treatment compared the efficacy of a 12-month course of cyclosporine to a combination of oral pulse dexamethasone and mycophenolate mofetil in children and adults with steroid-resistant primary FSGS. Of the 192 patients enrolled, 138 were randomized to cyclosporine (72) or to mycophenolate/dexamethasone (66). The primary analysis compared the levels of an ordinal variable measuring remission during the first year. The odds ratio (0.59) for achieving at least a partial remission with mycophenolate/dexamethasone compared to cyclosporine was not significant. Partial or complete remission was achieved in 22 mycophenolate/dexamethasone- and 33 cyclosporine-treated patients at 12 months. The main secondary outcome, preservation of remission for 26 weeks following cessation of treatment, was not significantly different between these two therapies. During the entire 78 weeks of study, 8 patients treated with cyclosporine and 7 with mycophenolate/dexamethasone died or developed kidney failure. Thus, our study did not find a difference in rates of proteinuria remission following 12 months of cyclosporine compared to mycophenolate/dexamethasone in patients with steroid-resistant FSGS. However, the small sample size might have prevented detection of a moderate treatment effect.

ObjectiveTo report the 10-year follow-up of the MAINTAIN Nephritis Trial comparing azathioprine (AZA) and mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) as maintenance therapy of proliferative lupus nephritis, and to test different definitions of early response as predictors of long-term renal outcome.MethodsIn 2014, data on survival, kidney function, 24 h proteinuria, renal flares and other outcomes were collected for the 105 patients randomised between 2002 and 2006, except in 13 lost to follow-up.ResultsDeath (2 and 3 in the AZA and MMF groups, respectively) and end-stage renal disease (1 and 3, respectively) were rare events. Time to renal flare (22 and 19 flares in AZA and MMF groups, respectively) did not differ between AZA and MMF patients. Patients with good long-term renal outcome had a much more stringent early decrease of 24 h proteinuria compared with patients with poor outcome. The positive predictive value of a 24 h proteinuria <0.5 g/day at 3 months, 6 months and 12 months for a good long-term renal outcome was excellent (between 89% and 92%). Inclusion of renal function and urinalysis in the early response criteria did not impact the value of early proteinuria decrease as long-term prognostic marker.ConclusionsThe long-term follow-up data of the MAINTAIN Nephritis Trial do not indicate that MMF is superior to AZA as maintenance therapy in a Caucasian population suffering from proliferative lupus nephritis. Moreover, we confirm the excellent positive predictive value of an early proteinuria decrease for long-term renal outcome.Trial registration numberNCT00204022.

This 24-week randomized, open-label, noninferiority trial compared oral mycophenolate mofetil with monthly intravenous cyclophosphamide as induction therapy for active lupus nephritis. Mycophenolate mofetil appeared more effective than intravenous cyclophosphamide in inducing remission of lupus nephritis, with a more favorable safety profile. Mycophenolate mofetil appeared to be more effective than intravenous cyclophosphamide in inducing remission of lupus nephritis, with a more favorable safety profile. Intravenous cyclophosphamide has been the standard of care for treating severe lupus glomerulonephritis 1 ; however, its use is limited by potentially severe toxic effects including bone marrow suppression, hemorrhagic cystitis, opportunistic infections, malignant diseases, and premature gonadal failure. 2 Clinical trials of treatment with intermittent intravenous cyclophosphamide combined with corticosteroids show greater long-term renal survival but not overall survival, as compared with treatment with corticosteroids alone. 3 – 6 Furthermore, failure to achieve remission, which is associated with an increased rate of progression to renal failure, is reported in 18 to 57 percent of patients who received cyclophosphamide. 7 – 10 Mycophenolate mofetil, an immunosuppressive . . .

ObjectivesLupus nephritis (LN) is a frequent complication of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Severe (proliferative) forms of LN are treated with induction immunosuppressive therapy (IST), followed by maintenance IST, to target remission and avoid relapses. The optimal duration of maintenance IST is unknown. The WIN-Lupus trial tested whether IST discontinuation after 2‒3 years was non-inferior to IST continuation for two more years in proliferative LN.MethodsWIN-Lupus was an investigator-initiated multicentre randomised controlled trial. Patients receiving maintenance IST with azathioprine or mycophenolate mofetil for 2–3 years, and hydroxychloroquine, were randomised (1:1) into two groups: (1) IST continuation and (2) IST discontinuation. The primary endpoint was the relapse rate of proliferative LN at 24 months. Main secondary endpoints were the rate of severe SLE flares, survival without renal relapse or severe flare, adverse events.ResultsBetween 2011 and 2016, 96 patients (out of 200 planned) were randomised in WIN-Lupus: IST continuation group (n=48), IST discontinuation group (n=48). Relapse of proliferative LN occurred in 5/40 (12.5%) patients with IST continuation and in 12/44 (27.3%) patients with IST discontinuation (difference 14.8% (95% CI −1.9 to 31.5)). Non-inferiority was not demonstrated for relapse rate; time to relapse did not differ between the groups. Severe SLE flares (renal or extrarenal) were less frequent in patients with IST continuation (5/40 vs 14/44 patients; p=0.035). Adverse events did not differ between the groups.ConclusionsNon-inferiority of maintenance IST discontinuation after 2‒3 years was not demonstrated for renal relapse. IST discontinuation was associated with a higher risk of severe SLE flares.Trial registration number NCT01284725.

As part of the Spare-the-Nephron trial, we evaluated the combination mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) and sirolimus (SRL) as a calcineurin inhibitor (CNI)-free regimen for the preservation of renal function in renal allograft recipients. This 2-year, open-label, multicenter trial randomized 299 patients of which 151 were maintained on MMF and a CNI, 148 on MMF plus SRL (n=120, tacrolimus; n=31, cyclosporine). Baseline characteristics including measured (iothalamate) glomerular filtration rate (GFR) were similar between groups. After 1 year, the mean percentage change from baseline in the primary end point of measured GFR was significantly higher in the MMF/SRL group compared with the MMF/CNI group. After 2 years, the change was indistinguishable. Calculated creatinine clearance and GFR were significantly greater with MMF/SRL at 2 years within which biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR) occurred in 14 MMF/SRL-treated patients (3 graft losses) and in 17 receiving the MMF/CNI (6 graft losses). Significantly, no patients receiving MMF/SRL but five treated with MMF/CNI died. Thus, compared with MMF/CNI treatment, a 2-year regimen of MMF/SRL resulted in similar measures of renal function but with fewer deaths and a trend to less BPAR and graft loss.

This phase 3 multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled 2-year trial compared the efficacy and safety of intravenous belimumab with those of placebo, plus standard therapy, in patients with active lupus nephritis. More patients who received belimumab had a primary efficacy renal response than those who received placebo.