J Rheum Dis.  2019 Jan;26(1):57-65. 10.4078/jrd.2019.26.1.57.

Comparison of Renal Responses to Cyclophosphamide and Mycophenolate Mofetil used as Induction Therapies in Korean Patients with Lupus Nephritis

• Choi SE
• Park DJ
• Kang JH
• Lee KE
• Xu H
• Lee JS
• Choi YD
• Lee SS

• KMID: 2442035
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4078/jrd.2019.26.1.57

Abstract

OBJECTIVE
Although intravenous cyclophosphamide (IVC) is generally accepted as the standard therapy for induction treatment of active proliferative lupus nephritis (LN), several clinical trials have suggested that mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) is at least as effective as IVC. Because few Asian studies have compared the two treatment modalities, we compared the efficacies of MMF and IVC as LN remission induction treatments in Korean patients.
METHODS
We enrolled 39 patients with class III and IV LN who received MMF or IVC as LN induction therapy. The renal outcomes (i.e., complete response [CR], partial response [PR], and no response [NR]) at 6 and 12 months were defined using the ACR 2006 response criteria.
RESULTS
Of 39 patients, 23 (59.0%) were treated with IVC, and 16 (41.0%) were treated with MMF. Demographics, clinical characteristics, laboratory data, and adverse events did not significantly differ between the two groups. However, C3 levels were lower and activity scores in renal biopsy were higher in IVC-treated patients. CRs were achieved by 11 (47.8%) of the patients receiving IVC and 7 (43.8%) of the patients receiving MMF after 6 months of treatment (p=0.961) and by 11 (47.8%) of those who received IVC and 9 (56.2%) of those who received MMF at 12 months of treatment (p=0.713). Neither the PR rate nor the NR rate differed significantly at 6 or 12 months between the two groups.
CONCLUSION
The efficacy of MMF does not differ from that of IVC in terms of induction of LN remission in Korean patients.

Keyword

Lupus nephritis; Cyclophosphamide; Mycophenolic acid; Induction of remission

MeSH Terms

Asian Continental Ancestry Group
Biopsy
Cyclophosphamide*
Demography
Humans
Lupus Nephritis*
Mycophenolic Acid
Remission Induction
Cyclophosphamide
Mycophenolic Acid

Reference

1. Tsokos GC. Systemic lupus erythematosus. N Engl J Med. 2011; 365:2110–21.

2. Illei GG, Austin HA, Crane M, Collins L, Gourley MF, Yarboro CH, et al. Combination therapy with pulse cyclophosphamide plus pulse methylprednisolone improves long-term renal outcome without adding toxicity in patients with lupus nephritis. Ann Intern Med. 2001; 135:248–57.

3. Mok CC, Chan PT, To CH. Anti-müllerian hormone and ovarian reserve in systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheum. 2013; 65:206–10.

4. Ginzler EM, Dooley MA, Aranow C, Kim MY, Buyon J, Merrill JT, et al. Mycophenolate mofetil or intravenous cyclophosphamide for lupus nephritis. N Engl J Med. 2005; 353:2219–28.

5. 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; 89:227–35.

6. Touma Z, Gladman DD, Urowitz MB, Beyene J, Uleryk EM, Shah PS. Mycophenolate mofetil for induction treatment of lupus nephritis: a systematic review and metaanalysis. J Rheumatol. 2011; 38:69–78.

7. Appel GB, Contreras G, Dooley MA, Ginzler EM, Isenberg D, Jayne D, et al. Mycophenolate mofetil versus cyclophosphamide for induction treatment of lupus nephritis. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2009; 20:1103–12.

8. Isenberg D, Appel GB, Contreras G, Dooley MA, Ginzler EM, Jayne D, et al. Influence of race/ethnicity on response to lupus nephritis treatment: the ALMS study. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2010; 49:128–40.

9. Chan TM, Li FK, Tang CS, Wong RW, Fang GX, Ji YL, et al. Efficacy of mycophenolate mofetil in patients with diffuse proliferative lupus nephritis. Hong Kong-Guangzhou nephrology study group. N Engl J Med. 2000; 343:1156–62.

10. Chan TM, Tse KC, Tang CS, Mok MY, Li FK; Group HKNS. Long-term study of mycophenolate mofetil as continuous induction and maintenance treatment for diffuse proliferative lupus nephritis. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2005; 16:1076–84.

11. 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.

12. Hu W, Liu Z, Chen H, Tang Z, Wang Q, Shen K, et al. Mycophenolate mofetil vs cyclophosphamide therapy for patients with diffuse proliferative lupus nephritis. Chin Med J (Engl). 2002; 115:705–9.

13. Li X, Ren H, Zhang Q, Zhang W, Wu X, Xu Y, et al. Mycophenolate mofetil or tacrolimus compared with intravenous cyclophosphamide in the induction treatment for active lupus nephritis. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2012; 27:1467–72.

14. Hanaoka H, Kiyokawa T, Iida H, Ishimori K, Takakuwa Y, Okazaki T, et al. Comparison of renal response to four different induction therapies in Japanese patients with lupus nephritis class III or IV: a single-centre retrospective study. PLoS One. 2017; 12:e0175152.

15. Rathi M, Goyal A, 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; 89:235–42.

16. Sahay M, Saivani Y, Ismal K, Vali PS. Mycophenolate versus cyclophosphamide for lupus nephritis. Indian J Nephrol. 2018; 28:35–40.

17. Hochberg MC. Updating the American College of Rheumatology revised criteria for the classification of systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheum. 1997; 40:1725.

18. Weening JJ, D'Agati VD, Schwartz MM, Seshan SV, Alpers CE, Appel GB, et al. The classification of glomerulonephritis in systemic lupus erythematosus revisited. Kidney Int. 2004; 65:521–30.

19. Gladman DD, Ibañez D, Urowitz MB. Systemic lupus erythematosus disease activity index 2000. J Rheumatol. 2002; 29:288–91.

20. Austin HA 3rd, Muenz LR, Joyce KM, Antonovych TA, Kullick ME, Klippel JH, et al. Prognostic factors in lupus nephritis. Contribution of renal histologic data. Am J Med. 1983; 75:382–91.

21. Bertsias GK, Tektonidou M, Amoura Z, Aringer M, Bajema I, Berden JH, et al. Joint European League Against Rheumatism and European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association (EULAR/ERA-EDTA) recommendations for the management of adult and paediatric lupus nephritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2012; 71:1771–82.

22. Hahn BH, McMahon MA, Wilkinson A, Wallace WD, Daikh DI, Fitzgerald JD, et al. American College of Rheumatology guidelines for screening, treatment, and management of lupus nephritis. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2012; 64:797–808.

23. Renal Disease Subcommittee of the American College of Rheumatology Ad Hoc Committee on Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Response C. The American College of Rheumatology response criteria for proliferative and membranous renal disease in systemic lupus erythematosus clinical trials. Arthritis Rheum. 2006; 54:421–32.

24. Radhakrishnan J, Cattran DC. The KDIGO practice guideline on glomerulonephritis: reading between the (guide) lines–application to the individual patient. Kidney Int. 2012; 82:840–56.

25. Mahieu MA, Strand V, Simon LS, Lipsky PE, Ramsey-Goldman R. A critical review of clinical trials in systemic lupus erythematosus. Lupus. 2016; 25:1122–40.

26. Moore RA, Derry S. Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials and cohort studies of mycophenolate mofetil in lupus nephritis. Arthritis Res Ther. 2006; 8:R182.

27. 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; 2:968–75.

28. 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; 22:1933–42.