Repeat kidney biopsies fail to detect differences between azathioprine and mycophenolate mofetil maintenance therapy for lupus nephritis: data from the MAINTAIN Nephritis Trial.

BACKGROUND: In the MAINTAIN Nephritis Trial, azathioprine (AZA) and mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) were compared as maintenance immunosuppressive treatment of proliferative lupus nephritis (LN) after a short-course of intravenous cyclophosphamide. Here, we compare the pathological findings on repeat kidney biopsies between the two groups. METHODS: Per protocol, repeat renal biopsies were obtained in 30 patients (16 AZA and 14 MMF) at 2 years (±6 months). Baseline and follow-up biopsies were graded according to the International Society of Nephrology/Renal Pathological Society (ISN/RPS) classification. The activity and chronicity indices (AI, CI) were calculated using two different semiquantitative scoring systems (Morel-Maroger and National Institutes of Health). Statistics were performed by non-parametric tests. RESULTS: The clinical characteristics of the 30 re-biopsied patients only marginally differ from the entire MAINTAIN cohort (105 patients). Clinical baseline and follow-up characteristics of AZA- and MMF-treated re-biopsied patients did not differ. Time (SD) to repeat renal biopsy was 25.0 (2.0) and 26.5 (3.3) months in AZA and MMF patients, respectively. More patients had normal renal biopsies or Classes I/II/V LN at follow-up compared to baseline and conversely, less patients had Class IV LN at follow-up. In both groups, the AI statistically decreased at follow-up compared to baseline, while the CI slightly, but significantly, increased. No differences could be detected between the groups. CONCLUSION: Centralized pathological analyses, including ISN/RPS classification and comparisons of AI/CI, failed to find differences between MMF and AZA at 2 years, a result well in line with the absence of difference in long-term clinical outcome reported elsewhere.

Early response to immunosuppressive therapy predicts good renal outcome in lupus nephritis: lessons from long-term followup of patients in the Euro-Lupus Nephritis Trial.

OBJECTIVE: In the Euro-Lupus Nephritis Trial (ELNT), 90 patients with lupus nephritis were randomly assigned to a high-dose intravenous cyclophosphamide (IV CYC) regimen (6 monthly pulses and 2 quarterly pulses with escalating doses) or a low-dose IV CYC regimen (6 pulses of 500 mg given at intervals of 2 weeks), each of which was followed by azathioprine (AZA). After a median followup of 41 months, a difference in efficacy between the 2 regimens was not observed. The present analysis was undertaken to extend the followup and to identify prognostic factors. METHODS: Renal function was prospectively assessed quarterly in all 90 patients except 5 who were lost to followup. Survival curves were derived using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: After a median followup of 73 months, there was no significant difference in the cumulative probability of end-stage renal disease or doubling of the serum creatinine level in patients who received the low-dose IV CYC regimen versus those who received the high-dose regimen. At long-term followup, 18 patients (8 receiving low-dose and 10 receiving high-dose treatment) had developed permanent renal impairment and were classified as having poor long-term renal outcome. We demonstrated by multivariate analysis that early response to therapy at 6 months (defined as a decrease in serum creatinine level and proteinuria <1 g/24 hours) was the best predictor of good long-term renal outcome. CONCLUSION: Long-term followup of patients from the ELNT confirms that, in lupus nephritis, a remission-inducing regimen of low-dose IV CYC followed by AZA achieves clinical results comparable with those obtained with a high-dose regimen. Early response to therapy is predictive of good long-term renal outcome.

Immunosuppressive therapy in lupus nephritis: the Euro-Lupus Nephritis Trial, a randomized trial of low-dose versus high-dose intravenous cyclophosphamide.

OBJECTIVE: Glomerulonephritis is a severe manifestation of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) that is usually treated with an extended course of intravenous (IV) cyclophosphamide (CYC). Given the side effects of this regimen, we evaluated the efficacy and the toxicity of a course of low-dose IV CYC prescribed as a remission-inducing treatment, followed by azathioprine (AZA) as a remission-maintaining treatment. METHODS: In this multicenter, prospective clinical trial (the Euro-Lupus Nephritis Trial [ELNT]), we randomly assigned 90 SLE patients with proliferative glomerulonephritis to a high-dose IV CYC regimen (6 monthly pulses and 2 quarterly pulses; doses increased according to the white blood cell count nadir) or a low-dose IV CYC regimen (6 fortnightly pulses at a fixed dose of 500 mg), each of which was followed by AZA. Intent-to-treat analyses were performed. RESULTS: Followup continued for a median of 41.3 months in the low-dose group and 41 months in the high-dose group. Sixteen percent of those in the low-dose group and 20% of those in the high-dose group experienced treatment failure (not statistically significant by Kaplan-Meier analysis). Levels of serum creatinine, albumin, C3, 24-hour urinary protein, and the disease activity scores significantly improved in both groups during the first year of followup. Renal remission was achieved in 71% of the low-dose group and 54% of the high-dose group (not statistically significant). Renal flares were noted in 27% of the low-dose group and 29% of the high-dose group. Although episodes of severe infection were more than twice as frequent in the high-dose group, the difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: The data from the ELNT indicate that in European SLE patients with proliferative lupus nephritis, a remission-inducing regimen of low-dose IV CYC (cumulative dose 3 gm) followed by AZA achieves clinical results comparable to those obtained with a high-dose regimen.