Daily low-dose prednisolone to prevent relapse of steroid-sensitive nephrotic syndrome in children with an upper respiratory tract infection: PREDNOS2 RCT.

BACKGROUND: Most children with steroid-sensitive nephrotic syndrome have relapses that are triggered by upper respiratory tract infections. Four small trials, mostly in children already taking maintenance corticosteroid in countries of different upper respiratory tract infection epidemiology, showed that giving daily low-dose prednisone/prednisolone for 5-7 days during an upper respiratory tract infection reduces the risk of relapse. OBJECTIVES: To determine if these findings were replicated in a large UK population of children with relapsing steroid-sensitive nephrotic syndrome on different background medication or none. DESIGN: A randomised double-blind placebo-controlled trial, including a cost-effectiveness analysis. SETTING: A total of 122 UK paediatric departments, of which 91 recruited patients. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 365 children with relapsing steroid-sensitive nephrotic syndrome (mean age 7.6 ± 3.5 years) were randomised (1 : 1) according to a minimisation algorithm based on background treatment. Eighty children completed 12 months of follow-up without an upper respiratory tract infection. Thirty-two children were withdrawn from the trial (14 prior to an upper respiratory tract infection), leaving a modified intention-to-treat analysis population of 271 children (134 and 137 children in the prednisolone and placebo arms, respectively). INTERVENTIONS: At the start of an upper respiratory tract infection, children received 6 days of prednisolone (15 mg/m2) or an equivalent dose of placebo. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the incidence of first upper respiratory tract infection-related relapse following any upper respiratory tract infection over 12 months. The secondary outcomes were the overall rate of relapse, changes in background treatment, cumulative dose of prednisolone, rates of serious adverse events, incidence of corticosteroid adverse effects, change in Achenbach Child Behaviour Checklist score and quality of life. Analysis was by intention-to-treat principle. The cost-effectiveness analysis used trial data and a decision-analytic model to estimate quality-adjusted life-years and costs at 1 year, which were then extrapolated over 16 years. RESULTS: There were 384 upper respiratory tract infections and 82 upper respiratory tract infection-related relapses in the prednisolone arm, and 407 upper respiratory tract infections and 82 upper respiratory tract infection-related relapses in the placebo arm. The number of patients experiencing an upper respiratory tract infection-related relapse was 56 (42.7%) and 58 (44.3%) in the prednisolone and placebo arms, respectively (adjusted risk difference -0.024, 95% confidence interval -0.14 to 0.09; p = 0.70). There was no evidence that the treatment effect differed when data were analysed according to background treatment. There were no significant differences in secondary outcomes between treatment arms. Giving daily prednisolone at the time of an upper respiratory tract infection was associated with increased quality-adjusted life-years (0.9427 vs. 0.9424) and decreased average costs (£252 vs. £254), when compared with standard care. The cost saving was driven by background therapy and hospitalisations after relapse. The finding was robust to sensitivity analysis. LIMITATIONS: A larger number of children than expected did not have an upper respiratory tract infection and the sample size attrition rate was adjusted accordingly during the trial. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical analysis indicated that giving 6 days of daily low-dose prednisolone at the time of an upper respiratory tract infection does not reduce the risk of relapse of steroid-sensitive nephrotic syndrome in UK children. However, there was an economic benefit from costs associated with background therapy and relapse, and the health-related quality-of-life impact of having a relapse. FUTURE WORK: Further work is needed to investigate the clinical and health economic impact of relapses, interethnic differences in treatment response, the effect of different corticosteroid regimens in treating relapses, and the pathogenesis of individual viral infections and their effect on steroid-sensitive nephrotic syndrome. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN10900733 and EudraCT 2012-003476-39. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 26, No. 3. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Steroid-sensitive nephrotic syndrome is a kidney condition in which protein leaks into the urine, causing generalised swelling. In most children, the condition recurs or relapses. Relapses often occur following an upper respiratory tract infection (i.e. a cough, cold or sore throat). Research in tropical countries suggests that if children have a small dose of daily steroids for a week at the time of an upper respiratory tract infection then they are less likely to relapse. The selection of children for these studies and the different patterns of infection mean that we are not certain if this treatment would work in the UK. A total of 365 children with relapsing nephrotic syndrome took part. Half of the children took a steroid and the other half took dummy tablets (placebo) for 6 days at the start of an upper respiratory tract infection. We followed up the children for 12 months and collected information on relapses and other treatments and information from questionnaires about behaviour and quality of life. We also investigated whether or not there were cost savings with this treatment. There were 271 children who had an upper respiratory tract infection in the 12 months of the study and so only these children were included in the analyses. Giving 6 days of a low-dose steroid at the time of an upper respiratory tract infection did not reduce the risk of a relapse. There was also no effect on the overall number of relapses, the number of children needing to start extra preventative treatments or side effects of steroids. Although there was no clinical effect, the economic evaluation found that giving prednisolone led to lower treatment costs overall and higher quality of life and might, therefore, offer better value for money, but this has to be interpreted against the clinical evidence of no significant effect. Our conclusion is that there is no clinical benefit to giving children low-dose prednisolone at the time of an upper respiratory tract infection.

Sixteen-week versus standard eight-week prednisolone therapy for childhood nephrotic syndrome: the PREDNOS RCT.

BACKGROUND: The optimal corticosteroid regimen for treating the presenting episode of steroid-sensitive nephrotic syndrome (SSNS) remains uncertain. Most UK centres use an 8-week regimen, despite previous systematic reviews indicating that longer regimens reduce the risk of relapse and frequently relapsing nephrotic syndrome (FRNS). OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to determine whether or not an extended 16-week course of prednisolone increases the time to first relapse. The secondary objectives were to compare the relapse rate, FRNS and steroid-dependent nephrotic syndrome (SDNS) rates, requirement for alternative immunosuppressive agents and corticosteroid-related adverse events (AEs), including adverse behaviour and costs. DESIGN: Randomised double-blind parallel-group placebo-controlled trial, including a cost-effectiveness analysis. SETTING: One hundred and twenty-five UK paediatric departments. PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred and thirty-seven children presenting with a first episode of SSNS. Participants aged between 1 and 15 years were randomised (1 : 1) according to a minimisation algorithm to ensure balance of ethnicity (South Asian, white or other) and age (≤ 5 or ≥ 6 years). INTERVENTIONS: The control group (n = 118) received standard course (SC) prednisolone therapy: 60 mg/m2/day of prednisolone in weeks 1-4, 40 mg/m2 of prednisolone on alternate days in weeks 5-8 and matching placebo on alternate days in weeks 9-18 (total 2240 mg/m2). The intervention group (n = 119) received extended course (EC) prednisolone therapy: 60 mg/m2/day of prednisolone in weeks 1-4; started at 60 mg/m2 of prednisolone on alternate days in weeks 5-16, tapering by 10 mg/m2 every 2 weeks (total 3150 mg/m2). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was time to first relapse [Albustix® (Siemens Healthcare Limited, Frimley, UK)-positive proteinuria +++ or greater for 3 consecutive days or the presence of generalised oedema plus +++ proteinuria]. The secondary outcome measures were relapse rate, incidence of FRNS and SDNS, other immunosuppressive therapy use, rates of serious adverse events (SAEs) and AEs and the incidence of behavioural change [using Achenbach Child Behaviour Checklist (ACBC)]. A comprehensive cost-effectiveness analysis was performed. The analysis was by intention to treat. Participants were followed for a minimum of 24 months. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in time to first relapse between the SC and EC groups (hazard ratio 0.87, 95% confidence interval 0.65 to 1.17; log-rank p = 0.3). There were also no differences in the incidence of FRNS (SC 50% vs. EC 53%; p = 0.7), SDNS (44% vs. 42%; p = 0.8) or requirement for other immunosuppressive therapy (56% vs. 54%; p = 0.8). The total prednisolone dose received following completion of study medication was 5475 mg vs. 6674 mg (p = 0.07). SAE rates were not significantly different (25% vs. 17%; p = 0.1) and neither were AEs, except poor behaviour (yes/no), which was less frequent with EC treatment. There were no differences in ACBC scores. EC therapy was associated with a mean increase in generic health benefit [0.0162 additional quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs)] and cost savings (£4369 vs. £2696). LIMITATIONS: Study drug formulation may have prevented some younger children who were unable to swallow whole or crushed tablets from participating. CONCLUSIONS: This trial has not shown any clinical benefit for EC prednisolone therapy in UK children. The cost-effectiveness analysis suggested that EC therapy may be cheaper, with the possibility of a small QALY benefit. FUTURE WORK: Studies investigating EC versus SC therapy in younger children and further cost-effectiveness analyses are warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN16645249 and EudraCT 2010-022489-29. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 23, No. 26. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Steroid-sensitive nephrotic syndrome (SSNS) is one of the most common childhood kidney diseases. The kidney filters leak protein into the urine, resulting in low levels of protein in the blood and generalised swelling. If untreated, this can lead to serious complications, including infection and blood clots. The disease responds well to prednisolone, a steroid drug; however, it is very common for disease to recur (called a relapse). Doctors are uncertain how long prednisolone should be given to treat children when they first present with nephrotic syndrome. In the UK, a 2-month course has traditionally been used. However, a number of research studies have suggested that giving prednisolone for ≥ 3 months may reduce the number of children who relapse and also the number who develop lots of relapses (called frequently relapsing nephrotic syndrome; FRNS). We recruited 237 children presenting with SSNS. Half were given an 8-week standard course of prednisolone and the other half a 16-week extended course (EC). We used placebo (dummy tablets) so that the participants and doctors did not know which treatment group they were in. Participants were followed for a minimum of 24 months and monitored for the development of relapses and prednisolone side effects, including behavioural problems. A cost analysis was performed. Giving EC prednisolone did not delay the development of disease relapse. There was also no difference in the number of children who developed FRNS or steroid-dependent nephrotic syndrome or who needed to be given other treatments. The rate of prednisolone side effects was the similar in the two treatment groups. EC treatment was, however, cheaper by £1673. Therefore, we conclude that there is no clinical benefit associated with the administration of EC prednisolone therapy in UK children presenting for the first time with SSNS. However, EC therapy was cheaper than the standard treatment.