Efficacy and safety of immunosuppressive agents for adults with lupus nephritis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Humans
Adult
Immunosuppressive Agents
/ adverse effects
Lupus Nephritis
/ drug therapy
Network Meta-Analysis
Treatment Outcome
Cyclophosphamide
/ adverse effects
Tacrolimus
/ adverse effects
Azathioprine
/ adverse effects
Mycophenolic Acid
/ adverse effects
Glucocorticoids
/ adverse effects
Bone Marrow Diseases
Kidney Failure, Chronic
Recurrence
Herpes Zoster
Neoplasms
/ chemically induced
efficacy
immunosuppressive
lupus nephritis
network meta-analysis
safety
Journal
Frontiers in immunology
ISSN: 1664-3224
Titre abrégé: Front Immunol
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101560960
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2023
2023
Historique:
received:
21
06
2023
accepted:
08
09
2023
medline:
31
10
2023
pubmed:
30
10
2023
entrez:
30
10
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Various immunosuppressive regimens have been developed for the treatment of lupus nephritis (LN). This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of immunosuppressive regimens in adults with LN. We systematically searched the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases, including conference proceedings, trial registries, and reference lists, from inception until July 10, 2022. The effects of treatment were compared and ranked using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). The primary endpoint was total remission. The secondary endpoints were complete remission, systemic lupus erythematosus disease activity index (SLEDAI), relapse, all-cause mortality, end-stage renal disease (ESRD), infection, herpes zoster, ovarian failure, myelosuppression, and cancer. Sixty-two trials reported in 172 studies involving 6,936 patients were included in the network meta-analysis. The combination of tacrolimus (TAC), mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), and glucocorticoid (GC) provided the best result for the total remission rate (SUCRA, 86.63%) and SLEDAI (SUCRA, 91.00%), while the combination of voclosporin (VCS) , MMF and GC gave the best improvement in the complete remission rate (SUCRA, 90.71%). The combination of cyclophosphamide (CYC), MMF and GC was associated with the lowest risk of relapse (SUCRA, 85.57%) and cancer (SUCRA, 85.14%), while the combination of obinutuzumab (OTB), MMF and GC was associated with the lowest risk of all-cause mortality (SUCRA, 84.07%). Rituximab (RTX) plus MMF plus GC was associated with the lowest risk of ESRD (SUCRA, 83.11%), while the risk of infection was lowest in patients treated with azathioprine (AZA) plus CYC plus GC (SUCRA, 68.59%). TAC plus GC was associated with the lowest risk of herpes zoster (SUCRA, 87.67%) and ovarian failure (SUCRA, 73.60%). Cyclosporine (CsA) plus GC was associated with the lowest risk of myelosuppression (SUCRA, 79.50%), while AZA plus GC was associated with the highest risk of myelosuppression (SUCRA, 16.25%). This study showed that a combination of TAC, MMF and GC was the best regimen for improving the total remission rate. The optimal regimen for specific outcomes should be highlighted for high-risk patients.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37901212
doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1232244
pmc: PMC10611487
doi:
Substances chimiques
Immunosuppressive Agents
0
Cyclophosphamide
8N3DW7272P
Tacrolimus
WM0HAQ4WNM
Azathioprine
MRK240IY2L
Mycophenolic Acid
HU9DX48N0T
Glucocorticoids
0
Types de publication
Meta-Analysis
Systematic Review
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1232244Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2023 Jiang, Jin, Yu, Zhao, Wang, Tian, Li and Zeng.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Références
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2012 Sep 27;12:150
pubmed: 23016799
Ann Rheum Dis. 2016 Mar;75(3):526-31
pubmed: 25757867
Am J Kidney Dis. 2000 May;35(5):904-14
pubmed: 10793026
Lupus. 2020 Jul;29(8):836-844
pubmed: 32408851
Rheumatol Immunol Res. 2021 Dec 15;2(3):195-202
pubmed: 36465068
Nephrology (Carlton). 2018 Oct;23 Suppl 4:80-83
pubmed: 30298658
Kidney Int. 2018 Apr;93(4):789-796
pubmed: 29459092
Mol Endocrinol. 2011 Aug;25(8):1376-86
pubmed: 21622531
Syst Rev. 2016 Sep 13;5(1):155
pubmed: 27619512
Kidney Int. 2021 Oct;100(4S):S1-S276
pubmed: 34556256
Nephrology (Carlton). 2014 Jan;19(1):11-20
pubmed: 23876069
Nephron. 2021;145(1):1-13
pubmed: 33147587
Ann Rheum Dis. 2020 Jun;79(6):713-723
pubmed: 32220834
Rheumatology (Oxford). 2008 Nov;47(11):1678-81
pubmed: 18753192
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Jun 29;6:CD002922
pubmed: 29957821
Pediatr Clin North Am. 2019 Feb;66(1):87-99
pubmed: 30454753
J Clin Epidemiol. 1997 Jun;50(6):683-91
pubmed: 9250266
Rheumatol Immunol Res. 2021 Apr 13;2(1):43-47
pubmed: 36467897
Nephrology (Carlton). 2005 Apr;10(2):174-9
pubmed: 15877678
Ann Intern Med. 2015 Jun 2;162(11):777-84
pubmed: 26030634
Res Synth Methods. 2012 Jun;3(2):111-25
pubmed: 26062085
J Clin Epidemiol. 2011 Feb;64(2):163-71
pubmed: 20688472
Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2012 Jun;64(6):797-808
pubmed: 22556106
Kidney360. 2022 Jan 27;3(1):5-7
pubmed: 35368575
J Clin Pharmacol. 2014 May;54(5):537-45
pubmed: 24243422
Nat Med. 2008 Sep;14(9):931-8
pubmed: 18724379
Rheumatology (Oxford). 2013 Mar;52(3):480-6
pubmed: 23148090
Clin Rheumatol. 2019 Jan;38(1):107-115
pubmed: 30123930
J Rheumatol. 2016 Oct;43(10):1801-1815
pubmed: 27585688
Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2020 Jan 23;6(1):7
pubmed: 31974366