Comparative efficacy of 13 immunosuppressive agents for idiopathic membranous nephropathy in adults with nephrotic syndrome: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Abstract

ObjectivesThis study aimed to compare the effectiveness of 13 types of immunosuppressive agents used to treat idiopathic membranous nephropathy (IMN) in adults with nephrotic syndrome.DesignSystematic review and network meta-analysis.Data sourcesPubMed, EMbase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Clinical trials, SinoMed, Chinese Biomedicine, CNKI, WanFang and Chongqing VIP Information databases were comprehensively searched until February 2018.Eligibility criteriaRandomised clinical trials (RCTs) comparing the effects of different immunosuppressive treatments in adult patients with IMN and nephrotic syndrome were included, and all included RCTs had a study-duration of at least 6 months.Data extraction and synthesisTwo reviewers independently screened articles, extracted data and assessed study quality. Standard pairwise meta-analysis was performed using DerSimonian-Laird random-effects model.ResultsThis study ultimately included 48 RCTs with 2736 patients and 13 immunosuppressive agents. The network meta-analysis results showed that most regimens, except for leflunomide (LEF), mizoribine (MZB) and steroids (STE), showed significantly higher probabilities of total remission (TR) when compared with non-immunosuppressive therapies (the control group),with risk ratios (RRs) of 2.71 (95% CI) 1.81 to 4.06)for tacrolimus+tripterygium wilfordii (TAC+TW), 2.16 (1.27 to 3.69) foradrenocorticotropic hormone, 2.02 (1.64 to 2.49) for TAC, 2.03 (1.13 to3.64) for azathioprine (AZA), 1.91 (1.46 to 2.50) for cyclosporine (CsA), 1.86 (1.44 to2.42) for mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), 1.85 (1.52 to 2.25) for cyclophosphamide (CTX),1.81 (1.10 to 2.98) for rituximab (RIT), 1.80 (1.38 to 2.33) for TW, 1.72 (1.35 to 2.19) for chlorambucil. As for 24 hours UTP, the direct andindirect comparisons showed that AZA (standard mean difference (SMD), −1.02(95% CI −1.90 to −0.15)), CsA (SMD, −0.70 (95% CI −1.33 to −0.08)),CTX (SMD, −1.01 (95% CI −1.44 to -0.58)), MMF (SMD, −0.98 (95% CI −1.64 to −0.32)), MZB (SMD, −0.97 (95% CI −1.90 to−0.04]), TAC (SMD, −1.16 (95% CI −1.72 to −0.60)) and TAC+TW(SMD, −2.03 (95% CI −2.94 to −1.12)) could significantly superior thancontrol, except for chlorambucil, LEF, RIT and STE. Thechanges of serum creatinine (Scr) was not significantly different between eachtreatments of immunosuppressive agents and the control, except for STE whichhas the possibility of increasing Scr (SMD, 1.00 (95% CI 0.36 to 1.64)).Comparisons among all treatments of immunosuppressive agents showed nostatistical significance in the outcome of relapse. A drenocorticotropichormone (85.1%) showed the lowest probability of relapse under the cumulativeranking curve values among all immunosuppressants. Infection,gastrointestinal symptoms, and bone marrow suppression were the common adverseevents associated with most of the immunosuppressive therapies.ConclusionsThis study demonstrates that TAC+TW, TAC and CTX are superior to other immunosuppressive agents in terms of TR and 24 hours UTP. Moreover, they are all at risk of infection, gastrointestinal symptoms, and myelosuppression. Furthermore, TAC could increase the risk of glucose intolerance or new-onset diabetes mellitus. Conversely, STE alone, LEF and MZB seem to have little advantage in clinical treatment of IMN.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018094228.

Immunosuppression therapy for idiopathic membranous nephropathy: systematic review with network meta-analysis

“…Our study differs from a previous network meta-analysis on idiopathic membranous nephropathy published in 2019, which compared 13 immunosuppressive agents against non-immunosuppressive therapy in 48 trials involving 2736 participants [76]. This study showed that most treatment strategies, except for leflunomide, mizoribine and steroid monotherapy, were significantly more likely to result in total remission compared with non-immunosuppressive therapies.…”

Pharmacometabonomic association of cyclophosphamide 4‐hydroxylation in hematopoietic cell transplant recipients

“…CY is used to treat a multitude of diseases, ranging from autoimmune disorders 28 , 29 to cancer to nonmalignant conditions treated with HCT. 9 , 14 With the increasing use of PT‐CY in alternative donor HCT, it is likely that CY use will expand.…”

A novel approach to rapid induction of remission in primary membranous nephropathy

“…Отчасти проблема конфаундинга в оценке эффективности лечения преодолена дополнительным межгрупповым сравнительным анализом с применением методов псевдорандомизации, который полностью подтвердил основные результаты исследования, повысив степень их надежности. Также нами не проведен анализ сравнительной эффективности нового подхода и стандартной терапии с применением ЦФ, что объясняется низкой частотой его применения в реальной практике клиники из-за высокого риска побочных эффектов и отмены лечения [6,22,23].…”