Eculizumab Versus Ravulizumab for the Treatment of Atypical Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome: A Systematic Review

Abstract

Atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome (aHUS) is a type of thrombotic microangiopathy and is characterized by microangiopathic hemolytic anemia, thrombocytopenia, and acute kidney failure. The complement cascade plays an integral role in aHUS. Mutations in the complement cascade, especially in the alternative pathway (AP) lead to an unregulated and continuous activation of the cascade. Eculizumab and ravulizumab are humanized monoclonal antibodies that inhibit the complement cascade. This systematic analysis reviews the evidence for both antibodies to compare them in terms of safety and efficacy. This review will also assess the evidence for biomarker associations with interventions, the role of genetic mutations in the prognosis of disease, and the financial burden of both treatment options. An in-depth search was conducted across PubMed, Science Direct, and Cochrane Library following the PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Both eculizumab and ravulizumab were comparable in safety and efficacy but ravulizumab was preferred by patients and their caregivers as it posed a lower financial burden and had less frequent dosing. Soluble complement 5b-9 (sC5b), especially in urine, has the potential to be used as a biomarker to assess response to treatment. Genetic mutations, especially mutations in complement factor I (CFI), membrane cofactor protein (MCP), and complement factor H (CFH), were associated with a higher risk of recurrence, and therefore care should be taken when attempting to discontinue treatment in this subset of patients. Treatment with a monoclonal antibody should be initiated as soon as a genetic mutation is identified. Blinded, double-arm, clinical trials preferably with larger sample sizes are needed to effectively compare both the monoclonal antibodies.