Mycophenolate mofetil versus intravenous cyclophosphamide for induction treatment of proliferative lupus nephritis in a Japanese population: A retrospective study

Akira Onishi, Daisuke Sugiyama, Go Tsuji, Takashi Nakazawa, Yoshinori Kogata, Kosaku Tsuda, Ikuko Naka, Keisuke Nishimura, Kenta Misaki, Chiyo Kurimoto, Hiroki Hayashi, Goichi Kageyama, Jun Saegusa, Takeshi Sugimoto, Seiji Kawano, Shunichi Kumagai, Akio Morinobu

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives: Recent studies have shown that mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) is similar to intravenous cyclophosphamide (IVC) for the treatment of lupus nephritis (LN), but that treatment response may vary according to location and race/ethnicity. Moreover, no studies have been conducted to compare the efficacy of MMF with that of IVC for a Japanese population. We therefore conducted a retrospective study to clarify the efficacy and safety of MMF compared with that of IVC for induction therapy for active LN, classes III and IV, in a Japanese population of 21 patients, 11 of whom received MMF and 10 IVC. Methods: The primary endpoint was expressed as the percentage of responders, who in turn were defined as the patients who met complete or partial response criteria according to the European consensus statement. The secondary endpoints comprised the renal activity component and serological activity. Results: The primary endpoint was achieved in nine (81.8 %) patients receiving MMF and in four (40.0 %) receiving IVC, with no significant difference between the two groups (p = 0.081), while there was also no significant difference between them in terms of secondary endpoints. However, the MMF group suffered significantly fewer hematologic toxic effects than the IVC group. Conclusions: MMF may be used as an alternative to IVC for inducing renal remission of LN in Japanese patients.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)89-96
Number of pages8
JournalModern Rheumatology
Volume23
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 01-01-2013

Fingerprint

Mycophenolic Acid
Lupus Nephritis
Cyclophosphamide
Retrospective Studies
Population
Therapeutics
Kidney
Poisons
Safety

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Rheumatology

Cite this

Onishi, Akira ; Sugiyama, Daisuke ; Tsuji, Go ; Nakazawa, Takashi ; Kogata, Yoshinori ; Tsuda, Kosaku ; Naka, Ikuko ; Nishimura, Keisuke ; Misaki, Kenta ; Kurimoto, Chiyo ; Hayashi, Hiroki ; Kageyama, Goichi ; Saegusa, Jun ; Sugimoto, Takeshi ; Kawano, Seiji ; Kumagai, Shunichi ; Morinobu, Akio. / Mycophenolate mofetil versus intravenous cyclophosphamide for induction treatment of proliferative lupus nephritis in a Japanese population : A retrospective study. In: Modern Rheumatology. 2013 ; Vol. 23, No. 1. pp. 89-96.
@article{d836ee518e5a47aea28ef5f7b6568ff8,
title = "Mycophenolate mofetil versus intravenous cyclophosphamide for induction treatment of proliferative lupus nephritis in a Japanese population: A retrospective study",
abstract = "Objectives: Recent studies have shown that mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) is similar to intravenous cyclophosphamide (IVC) for the treatment of lupus nephritis (LN), but that treatment response may vary according to location and race/ethnicity. Moreover, no studies have been conducted to compare the efficacy of MMF with that of IVC for a Japanese population. We therefore conducted a retrospective study to clarify the efficacy and safety of MMF compared with that of IVC for induction therapy for active LN, classes III and IV, in a Japanese population of 21 patients, 11 of whom received MMF and 10 IVC. Methods: The primary endpoint was expressed as the percentage of responders, who in turn were defined as the patients who met complete or partial response criteria according to the European consensus statement. The secondary endpoints comprised the renal activity component and serological activity. Results: The primary endpoint was achieved in nine (81.8 {\%}) patients receiving MMF and in four (40.0 {\%}) receiving IVC, with no significant difference between the two groups (p = 0.081), while there was also no significant difference between them in terms of secondary endpoints. However, the MMF group suffered significantly fewer hematologic toxic effects than the IVC group. Conclusions: MMF may be used as an alternative to IVC for inducing renal remission of LN in Japanese patients.",
author = "Akira Onishi and Daisuke Sugiyama and Go Tsuji and Takashi Nakazawa and Yoshinori Kogata and Kosaku Tsuda and Ikuko Naka and Keisuke Nishimura and Kenta Misaki and Chiyo Kurimoto and Hiroki Hayashi and Goichi Kageyama and Jun Saegusa and Takeshi Sugimoto and Seiji Kawano and Shunichi Kumagai and Akio Morinobu",
year = "2013",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s10165-012-0634-9",
language = "English",
volume = "23",
pages = "89--96",
journal = "Modern Rheumatology",
issn = "1439-7595",
publisher = "Springer Japan",
number = "1",

}

Onishi, A, Sugiyama, D, Tsuji, G, Nakazawa, T, Kogata, Y, Tsuda, K, Naka, I, Nishimura, K, Misaki, K, Kurimoto, C, Hayashi, H, Kageyama, G, Saegusa, J, Sugimoto, T, Kawano, S, Kumagai, S & Morinobu, A 2013, 'Mycophenolate mofetil versus intravenous cyclophosphamide for induction treatment of proliferative lupus nephritis in a Japanese population: A retrospective study', Modern Rheumatology, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 89-96. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10165-012-0634-9

Mycophenolate mofetil versus intravenous cyclophosphamide for induction treatment of proliferative lupus nephritis in a Japanese population : A retrospective study. / Onishi, Akira; Sugiyama, Daisuke; Tsuji, Go; Nakazawa, Takashi; Kogata, Yoshinori; Tsuda, Kosaku; Naka, Ikuko; Nishimura, Keisuke; Misaki, Kenta; Kurimoto, Chiyo; Hayashi, Hiroki; Kageyama, Goichi; Saegusa, Jun; Sugimoto, Takeshi; Kawano, Seiji; Kumagai, Shunichi; Morinobu, Akio.

In: Modern Rheumatology, Vol. 23, No. 1, 01.01.2013, p. 89-96.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Mycophenolate mofetil versus intravenous cyclophosphamide for induction treatment of proliferative lupus nephritis in a Japanese population

T2 - A retrospective study

AU - Onishi, Akira

AU - Sugiyama, Daisuke

AU - Tsuji, Go

AU - Nakazawa, Takashi

AU - Kogata, Yoshinori

AU - Tsuda, Kosaku

AU - Naka, Ikuko

AU - Nishimura, Keisuke

AU - Misaki, Kenta

AU - Kurimoto, Chiyo

AU - Hayashi, Hiroki

AU - Kageyama, Goichi

AU - Saegusa, Jun

AU - Sugimoto, Takeshi

AU - Kawano, Seiji

AU - Kumagai, Shunichi

AU - Morinobu, Akio

PY - 2013/1/1

Y1 - 2013/1/1

N2 - Objectives: Recent studies have shown that mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) is similar to intravenous cyclophosphamide (IVC) for the treatment of lupus nephritis (LN), but that treatment response may vary according to location and race/ethnicity. Moreover, no studies have been conducted to compare the efficacy of MMF with that of IVC for a Japanese population. We therefore conducted a retrospective study to clarify the efficacy and safety of MMF compared with that of IVC for induction therapy for active LN, classes III and IV, in a Japanese population of 21 patients, 11 of whom received MMF and 10 IVC. Methods: The primary endpoint was expressed as the percentage of responders, who in turn were defined as the patients who met complete or partial response criteria according to the European consensus statement. The secondary endpoints comprised the renal activity component and serological activity. Results: The primary endpoint was achieved in nine (81.8 %) patients receiving MMF and in four (40.0 %) receiving IVC, with no significant difference between the two groups (p = 0.081), while there was also no significant difference between them in terms of secondary endpoints. However, the MMF group suffered significantly fewer hematologic toxic effects than the IVC group. Conclusions: MMF may be used as an alternative to IVC for inducing renal remission of LN in Japanese patients.

AB - Objectives: Recent studies have shown that mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) is similar to intravenous cyclophosphamide (IVC) for the treatment of lupus nephritis (LN), but that treatment response may vary according to location and race/ethnicity. Moreover, no studies have been conducted to compare the efficacy of MMF with that of IVC for a Japanese population. We therefore conducted a retrospective study to clarify the efficacy and safety of MMF compared with that of IVC for induction therapy for active LN, classes III and IV, in a Japanese population of 21 patients, 11 of whom received MMF and 10 IVC. Methods: The primary endpoint was expressed as the percentage of responders, who in turn were defined as the patients who met complete or partial response criteria according to the European consensus statement. The secondary endpoints comprised the renal activity component and serological activity. Results: The primary endpoint was achieved in nine (81.8 %) patients receiving MMF and in four (40.0 %) receiving IVC, with no significant difference between the two groups (p = 0.081), while there was also no significant difference between them in terms of secondary endpoints. However, the MMF group suffered significantly fewer hematologic toxic effects than the IVC group. Conclusions: MMF may be used as an alternative to IVC for inducing renal remission of LN in Japanese patients.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84872497557&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84872497557&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s10165-012-0634-9

DO - 10.1007/s10165-012-0634-9

M3 - Article

C2 - 22447557

AN - SCOPUS:84872497557

VL - 23

SP - 89

EP - 96

JO - Modern Rheumatology

JF - Modern Rheumatology

SN - 1439-7595

IS - 1

ER -