• Medicine · Sep 2020

    Meta Analysis

    Comparative efficacy and safety of mycophenolate mofetil and cyclophosphamide in the induction treatment of lupus nephritis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

    • Yue-Peng Jiang, Xiao-Xuan Zhao, Rong-Rong Chen, Zheng-Hao Xu, Cheng-Ping Wen, and Jie Yu.
    • College of Basic Medical Science, Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou.
    • Medicine (Baltimore). 2020 Sep 18; 99 (38): e22328.

    BackgroundLupus nephritis (LN) remains a predominant cause of morbidity and mortality in SLE. Here we performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the induction treatment with mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) and cyclophosphamide (CYC) for LN.MethodsRelevant literature was searched by computer from the establishment of the database to November 2019. A meta-analysis was conducted to analysis the efficacy and safety between mycophenolate mofetil and cyclophosphamide as induction therapy in LN patients. The primary end-point was response to urine protein, serum creatinine (Scr) and serum complement C3, and the secondary end-points were complete remission and adverse reactions.ResultsEighteen articles were selected for the final meta-analysis, involving 1989 patients with LN, of which the renal biopsy result could be classified into class III-V according to the standards of WHO/ISN. The results revealed that MMF was superior to CYC in increasing the level of serum complement C3 [SMD = 0.475, 95%CI (0.230-0.719)] and complete remission [RR = 1.231, 95%CI (1.055-1.437)]. Furthermore, the subgroup analysis showed that it was in Asian patients, rather than in Caucasian patients, that CYC exerted a better effect on lowering the level of urine protein (UPRO) than MMF [SMD = 0.405, 95%CI (0.081-0.730)]. Besides, when the initial UPRO level was less than 4 g/day, the effect of CYC was better than MMF [SMD = 0.303, 95%CI (0.014-0.591)]. There was no significant difference between MMF and CYC in improving Scr [SMD = 0.090, 95%CI (-0.060-0.239)]. When it came to the comparison of safety between MMF and CYC, the meta-analysis showed that MMF was superior to CYC in decreasing infection in Caucasian patients [RR = 0.727, 95%CI (0.532-0.993)], reducing the risk of leukopenia and menstrual abnormalities in Asian patients and lowering the frequency of gastrointestinal symptoms [RR = 0.639, 95%CI (0.564-0.724)], independent of race.ConclusionsMMF precedes CYC in improving serum complement C3 and complete remission regardless of race, as well as shows fewer adverse drug reactions in the induction treatment of LN belonging to type III-V. But for Asian patients or those initial UPRO levels are less than 4 g/day, CYC may be superior to MMF.

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.