Lupus nephritis management guidelines compared

In the past years, many (randomized) trials have been performed comparing the treatment strategies for lupus nephritis. In 2012, these data were incorporated in six different guidelines for treating lupus nephritis. These guidelines are European, American and internationally based, with one separate guideline for children. They offer information on different aspects of the management of lupus nephritis including induction and maintenance treatment of the different histological classes, adjunctive treatment, monitoring of the patient, definitions of response and relapse, indications for (repeat) renal biopsy, and additional challenges such as the presence of vascular complications, the pregnant SLE patient, treatment in children and adolescents and considerations about end-stage renal disease and transplantation. In this review, we summarize the guidelines, determine the common ground between them, highlight the differences and discuss recent literature

Developing novel drugs for systemic lupus erythematosus. Lessons learned from the belimumab trials

Systemic lupus erythematosus is the prototypic autoimmune disease with a broad range of clinical manifestations and a complex pathogenesis. B-cells hold a central role in its pathogenesis, not only as autoantibody producing cells, but also by producing other inflammatory mediators and by presenting autoantigens to autoreactive T cells. BlyS, a soluble ligand of the TNF cytokine family, is a key factor affecting B-cell homeostasis and survival and its blockade ameliorated the disease in animal models and preclinical studies of SLE. Following an unsuccessful phase II trial of belimumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting BlyS, two large phase III studies in patients with mild-to-moderate disease, BLISS-52 and BLISS-76, met their primary endpoints showing better efficacy of the drug over standard of care alone. To this end, development of a novel more sensitive responder index and improvements in study designs were crucial. As a result, belimumab became the first drug to get approval for the treatment of SLE after more than 50 years. In this paper we discuss the rationale, development, indications, lessons learned, pitfalls and challenges for this novel therapy and point-out to additional issues that need to be addressed in the future.http://dx.doi.org/10.7175/rhc.v3i3.20

Metabolic syndrome in rheumatic diseases: epidemiology, pathophysiology, and clinical implications

Subjects with metabolic syndrome–a constellation of cardiovascular risk factors of which central obesity and insulin resistance are the most characteristic–are at increased risk for developing diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular disease. In these subjects, abdominal adipose tissue is a source of inflammatory cytokines such as tumor necrosis factor-alpha, known to promote insulin resistance. The presence of inflammatory cytokines together with the well-documented increased risk for cardiovascular diseases in patients with inflammatory arthritides and systemic lupus erythematosus has prompted studies to examine the prevalence of the metabolic syndrome in an effort to identify subjects at risk in addition to that conferred by traditional cardiovascular risk factors. These studies have documented a high prevalence of metabolic syndrome which correlates with disease activity and markers of atherosclerosis. The correlation of inflammatory disease activity with metabolic syndrome provides additional evidence for a link between inflammation and metabolic disturbances/vascular morbidity

Can we withdraw immunosuppressants in patients with lupus nephritis in remission? An expert debate.

Lupus nephritis (LN) treatment requires an initial intensive period of therapy followed by a long-term maintenance treatment in order to stabilize disease control and eventually reach renal remission. In this section, Authors discuss the feasibility of safely lowering and even suspending maintenance therapy in LN patients having entered remission, highlighting hurdles in predicting the depth and durability of disease quiescence together with the need for minimizing potentially toxic therapies. Even though no firm conclusions can still be drawn, the treating physician has to find the wise balance between disease control and treatment-related drawbacks by following patients closely and recognizing as early as possible the ones who are likely to reach a deep and durable renal remission; there is consensus that is these are the only patients in whom a potential safe complete withdrawal can be foreseen so far

Management of lupus nephritis: a systematic literature review informing the 2019 update of the joint EULAR and European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association (EULAR/ERA-EDTA) recommendations.

OBJECTIVES: To analyse the current evidence for the management of lupus nephritis (LN) informing the 2019 update of the EULAR/European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association recommendations. METHODS: According to the EULAR standardised operating procedures, a PubMed systematic literature review was performed, from January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2018. Since this was an update of the 2012 recommendations, the final level of evidence (LoE) and grading of recommendations considered the total body of evidence, including literature prior to 2012. RESULTS: We identified 387 relevant articles. High-quality randomised evidence supports the use of immunosuppressive treatment for class III and class IV LN (LoE 1a), and moderate-level evidence supports the use of immunosuppressive treatment for pure class V LN with nephrotic-range proteinuria (LoE 2b). Treatment should aim for at least 25% reduction in proteinuria at 3 months, 50% at 6 months and complete renal response (<500-700 mg/day) at 12 months (LoE 2a-2b). High-quality evidence supports the use of mycophenolate mofetil/mycophenolic acid (MMF/MPA) or low-dose intravenous cyclophosphamide (CY) as initial treatment of active class III/IV LN (LoE 1a). Combination of tacrolimus with MMF/MPA and high-dose CY are alternatives in specific circumstances (LoE 1a). There is low-quality level evidence to guide optimal duration of immunosuppression in LN (LoE 3). In end-stage kidney disease, all methods of kidney replacement treatment can be used, with transplantation having the most favourable outcomes (LoE 2b). CONCLUSIONS: There is high-quality evidence to guide the initial and subsequent phases of class III/IV LN treatment, but low-to-moderate quality evidence to guide treatment of class V LN, monitoring and optimal duration of immunosuppression