| 2008 JASN IMPACT FACTOR 7.505 | HOME AUTHOR INFO EDITORIAL BOARD SUBSCRIBE FEEDBACK ALERTS HELP | |||
| CURRENT ISSUE | ARCHIVES | JASN Express | ONLINE SUBMISSION | |
DISEASE OF THE MONTH |
Renal Unit, Guy's and St. Thomas' Hospitals, King's College, London, United Kingdom.
Correspondence to J. Stewart Cameron, Elm Bank, Melmerby, Penrith, Cumbria CA10 1HB, United Kingdom. Phone: 44 1768 881804; Fax: 44 1768 881105; E-mail: jstewart_cameron{at}email.msn.com
| Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
One important distortion that occurs through the usual style of reporting of lupus in the literature is that by defining "typical" or "core" patients with a positive antinuclear antibody and/or dsDNA antibodies, a considerable number of patients are excluded who belong to the lupus "family" of diseases, but do not satisfy current strict criteria. These patients are in practice as important to recognize and treat as those with "classical" lupus. Many with a clinical lupus syndrome but a negative antinuclear antibody have low titers of anti-Ro antibody; this subset of patients rarely has significant renal disease, but often has a high incidence of antiphospholipid antibodies and associated thromboses and abortions (see below), as well as inherited complement deficiencies.
| Origins of Autoimmunity and the Immunologic Abnormalities of Lupus |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Genetic factors are important in lupus, with a strong racial preponderance. For instance, the prevalence and mortality of lupus are both ten times higher in black (American) women than whites; however, it is relatively rare in the progenitors of Afro-Americans in West Africa. Familial clustering of lupus is present also, and monozygotic twins show a 25% concordance. In addition, patients with lupus may have healthy family members who show antinuclear and other autoantibodies. However, only weak associations have been noted with MHC loci, the strongest being with genes for C4A or C4B or low production of tumor necrosis factor. A few lupus patients also have genetic deficiencies of complement components. Acquired complement deficiencies are also associated with lupus, for example of the complement receptor CR-1.
A female phenotype is the major risk factor for the development of lupus. The female:male ratio rises from 2:1 in prepubertal children up to 4.5:1 in adolescence to the 8 to 12:1 reported in series of adult onset patients, falling back to 2:1 in patients over 60 yr of age. These data are in accord with murine models of lupus, in which estrogens are precipitating factors in the emergence of lupus, while androgens protect. Lupus is distinctly rare before puberty, although onset in the first year of life has been recorded. Overall incidence is much lower in children compared with adults.
Infective agents, including historically tuberculosis and more recently retroviruses, have been considered as candidates for the provocation of the lupus syndrome; however, there is no convincing evidence of their participation in human disease.
Medicines, of which hydralazine and procainamide are prototypes, may precipitate a lupus syndrome, but they rarely affect the kidney.
| Pathogenesis and Mediation of Disease |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Typically, there are multiple autoantibodies in lupus directed against nucleic acids and proteins concerned with intracellular transcriptional and translational machinery (6): The main targets are nucleosomes (DNA-histone) (7) or even quaternary antigens on the chromatin itself, small nuclear ribonucleoproteins and small cytoplasmic ribonucleoproteins. Patients with lupus nephritis usually show antibodies directed against dsDNA, Sm, and C1q (see below). It remains uncertain whether the DNA- anti-DNA antibody system, so characteristic of lupus, has a direct role in pathogenesis.
There is no reason to believe that the effector mechanisms of renal damage (complement, polymorphs, monocytes, cytokines, eicosanoids, etc.) are different in lupus from primary glomerulonephritis, but the interstitial cellular infiltrates in lupus often show an excess of CD8+ cytotoxic T lymphocytes over CD4+, compared with the usual majority of CD4+ T-helper lymphocytes and monocytes seen in primary glomerulonephritis.
Why do only some patients with lupus develop clinically evident nephritis? Those with nephritis usually have antibodies directed against dsDNA as well as single-stranded DNA, and have at most low titers of anti-Ro and anti-La antibody. They also have high avidity anti-DNA antibodies that activate complement strongly. Higher avidity anti-DNA antibodies also occur in proliferative more than membranous lupus nephritis, and cationic antibodies appear to be more pathogenic. Antibodies directed against C1q are more frequent in those with nephritis also.
| Renal Manifestations of Lupus |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
| Extrarenal Manifestations in Lupus Nephritis |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| Laboratory Investigations in Lupus Nephritis |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
Hematology
Anemia of moderate degree is common, but a positive test for anti-red cell
antibodies (Coombs' test) can be obtained only in a minority of patients with
lupus, and severe hemolytic anemias are not often seen. Leukopenia (due to
anti-white cell antibodies) is common, with 50% of patients having a white
cell count below 5000/µl, while thrombocytopenia is found in one-quarter of
patients. The origins of the thrombocytopenia are complicated, resulting from
accelerated destruction after binding of antiplatelet antibody, sequestration
of platelets in the kidneys, and lysis and/or phagocytosis of circulating
platelets by reaction of both antiphospholipid antibodies and immune complexes
(including dsDNA-anti-dsDNA complexes) with circulating platelets.
Antiphospholipid Antibodies and the "Lupus
Anticoagulant"
The doubly misnamed "lupus anticoagulant" activity
(10) is based on the presence
of antiphospholipid antibodies, directed mainly against the
ß2-globulin carrier protein rather than the phospholipid
itself. These antibodies prolong phospholipid-dependent coagulation studies
in vitro, but in vivo are associated with thrombosis. The
in vitro mechanisms are clear, but what promotes thrombosis in
vivo remains uncertain. Antiphospholipid antibodies can be detected in
one-third to one-half of patients with lupus nephritis, and have been
associated with renal arterial, venous, and glomerular capillary thrombosis,
as well as Libman-Sachs "endocarditis" and cerebral thrombosis. It
is important to note that despite the in vitro prolongation of
clotting times, it is safe to do needle biopsies in the presence of
antiphospholipid antibodies; in contrast, a prolongation of Kaslin Cephalin
Time that reverses on mixing with normal plasma is the result of a true lupus
anticoagulant, and will require cover with fresh-frozen plasma. These may be
antibodies directed against factors leading to fibrin formation, such as
factor VIII and IX, but also less commonly factors XI and XII. Other
prothrombotic risk factors include depressed release of plasminogen activator
and possibly also antagonists of plasmin, decreased plasma concentration of
free protein S, and raised von Willebrand factor concentrations.
| Diagnosis |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Immunologic Tests and the Diagnosis of Lupus
Few clinicians are happy to make a diagnosis of lupus nephritis without
some antinuclear antibodies in the serum preferably shown to react with dsDNA
(6). "Lupus-like"
patients with negative antinuclear antibody tests show little or no renal
disease, although there are exceptions and more than 80% of this
"fringe" have antiphospholipid antibodies
(10). The proportion of
positive ANA depends not only on the population studied, but also on the
technique used. The classic Farr assay detects only high avidity anti-dsDNA
antibodies; enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay also picks up low avidity
antibodies, as does the slide Crithidia lucilae kinetoplast test.
Correlations with the presence and severity of nephritis are best with high
avidity antibodies using the Farr assay, but for screening diagnosis the
enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay has advantages because it will detect
positives in some FANA-positive patients in whom the Farr assay is negative,
but who do have lupus. Anti-Sm antibodies are almost entirely specific for
lupus, but are found only in about 30% of patients, and thus have a very low
sensitivity.
Hypocomplementemia is found at presentation in more than three-quarters of untreated patients with lupus, and is more common with evident nephritis. The concentration of C4 and C1q tends to be more depressed than C3, which suggests complement activation via the classical pathway (which is almost never seen in idiopathic mesangiocapillary nephritis or acute glomerulonephritis, although common in essential cryoglobulinemia). However, concentrations of properdin and factor B are depressed also through secondary activation of the alternative pathway.
The interpretation of antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibodies (ANCA) is difficult in the presence of antinuclear antibodies, and may be interpreted as a positive p-ANCA. However, the finding of multiple immunoglobulin deposition, together with complement in the affected glomeruli, and a proliferative/membranous pattern rather than a necrotizing glomerulitis, should cause no diagnostic difficulty.
Immune complexes can be detected in the serum of the majority of patients with lupus, especially those with nephritis, and the titer in general rises and falls with indices of clinical activity. However, their utility in diagnosis is minimal since so many other conditions show immune complexes of varying biological activity, and immune complex detection is no longer in routine clinical use. In addition, complement-based tests for "immune complexes" have been shown to measure not immune complexes but anti-C1q autoantibodies.
| Renal Histologic Findings |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Glomerular Appearances
The World Health Organization (WHO) classification of lupus nephritis
(12) (Table
3A and
3B),
(Figure 1, A through D, and
Figure 2, A through D) based on
light microscopy is widely accepted, but at best it allows only a general
level of severity to be judged. Class III (focal proliferative nephritis)
(Figure 1, C and D) is a
particular source of difficulty, since it covers such a wide range of
appearances. Nevertheless, there is a remarkable similarity in the proportion
of patients allocated to each class in different series from all over the
world: more than half show WHO class III (focal proliferative) or IV (diffuse
proliferative) nephritis (Figure 2, A and
B), severe forms which most clinicians would treat vigorously. The
proportion of class V (membranous) biopsies is about the same in all series,
i.e., 10 to 15% (Figure 2, C and
D).
|
|
|
|
On immunohistology, IgG is almost always the dominant immunoglobulin with IgG1 and IgG3 being especially prevalent; however, a few patients show predominant IgA or IgM. Early complement components such as C4 and especially C1q are usually present, along with C3. The finding of positivity for all three isotypes of Ig, together with C3, C4, and C1q (a "full house"), is present in about one-quarter of patients with lupus, and almost never in nonlupus disease. Other immune reactants such as complement components B, C5b-9, properdin, and ß1H are also present in many patients. Fibrin, sometimes accompanied by cross-linked fibrin, is often present in class IV biopsies but rare in other classes.
Tubulointerstitial Nephritis
In about 50% of patients with nephritis, less in those with class II but in
up to three-quarters of those with class IV, immune aggregates are present in
the tubular basement membrane (Figure
1D). In an occasional patient, linear tubular immunofluorescence
is seen, suggestive of anti-TBM antibodies. The interstitial cellular
infiltrate is mainly T lymphocytes and monocytes, with only a few B cells,
plasma cells and natural killer cells. Among the T lymphocytes, both
CD4+ and CD8+ are present, with the latter being
predominant. Active infiltration and invasion of tubules
("tubulitis") is frequently seen in active disease. In more
chronic disease, the interstitium is expanded with a variable amount of
collagen. In a few patients, an acute tubulointerstitial nephritis is seen in
the absence of glomerular disease and may present as acute renal failure
(13).
Intrarenal Vessels
Vascular immune aggregates, hyaline and noninflammatory necrotizing
lesions, and true vasculitis with lymphocytic and monocyte infiltration of the
vessel wall may all be seen, more rarely intrarenal anteriolar thrombi
(14). All of these vascular
changes are signs of a poor prognosis (see below), and thus are important to
recognize. Occasional patients show overt thrombotic microangiopathy on
histologic and hematologic criteria. Correlations have been shown between the
presence of antiphospholipid antibodies and intraglomerular thrombi by some
observers.
Other Histologic Factors
Amyloidosis is rare in lupus, consistent with the fact that concentrations
of acute-phase proteins such as amyloid A and C-reactive protein do not rise
in the plasma during flares of activity in lupus. Dense-deposit disease and
pauci-immune necrotizing glomerulitis have been reported in lupus in
occasional patients. Serial biopsies show that transformation between WHO
classes is quite frequent. Particularly common is transformation from diffuse
proliferative glomerulonephritis (class IV) to a predominant membranous (class
V) pattern under successful treatment. As renal function improves, proteinuria
may become massive under these circumstances.
A number of authors have noted that lupus patients without clinical manifestations of nephritis have, in renal biopsies, significant glomerular disease. There have been few follow-up studies on such patients, but one study showed that the majority remain without clinical nephritis for several years. However, it is equally obvious that all patients with clinically evident nephritis must have gone through a period of absent or occult disease before this becomes evident, particularly as the proportion of patients with nephritis at onset is so low; how many of these patients run a subclinical course for a prolonged period is not known.
| Clinicopathologic Correlations |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| Outcome and Mortality in Treated Patients with Lupus Nephritis |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
In most patients today, there is a gratifying response to early treatment, followed by relatively quiescent disease under continuing immunosuppression that can be tapered out eventually without further relapse. Another common pattern is the patient rendered quiescent who suddenly relapses. The frequency and intensity of relapses depend not only on the underlying disease, but on the intensity and duration of immunosuppression. Since lupus is a multisystem disease, the outlook does not of course depend only on what happens to renal function, especially now that this is treatable by dialysis and transplantation.
Long-term results are now very encouraging compared with 20 yr ago (Tables 4 and 5) (1,21,23). However, many questions remain unresolved: Will those showing reduced renal function evolve eventually into renal failure? What is the significance of persistent proteinuria in the absence of disease activity? How can treatment be optimized to allow cessation of treatment?
|
The overall causes of death in lupus (Table 6) are much more varied than in other forms of primary glomerulonephritis, in which renal failure is the dominant cause. It must be remembered that the data in this table cover a considerable time span, and that they may not reflect contemporary eventsparticularly in relation to treatment-related deaths such as sepsis. Only 10 to 15% of patient with lupus nephritis now go into end-stage renal failure (15,17), and sepsis is the principal cause of actual death in lupus nephritis. Extrarenal lupus affecting the central nervous system or lung are prominent, and almost half of all lupus deaths are due to excess cardiovascular mortality, particularly from premature myocardial ischemia in long-term survivors. When renal failure supervenes, this is usually within the first decade of follow-up (15). The proportion of patients in end-stage renal disease who have "burnt-out" lupus has been exaggerated: Most patients on dialysis still require immunosuppression (18). Transplantation achieves results comparable to other groups of patients (19,20), and recurrence of lupus nephritis in the allograft (21) is rare and probably its incidence has been overestimated, since the glomerular appearances have not often met strict criteria for lupus nephritis in published reports.
|
| Outcome in Relation to Clinical, Histologic, and Laboratory Findings |
|---|
|
|
|---|
On renal biopsy, today there is little or no difference in outcome between different WHO classes of nephritis in treated patients, although extensive subendothelial deposits and tubulointerstitial changes point to a poorer prognosis, as do the number of macrophages and T cells in the infiltrate. Crescents have also been related to a poorer prognosis, as in other forms of nephritis, but very extensive crescentic disease is relatively uncommon in lupus. Vascular lesions within the biopsy and intraglomerular capillary thrombi have been associated with unfavorable outcomes also, although the latter observation has been contested. Calculation of activity and chronicity indices allowed the National Institutes of Health (NIH) group to identify clear groups of high and low risk for a poor outcome, and also permitted therapeutic decisions, especially when and when not to use aggressive treatment, although these data are not supported by all other analyses.
Among laboratory tests, correlations between complement concentrations, levels of circulating anti-dsDNA antibody, and outcome have been reported, but are not useful in practice. The strongest laboratory predictor of outcome is anemia, with thrombocytopenia, hypocomplementemia, and a raised DNA binding at onset all correlated with a poorer evolution.
| Treatment of Lupus Nephritis |
|---|
|
|
|---|
In most patients with absent or trivial urine abnormalities, the biopsy appearances will be bland, the outlook good, and treatment unnecessary. Whether treatment with corticosteroids at this point might prevent subsequent evolution of severe disease has never been tested. There is equally little evidence that early treatment of those with minor but definite urine abnormalities, but normal renal function and mild histopathologic appearances (WHO class II), alters subsequent evolution. Nor is the evidence clear on whether the outcome of membranous nephropathy (WHO class V) improved after treatment, although most clinicians would treat patients with this pattern. Certainly, a proportion of such patients evolve slowly into renal failure.
Therefore, it is in those groups with focal proliferative nephritis of varying severity (WHO class III), or severe diffuse proliferative nephritis (WHO class IV), where immunosuppression seems to have the most to offer. Again, however, no prospective trials have been done to see whether maximum benefit is obtained by "tailoring" the treatment to the histology in this way. However, it is difficult to argue with the dramatic improvement in outlook described in the previous section.
The Acute Phase: Induction Treatment
Corticosteroids. Oral corticosteroids in high doses (starting with
60 mg/24 h) carry a heavy penalty in terms of side effects. Thus, today many
clinicians believe "pulse" intravenous methylprednisolone,
together with low-dose oral prednisolone (10 to 20 mg daily), can reduce the
incidence of these side effects, particularly on facial appearance. This is of
course provided that treatment is limited to a maximum two courses of 3 days'
intravenous 0.5 to 1 g methylprednisolone. Side effects described after
intravenous injection of high doses of corticosteroids include cardiac
arrhythmias or even cardiac arrest if given through central venous lines, and
unpleasant flushing sensations. Acute hypertension may be seen, and
occasionally acute psychosis. All of these complications seem to be more
common in children and adolescents with lupus. It is difficult to say whether
results are better in terms of cost and benefit using "pulse"
methylprednisolone than with conventional high-dose oral steroids, since the
only controlled trial reported thus far mainly concerned patients with
nonrenal lupus, and involved only small numbers.
Cytotoxic Agents. Donadio and Glassock (22) examined this subject extensively, and came to the conclusion that there is no good evidence that the addition of cytotoxic agents, such as cyclophosphamide or azathioprine, improve outlook in the acute (or the maintenance) phase. Nevertheless, today most physicians still use a cytotoxic agent in the acute phases of severe lupus nephritis (23), and this behavior is supported by meta-analyses of controlled trials (24,25). Cyclophosphamide has the advantage in the induction phase that it is a much more powerful inhibitor of B cells than azathioprine, and the resynthesis of autoantibodies is reduced to normal levels rapidly and efficiently. Therefore, most physicians prefer it for induction therapy. Whether there is extra benefit in giving cyclophosphamide by the intravenous route during the acute phase is unproven. Despite this, intravenous cyclophosphamide is commonly used, although it does not seem logical to use a drug intravenously, which was specifically developed for oral use, when one of its active principles (nitrogen mustard) is available as well. Also, the drug has to be extensively metabolized before it is active, so that (unlike methylprednisolone) there is no immediate effect. Since the patient is usually in the hospital at this point, compliance should not be an issue.
Plasma Exchange. Although there is an obvious rationale for plasma exchange in lupus, a role in acute severe lupus nephritis has not been established. The two completed controlled trials (26,27) showed no benefit of the addition of a three times weekly plasma exchange over conventional combined cytotoxic and corticosteroid therapy, and another recent trial failed to show benefit when intravenous cyclophosphamide was synchronized with the plasma exchange to minimize antibody rebound. Other groups have used even more intensive courses of exchange (one plasma volume daily for 7 to 10 d), but it is unknown whether this extra treatment confers benefit. Thus, plasma exchange cannot be recommended except in patients with associated severe cryoglobulinemia, hemolytic uremic syndrome, or possibly vasculitis; however, many physicians continue to use it as a treatment of desperation when all else has failed. A suggested guideline for the treatment of the acute phase of lupus nephritis as used in our hospital during the past decade is shown in Table 7.
|
The Chronic Phase: Maintenance Treatment
Usually, the acute disease will be under control after 12 wk or less,
although occasional patients may have a stormy course and require several
extra courses of `pulse' methylprednisolone. The balance of benefit between
strategies to avoid relapses or smoldering disease activity, and the many side
effects of the drugs used to achieve this are poorly evaluated, despite a
number of controlled trials and a large amount of anecdotal information.
Corticosteroids. Corticosteroids remain the basis of treatment in the maintenance as well as the acute phase; no studies of other treatments without prednisolone have been attempted. To minimize the side effects of long-term corticosteroids, dosage should be limited to prednisolone 5 to 15 mg daily or equivalent. Daily and alternate-day regimens have not been formally compared in lupus, but the latter are often used in children to maximize growth. Monthly "pulses" of methylprednisolone have been used, but again the toxicity and benefits of this regimen have never been investigated. Prednis(ol)one has been almost universal, although side effects of deflazacort seem to be less in other diseases.
Cytotoxic Agents. Meta-analyses (24,25) came down unequivocally in favor of an additional clinical benefit of cytotoxic agents when added to corticosteroids in the maintenance phase. Another crucial observation is that the long-term follow-up data from the NIH trials have shown less progression of renal sclerosis at 10 to 15 yr in those groups treated with a cytotoxic agent than in those treated with prednisolone alone (28), although importantly it was not possible to distinguish in this analysis any difference between the various cytotoxic drugs used or the route of administration. In these studies, only groups treated with intravenous cyclophosphamide showed improved survival in contrast to a group of (partially historic) control subjects treated only with prednisolone (29,30). Again, it is important to note that there was no difference in clinical outcome between those treated with either oral or intravenous cyclophosphamide versus azathioprine, and the difference in outcome between the intravenous cyclophosphamide group and those treated with prednisone alone did not become apparent until more than 5 yr of follow-up had been achieved (30).
Oral cyclophosphamide cannot be given for longer than about 12 wk because of bladder and gonadal toxicity, and therefore, unlike the acute phase, it has no place in maintenance therapy. Therefore, regular monthly, then bimonthly intravenous cyclophosphamide has been advocated for periods of up to 2 yr or more, because as just noted the results in medium and long-term were statistically superior to those obtainable with prednisolone alone (29, 30, 31), even though there was no difference from those obtained using azathioprine. However, it has become evident that the intravenous cyclophosphamide regimen, like prolonged daily oral treatment, carries a considerable risk of gonadal damage, with late menarche and early menopause a regular finding in a dose- and age-dependent manner, with older recipients showing greater toxicity (32). This may be a particularly important point in the many transpubertal children with lupus, who however probably tolerate the treatment better. Gonadal damage could in theory be limited by giving the pulse timed so that a developing follicle is not present. Pregnancy cannot be contemplated during such treatment, although it may be possible at a later date in those who do not become sterile. The oncogenic risk of such regimens may not be evident for many years and, apart from that in the bladder, remains present whatever route of administration of cyclophosphamide is used. However, a major advantage of the intravenous regimen is that in noncompliant patients it permits low corticosteroid dosage, with acceptable effects on appearance, and the treatment can be given under observation.
Azathioprine in doses of 2 to 2.5 mg/kg per 24 h has proved remarkably safe in the very long term (1,15,23,33), although macrocytosis is very common and higher doses will induce leukopenia. Previously, we used this agent during the acute phase of the disease but in the past decade we have used initial oral cyclophosphamide, and then transferred patients to azathioprine after 12 wk induction (Table 7). There is evidence that the addition of azathioprine does not increase infections (which mostly depend on corticosteroid dosage). Both azathioprine and cyclophosphamide almost certainly have a steroid-sparing effect. Azathioprine has only a very small oncogenic potential; pregnancy during maintenance azathioprine can be encouraged, and is safe. Pancreatitis and hepatotoxicity are very rare. In lupus nephritis, long-term results as good or better than the best obtainable with cyclophosphamide, by whatever route, can be achieved by initial intravenous methylprednisolone, 12 wk oral cyclophosphamide, followed by combined azathioprine and corticosteroids. In practice, a choice of cytotoxic agents is useful (34). In my view (23), there is no evidence as yet that intravenous cyclophosphamide offers a better cost-benefit ratio in the long term than azathioprine, and no trial directly comparing these two regimens has yet been completed. Chlorambucil has been used on occasion as an alternative, but its gonadal effects and oncogenic potential are, if anything, greater than cyclophosphamide. Mycophenolate mofetil has been used recently in limited clinical trials with encouraging results, however, more data are awaited.
Cyclosporine. Cyclosporine might be expected to benefit patients with lupus because of its powerful effect on helper T cell clonal expansion through inhibition of interleukin-2 synthesis. Limited evidence suggests that a dose of 5 mg/kg per 24 h (chosen to avoid nephrotoxicity) produces a good response in some patients, although a relapse often follows withdrawal of treatment. There is no effect in reducing anti-dsDNA antibody levels. Cyclosporine does not appear to be particularly useful in acute lupus, but can have a role in the maintenance phase as a steroid-sparing agent and for its effect in reducing proteinuria in very nephrotic patients.
Intravenous Gamma Globulin. Intravenous gamma globulin has been used in a number of small series of patients with lupus, including those resistant to conventional treatments, with encouraging results (35,36). How it might act is speculative, but modification of anti-idiotype networks by the anti-idiotypic antibodies and effects on vascular biology are the most usual explanations offered. Various preparations and dosages have been used for periods up to 6 mo or 1 yr. Relapse after improvement is seen frequently. Transient decline in renal function may follow its use in nephrotic patients, the result in some cases of the osmotic effect of the sugar vehicle.
Newer Forms of Immunologic Intervention. Patients with severe resistant lupus have been given total lymphoid irradiation. Results have been encouraging, with minimal requirements for immunosuppression subsequently, but the use of this technique on prepubertal or transpubertal subjects raises extra worries. Even more radical approaches have been used in very resistant disease with major treatment side effects, including marrow ablation and reconstitution. These approaches are still experimental, as are newer less dramatic immunologic strategies, including the use of monoclonal antibodies and molecular blockers to interrupt specific elements of immune recognition (37), which should in theory have a major role to play.
Serologic Tests in Monitoring Effects of Treatment. Although persisting anti-dsDNA antibody may be associated with subsequent relapses, a number of patients maintain elevated levels for years without relapse, and there is a fine balance between under-treatment and over-treatment. In our opinion, the main value of DNA binding levels is that normal values usually permit safe reduction of treatment during the chronic phase. Likewise, complement concentrations are of limited value during the acute phase in severe nephritis; clinical and biochemical data are almost always sufficient.
| Other Treatments for Lupus Nephritis |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Fish Oil and Dietary Fat
The
-3 unsaturated eicosapentanoic acid (EPA) has been shown to
protect mice from lupus nephritis, with a reduction in anti-dsDNA antibody
titers, whereas a high saturated fat diet accelerates the disease. A
controlled trial of EPA in human lupus showed favorable short-term effects on
hematuria, blood lipids, and hemostatic parameters; anti-dsDNA titers were not
affected. No benefit has yet been shown on nephritis. Effects on hemostasis
and lipids are particularly attractive in view of the accelerated vascular
disease reported in young women with lupus, which is a major cause of late
morbidity and mortality.
| When Can We Stop Treatment in Lupus Nephritis? |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| Complications of Lupus and its Treatment |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
| Footnotes |
|---|
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
T. Wu, Y. Fu, D. Brekken, M. Yan, X. J. Zhou, K. Vanarsa, N. Deljavan, C. Ahn, C. Putterman, and C. Mohan Urine Proteome Scans Uncover Total Urinary Protease, Prostaglandin D Synthase, Serum Amyloid P, and Superoxide Dismutase as Potential Markers of Lupus Nephritis J. Immunol., February 15, 2010; 184(4): 2183 - 2193. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Frese-Schaper, J. Zbaeren, M. Gugger, M. Monestier, and S. Frese Reversal of Established Lupus Nephritis and Prolonged Survival of New Zealand Black x New Zealand White Mice Treated with the Topoisomerase I Inhibitor Irinotecan J. Immunol., February 15, 2010; 184(4): 2175 - 2182. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Trivedi, M. Zeier, and J. Reiser Role of podocytes in lupus nephritis Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., December 1, 2009; 24(12): 3607 - 3612. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M Faurschou, M Penkowa, C. Andersen, H Starklint, and S Jacobsen Renal cell apoptosis in human lupus nephritis: a histological study Lupus, October 1, 2009; 18(11): 994 - 999. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. Vachvanichsanong, P. Dissaneewate, and E. McNeil Diffuse proliferative glomerulonephritis does not determine the worst outcome in childhood-onset lupus nephritis: a 23-year experience in a single centre Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., September 1, 2009; 24(9): 2729 - 2734. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. N. Boletis, S. Marinaki, C. Skalioti, S. S. Lionaki, A. Iniotaki, and P. P. Sfikakis Rituximab and mycophenolate mofetil for relapsing proliferative lupus nephritis: a long-term prospective study Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., July 1, 2009; 24(7): 2157 - 2160. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P Hari, A Bagga, P Mahajan, and A Dinda Outcome of lupus nephritis in Indian children Lupus, April 1, 2009; 18(4): 348 - 354. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L Zhu, X Yang, Y Ji, W Chen, W Guan, S. Zhou, and X Yu Up-regulated renal expression of TNF-{alpha} signalling adapter proteins in lupus glomerulonephritis Lupus, February 1, 2009; 18(2): 116 - 127. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. Aprahamian, R. G. Bonegio, C. Richez, K. Yasuda, L.-K. Chiang, K. Sato, K. Walsh, and I. R. Rifkin The Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptor {gamma} Agonist Rosiglitazone Ameliorates Murine Lupus by Induction of Adiponectin J. Immunol., January 1, 2009; 182(1): 340 - 346. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H. Wang, T. Cui, F. Hou, Z. Ni, X. Chen, F. Lu, F. Xu, X. Yu, F. Zhang, X. Zhao, et al. Induction treatment of proliferative lupus nephritis with leflunomide combined with prednisone: a prospective multi-centre observational study Lupus, July 1, 2008; 17(7): 638 - 644. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
G Ferraccioli and G Romano Renal interstitial cells, proteinuria and progression of lupus nephritis: new frontiers for old factors Lupus, June 1, 2008; 17(6): 533 - 540. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
F. Houssiau and E. Ginzler Current treatment of lupus nephritis Lupus, May 1, 2008; 17(5): 426 - 430. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. Chrysochou, H. Randhawa, R. Reeve, S. Waldek, G. N. Wood, D. J. O'Donoghue, and P. A. Kalra Determinants of renal functional outcome in lupus nephritis: a single centre retrospective study QJM, April 1, 2008; 101(4): 313 - 316. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
G. Contreras and J. Sosnov Role of Mycophenolate Mofetil in the Treatment of Lupus Nephritis Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., September 1, 2007; 2(5): 879 - 882. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. C. F. Wilson, D. R. W. Jayne, E. Dellow, and R. J. Fordham The cost-effectiveness of mycophenolate mofetil as firstline therapy in active lupus nephritis Rheumatology, July 1, 2007; 46(7): 1096 - 1101. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A M Hammad, H M Youssef, and M M El-Arman Transforming growth factor beta 1 in children with systemic lupus erythematosus: a possible relation with clinical presentation of lupus nephritis Lupus, September 1, 2006; 15(9): 608 - 612. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
G. Moroni, A. Doria, M. Mosca, O. D. C. Alberighi, G. Ferraccioli, S. Todesco, C. Manno, P. Altieri, R. Ferrara, S. Greco, et al. A Randomized Pilot Trial Comparing Cyclosporine and Azathioprine for Maintenance Therapy in Diffuse Lupus Nephritis over Four Years Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., September 1, 2006; 1(5): 925 - 932. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. Ponticelli New Therapies for Lupus Nephritis Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., July 1, 2006; 1(4): 863 - 868. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
G. Moroni, B. Gallelli, S. Quaglini, G. Banfi, E. Rivolta, P. Messa, and C. Ponticelli Withdrawal of therapy in patients with proliferative lupus nephritis: long-term follow-up Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., June 1, 2006; 21(6): 1541 - 1548. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
G Contreras, V Pardo, C Cely, E Borja, A Hurtado, C De La Cuesta, K Iqbal, O Lenz, A Asif, N Nahar, et al. Factors associated with poor outcomes in patients with lupus nephritis Lupus, November 1, 2005; 14(11): 890 - 895. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. M. Fine Pharmacological Therapy of Lupus Nephritis JAMA, June 22, 2005; 293(24): 3053 - 3060. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
O Arbel, G Pizov, A Ben-Yehuda, A Rubinow, Y Naparstek, and H Amital Hyperacute renal failure as the initial presentation of systemic lupus erythematosus Lupus, April 1, 2005; 14(4): 331 - 333. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C C Mok Prognostic factors in lupus nephritis Lupus, January 1, 2005; 14(1): 39 - 44. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
F. A. Houssiau Management of Lupus Nephritis: An Update J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., October 1, 2004; 15(10): 2694 - 2704. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
G P Fra, G C Avanzi, and E Bartoli Remission of refractory lupus nephritis with a protocol including rituximab Lupus, October 1, 2003; 12(10): 783 - 787. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Bhattacharya, R. A. Lawrence, A. Krishnan, K. Zaman, D. Sun, and G. Fernandes Effect of Dietary n-3 and n-6 Oils with and without Food Restriction on Activity of Antioxidant Enzymes and Lipid Peroxidation in Livers of Cyclophosphamide Treated Autoimmune-Prone NZB/W Female Mice J. Am. Coll. Nutr., October 1, 2003; 22(5): 388 - 399. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C P Mavragani and H M Moutsopoulos Lupus nephritis: current issues Ann Rheum Dis, September 1, 2003; 62(9): 795 - 798. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C C Mok, R W S Wong, and K N Lai Treatment of severe proliferative lupus nephritis: the current state Ann Rheum Dis, September 1, 2003; 62(9): 799 - 804. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C Fiehn, Y Hajjar, K Mueller, R Waldherr, A D Ho, and K Andrassy Improved clinical outcome of lupus nephritis during the past decade: importance of early diagnosis and treatment Ann Rheum Dis, May 1, 2003; 62(5): 435 - 439. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M Zabaleta-Lanz, R E Vargas-Arenas, F Tapanes, I Daboin, J A. Pinto, and N E Bianco Silent nephritis in systemic lupus erythematosus Lupus, January 1, 2003; 12(1): 26 - 30. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
F. Fakhouri, S. Darre, D. Droz, M. Lemaire, B. Nabarra, M.-C. Machet, D. Chauveau, P. Lesavre, J.-P. Grunfeld, and B. Knebelmann Mesangial IgG Glomerulonephritis: A Distinct Type of Primary Glomerulonephritis J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., February 1, 2002; 13(2): 379 - 387. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. J. Lewis The Treatment of Lupus Nephritis: Revisiting Galen Ann Intern Med, August 21, 2001; 135(4): 296 - 298. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
G. P. D. LEMA, H. MAIER, E. NIETO, V. VIELHAUER, B. LUCKOW, F. MAMPASO, and D. SCHLONDORFF Chemokine Expression Precedes Inflammatory Cell Infiltration and Chemokine Receptor and Cytokine Expression during the Initiation of Murine Lupus Nephritis J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., July 1, 2001; 12(7): 1369 - 1382. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
G. Moroni, G. C. Greloni, and C. Ponticelli Late recurrence of lupus nephritis after long-term clinical remission Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., April 1, 2001; 16(4): 849 - 852. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. A. Isenberg, F. B. Karassa, T. M. Chan, and The Hong Kong-Guangzhou Nephrology Study Group Efficacy of Mycophenolate Mofetil in Patients with Diffuse Proliferative Lupus Nephritis N. Engl. J. Med., February 1, 2001; 344(5): 382 - 383. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H. C. Nossent and W. Koldingsnes Long-term efficacy of azathioprine treatment for proliferative lupus nephritis Rheumatology, September 1, 2000; 39(9): 969 - 974. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
HOME
CURRENT ISSUE
ARCHIVES
JASN Express
ONLINE SUBMISSION
AUTHOR INFO
EDITORIAL BOARD SUBSCRIBE FEEDBACK ALERTS HELP |