Pilot study comparing the childhood arthritis and rheumatology research alliance consensus treatment plans for induction therapy of juvenile proliferative lupus nephritis
Year: 2018
Type: article
Study design: Observational Study
Abstract: BACKGROUND: To reduce treatment variability and facilitate comparative effectiveness studies, the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA) published consensus treatment plans (CTPs) including one for juvenile proliferative lupus nephritis (LN). Induction immunosuppression CTPs outline treatment with either monthly intravenous (IV) cyclophosphamide (CYC) or mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) in conjunction with one of three corticosteroid (steroid) CTPs: primarily oral, primarily IV or mixed oral/IV. The acceptability and in-practice use of these CTPs are unknown. Therefore, the primary aims of the pilot study were to demonstrate feasibility of adhering to the LN CTPs and delineate barriers to implementation in clinical care in the US. Further, we aimed to explore the safety and effectiveness of the treatments for induction therapy. METHODS: Forty-one patients were enrolled from 10 CARRA sites. Patients had new-onset biopsy proven ISN/RPS class III or IV proliferative LN, were starting induction therapy with MMF or IV CYC and high-dose steroids and were followed for up to 24 months. Routine clinical data were collected at each visit. Provider reasons for CTP selection were assessed at baseline. Adherence to the CTPs was evaluated by provider survey and medication logs. Complete and partial renal responses were reported at 6 months. RESULTS: The majority of patients were female (83%) with a mean age of 14.7 years, SD 2.8. CYC was used more commonly than MMF for patients with ISN/RPS class IV LN (vs. class III), those who had hematuria, and those with adherence concerns. Overall adherence to the immunosuppression induction CTPs was acceptable with a majority of patients receiving the target MMF (86%) or CYC (63%) dose. However, adherence to the steroid CTPs was poor (37%) with large variability in dosing. Renal response endpoints were exploratory and did not show a significant difference between CYC and MMF. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the immunosuppression CTPs were followed as intended in the majority of patients however, adherence to the steroid CTPs was poor indicating revision is necessary. In addition, our pilot study revealed several sources of treatment selection bias that will need to be addressed in for future comparative effectiveness research.
Source: Pediatric Rheumatology
Authors: for the CARRA registry investigators, Jennifer C Cooper, Kelly Rouster-Stevens, Tracey B Wright, Joyce J Hsu, Marisa S Klein-Gitelman, Stacy P Ardoin, Laura E Schanberg, Hermine I Brunner, B Anne Eberhard, Linda Wagner-Weiner, Jay Mehta, Kathleen Haines, Deborah K McCurdy, Thomas A Phillips, Zhen Huang, Emily von Scheven
Institutions: University of California, San Francisco, Emory University, Children's Healthcare of Atlanta, Texas Scottish Rite Hospital for Children, Stanford University, Lurie Children's Hospital, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, The Ohio State University, Duke Medical Center, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cohen Children's Medical Center, University of Chicago, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Children's Hospital at Montefiore, Hackensack University Medical Center, University of California, Los Angeles
Language: English
Subfield: Rheumatology
Field: Medicine
Domain: Health Sciences
Open Access status: gold
Estimated APC paid: $3,090
OpenAlex ID: W2897721472
