4.7 Article

Cyclosporine versus azathioprine therapy in high-risk idiopathic membranous nephropathy patients: A 3-year prospective study

期刊

BIOMEDICINE & PHARMACOTHERAPY
卷 65, 期 2, 页码 105-110

出版社

ELSEVIER FRANCE-EDITIONS SCIENTIFIQUES MEDICALES ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.biopha.2010.10.009

关键词

Azathioprine; Cyclosporine; Idiopathic membranous nephropathy

资金

  1. Ministry of Science and Technology of the Republic of Serbia [145043]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

There is no consensus regarding themodality of therapy for idiopathic membranous nephropathy (IMN), especially for patients who did not react to treatment with cytotoxic drugs. This study followed prospectively for 3-year IMN patients who did not react to Ponticelli protocol comparing effects of 2-year course of cyclosporine (CsA) with azathioprine (Aza) treatment both with small doses of prednisolone. Twenty-three patients were randomly assigned to receive either cyclosporine at 3 mg/kg per day (10 patients) or azathioprine at 1.5 to 2 mg/kg (13 patients). Both groups were comparable regarding age, sex and renal function, except for proteinuria, which was significantly greater in CsA group (P = 0.003). Similar rate of remission of nephrotic syndrome (NS) have been noted at the end of treatment (80% CsA versus 93% Aza). During last year, follow-up relapses of NS were more frequent in Aza group (5 versus 1). A fall in proteinuria was recorded in both groups during treatment, but it rose significantly in Aza group (1.5 g/day versus 3.1 g/day, P = 0.04) and remained unchanged in CsA group (3.9 g/day versus 4.1 g/day) after treatment cessation. Renal function deteriorated in Aza group (sCr 120.5 versus 269.8 mu mol/L; P < 0.01) and was stable in CsA group. In conclusion, CsA and steroids may be a very important option in the management of high-risk IMN patients. Long-term treatment is necessary for achievement of full therapeutic effect. Treatment with Aza did not have long-term benefits particularly regarding renal function preservation. (C) 2010 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据