Rui Barata

BACKGROUND: Sparsentan, a novel, non-immunosuppressive, single-molecule, dual endothelin angiotensin receptor antagonist, significantly reduced proteinuria versus irbesartan, an angiotensin II receptor blocker, at 36 weeks (primary endpoint) in patients with immunoglobulin A nephropathy in the phase 3 PROTECT trial's previously reported interim analysis. Here, we report kidney function and outcomes over 110 weeks from the double-blind final analysis. METHODS: PROTECT, a double-blind, randomised, active-controlled, phase 3 study, was done across 134 clinical practice sites in 18 countries throughout the Americas, Asia, and Europe. Patients aged 18 years or older with biopsy-proven primary IgA nephropathy and proteinuria of at least 1·0 g per day despite maximised renin-angiotensin system inhibition for at least 12 weeks were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive sparsentan (target dose 400 mg oral sparsentan once daily) or irbesartan (target dose 300 mg oral irbesartan once daily) based on a permuted-block randomisation method. The primary endpoint was proteinuria change between treatment groups at 36 weeks. Secondary endpoints included rate of change (slope) of the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), changes in proteinuria, a composite of kidney failure (confirmed 40% eGFR reduction, end-stage kidney disease, or all-cause mortality), and safety and tolerability up to 110 weeks from randomisation. Secondary efficacy outcomes were assessed in the full analysis set and safety was assessed in the safety set, both of which were defined as all patients who were randomly assigned and received at least one dose of randomly assigned study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03762850. FINDINGS: per year, 95% CI -0·03 to 1·94; p=0·058). The significant reduction in proteinuria at 36 weeks with sparsentan was maintained throughout the study period; at 110 weeks, proteinuria, as determined by the change from baseline in urine protein-to-creatinine ratio, was 40% lower in the sparsentan group than in the irbesartan group (-42·8%, 95% CI -49·8 to -35·0, with sparsentan versus -4·4%, -15·8 to 8·7, with irbesartan; geometric least-squares mean ratio 0·60, 95% CI 0·50 to 0·72). The composite kidney failure endpoint was reached by 18 (9%) of 202 patients in the sparsentan group versus 26 (13%) of 202 patients in the irbesartan group (relative risk 0·7, 95% CI 0·4 to 1·2). Treatment-emergent adverse events were well balanced between sparsentan and irbesartan, with no new safety signals. INTERPRETATION: Over 110 weeks, treatment with sparsentan versus maximally titrated irbesartan in patients with IgA nephropathy resulted in significant reductions in proteinuria and preservation of kidney function. FUNDING: Travere Therapeutics.

BACKGROUND: Urinary sediment is a noninvasive laboratory test that can be performed by an automated analyzer or manually by trained personnel. Manual examination remains the diagnostic standard because it excels at differentiating isomorphic from dysmorphic red blood cells and identifying other urinary particles such as renal tubular epithelial cells (RTECs), lipids, crystals, and the composition of casts. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence of a complete profile of urinary sediment particles and its associations with histologic lesions on kidney biopsy, regardless of diagnosis. METHODS: This was a single-center, observational retrospective study of 131 patients who had contemporary manual urinary sediment evaluation and kidney biopsy. A comprehensive set of urinary particles and histologic lesions were quantified, and their associations were analyzed. RESULTS: In our samples, we found an elevated frequency of findings suggestive of proliferative kidney disease and a low frequency of particles evoking urologic damage. The association of histologic lesions and urinary particles was explored with a multivariate model. We identified urinary sediment characteristics that independently correlated with the presence of some histologic lesions: urinary lipids with mesangial expansion (OR=2.86; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.3 to 6.3), mesangial hypercellularity (OR=2.44; 95% CI, 1.06 to 5.58), and wire loops and/or hyaline deposits (OR=2.89; 95% CI, 1.13 to 7.73); Urinary renal tubular epithelial cells with endocapillary hypercellularity (OR=3.17; 95% CI, 1.36 to 7.39), neutrophils and/or karyorrhexis (OR=4.51; 95% CI, 1.61 to 12.61), fibrinoid necrosis (OR=4.35; 95% CI, 1.48 to 12.74), cellular/fibrocellular crescents (OR=5.27; 95% CI, 1.95 to 14.26), and acute tubular necrosis (OR=2.31; 95% CI, 1.08 to 4.97). CONCLUSIONS: In a population of patients submitted to kidney biopsy, we found that the presence of some urinary particles (renal tubular epithelial cells, lipids, and dysmorphic erythrocytes), which are seldom reported by automated analyzers, is associated with active proliferative histologic lesions. In this regard, manual urinary sediment evaluation may help to shape the indications for performing a kidney biopsy.

The role of uric acid as an independent risk factor for chronic kidney disease development and progression is still a matter of discussion. Several observational studies showed a positive association between hyperuricemia and the progression of kidney dysfunction, but others did not, which probably derived from different biases and studies insufficiencies. Moreover, the results from studies on patients in hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis are even more controversial, with some evidence pointing towards a protective role of uric acid in hemodialysis patients, but not in peritoneal dialysis. In addition to most evidence suggesting a role of uric acid in chronic kidney disease pathogenesis and progression, pharmacological treatment of asymptomatic hyperuricemia is still not indicated, with no consensus on either the uric acid level at which treatment would be beneficial, or the target-level to achieve. There are several studies on the renal benefits of xanthine oxidase inhibitors allopurinol and febuxostat, with heterogeneous results. Most of them showed a renoprotective effect of both drugs, delaying renal disease progression. However, the different results found in other studies makes it difficult to draw definitive conclusions. Despite recent evidence pointing toward an important role of uric acid in the pathogenesis and progression of kidney disorders, and the benefits of its treatment, there are still several unanswered questions, and well-conducted studies are needed to make valid conclusions.

Kidney disease is frequent in HIV-patients. We present a case of a 44-year-old woman, with known uncontrolled HIV infection and chronic kidney disease due to HIV-associated nephropathy. After starting dolutegravir, the patient developed eosinophilia and worsening kidney function. A kidney biopsy confirmed the diagnosis of acute interstitial nephritis. Given the time relation with dolutegravir introduction, it was deemed the culprit medication. Dolutegravir was stopped, and corticosteroids were initiated, with moderate improvement in renal function. To our knowledge, this is the first reported case of acute interstitial nephritis to dolutegravir, which should raise awareness of previously undocumented renal effects of antiretroviral therapy. La enfermedad renal es frecuente en pacientes con VIH. Presentamos el caso de una mujer de 44 años, con infección por VIH no controlada conocida y enfermedad renal crónica por nefropatía asociada al VIH. Después de comenzar con dolutegravir, el paciente desarrolló eosinofilia y empeoramiento de la función renal. Una biopsia de riñón confirmó el diagnóstico de nefritis intersticial aguda. Dada la relación temporal con la introducción de dolutegravir, se consideró al medicamento el culpable. Se interrumpió el tratamiento con dolutegravir y se iniciaron corticosteroides, con una mejoría moderada de la función renal. Hasta donde sabemos, este es el primer caso notificado de nefritis intersticial aguda por dolutegravir, lo que debería crear conciencia sobre los efectos renales previamente indocumentados de la terapia antirretroviral.

Bullous pemphigoid is an autoimmune bullous cutaneous disease. We report the case of a 60 year-old male patient whose kidney allograft failed and was on hemodialysis for the previous 16 months. After tapering immunosuppressive medication, he presented simultaneous bullous eruption and kidney allograft intolerance syndrome. Investigation showed a positive BP180 anti-basement membrane zone antibody and skin biopsy was consistent with bullous pemphigoid. The patient was treated with corticotherapy and bullous pemphigoid resolved. The development of new onset diabetes and concerns over long term immunosuppression, halted the decision to continue corticotherapy and the patient underwent graft nephrectomy, with resolution of the kidney allograft intolerance syndrome without recurrence of the bullous disease. The occurrence of bullous pemphigoid in patients with failed renal allograft is rare, with only eleven cases reported in literature. This case illustrates how graft nephrectomy can provide a definitive cure to bullous pemphigoid in this setting.