Effect of Oral Methylprednisolone on Decline in Kidney Function or Kidney Failure in Patients With IgA NephropathyImportance: The effect of glucocorticoids on major kidney outcomes and adverse events in IgA nephropathy has been uncertain. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and adverse effects of methylprednisolone in patients with IgA nephropathy at high risk of kidney function decline. Design, Setting, and Participants: An international, multicenter, double-blind, randomized clinical trial that enrolled 503 participants with IgA nephropathy, proteinuria greater than or equal to 1 g per day, and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of 20 to 120 mL/min/1.73 m2 after at least 3 months of optimized background care from 67 centers in Australia, Canada, China, India, and Malaysia between May 2012 and November 2019, with follow-up until June 2021. Interventions: Participants were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive oral methylprednisolone (initially 0.6-0.8 mg/kg/d, maximum 48 mg/d, weaning by 8 mg/d/mo; n = 136) or placebo (n = 126). After 262 participants were randomized, an excess of serious infections was identified, leading to dose reduction (0.4 mg/kg/d, maximum 32 mg/d, weaning by 4 mg/d/mo) and addition of antibiotic prophylaxis for pneumocystis pneumonia for subsequent participants (121 in the oral methylprednisolone group and 120 in the placebo group). Main Outcomes And Measures: The primary end point was a composite of 40% decline in eGFR, kidney failure (dialysis, transplant), or death due to kidney disease. There were 11 secondary outcomes, including kidney failure. Results: Among 503 randomized patients (mean age, 38 years; 198 [39%] women; mean eGFR, 61.5 mL/min/1.73 m2; mean proteinuria, 2.46 g/d), 493 (98%) completed the trial. Over a mean of 4.2 years of follow-up, the primary outcome occurred in 74 participants (28.8%) in the methylprednisolone group compared with 106 (43.1%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.53 [95% CI, 0.39-0.72]; P < .001; absolute annual event rate difference, -4.8% per year [95% CI, -8.0% to -1.6%]). The effect on the primary outcome was seen across each dose compared with the relevant participants in the placebo group recruited to each regimen (P for heterogeneity = .11): full-dose HR, 0.58 (95% CI, 0.41-0.81); reduced-dose HR, 0.27 (95% CI, 0.11-0.65). Of the 11 prespecified secondary end points, 9 showed significant differences in favor of the intervention, including kidney failure (50 [19.5%] vs 67 [27.2%]; HR, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.40-0.87]; P = .008; annual event rate difference, -2.9% per year [95% CI, -5.4% to -0.3%]). Serious adverse events were more frequent with methylprednisolone vs placebo (28 [10.9%] vs 7 [2.8%] patients with serious adverse events), primarily with full-dose therapy compared with its matching placebo (22 [16.2%] vs 4 [3.2%]). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with IgA nephropathy at high risk of progression, treatment with oral methylprednisolone for 6 to 9 months, compared with placebo, significantly reduced the risk of the composite outcome of kidney function decline, kidney failure, or death due to kidney disease. However, the incidence of serious adverse events was increased with oral methylprednisolone, mainly with high-dose therapy. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01560052.
Efficacy and safety of sparsentan versus irbesartan in patients with IgA nephropathy (PROTECT): 2-year results from a randomised, active-controlled, phase 3 trialBACKGROUND: 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.
Effects of uric acid-lowering therapy on renal outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysisBhadran Bose, Sunil V. Badve, Swapnil Hiremath et al.|Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation|2013 BACKGROUND: Non-randomized studies suggest an association between serum uric acid levels and progression of chronic kidney disease (CKD). The aim of this systematic review is to summarize evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) concerning the benefits and risks of uric acid-lowering therapy on renal outcomes. METHODS: Medline, Excerpta Medical Database and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched with English language restriction for RCTs comparing the effect of uric acid-lowering therapy with placebo/no treatment on renal outcomes. Treatment effects were summarized using random-effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: Eight trials (476 participants) evaluating allopurinol treatment were eligible for inclusion. There was substantial heterogeneity in baseline kidney function, cause of CKD and duration of follow-up across these studies. In five trials, there was no significant difference in change in glomerular filtration rate from baseline between the allopurinol and control arms [mean difference (MD) 3.1 mL/min/1.73 m2, 95% confidence intervals (CI) -0.9, 7.1; heterogeneity χ2=1.9, I2=0%, P=0.75]. In three trials, allopurinol treatment abrogated increases in serum creatinine from baseline (MD -0.4 mg/dL, 95% CI -0.8, -0.0 mg/dL; heterogeneity χ2=3, I2=34%, P=0.22). Allopurinol had no effect on proteinuria and blood pressure. Data for effects of allopurinol therapy on progression to end-stage kidney disease and death were scant. Allopurinol had uncertain effects on the risks of adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Uric acid-lowering therapy with allopurinol may retard the progression of CKD. However, adequately powered randomized trials are required to evaluate the benefits and risks of uric acid-lowering therapy in CKD.
Sparsentan in patients with IgA nephropathy: a prespecified interim analysis from a randomised, double-blind, active-controlled clinical trialGlomerular DiseasesBhadran Bose, Daniel C. Cattran|Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology|2013 FSGS is a lesion, not a disease. The separation into primary FSGS (a result of immunologic-mediated injury) versus secondary FSGS (related to a variety of causes) is often difficult. Even when this particular issue is carefully evaluated, the therapeutic implications are not always apparent. Newer literature on both biomarker discovery and on the genetic basis of FSGS is reviewed in this context. In addition, the thorny implications of obesity as it relates to the FSGS lesion are discussed. An overall practical algorithmic approach to the management and treatment of the FSGS lesion that integrates these controversial overlap areas is suggested.