IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0175152.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparison of renal response to four different induction therapies in Japanese patients with lupus nephritis class III or IV: A single-centre retrospective study

Author

Listed:
  • Hironari Hanaoka
  • Tomofumi Kiyokawa
  • Harunobu Iida
  • Kana Ishimori
  • Yukiko Takakuwa
  • Takahiro Okazaki
  • Hidehiro Yamada
  • Daisuke Ichikawa
  • Sayuri Shirai
  • Junki Koike
  • Shoichi Ozaki

Abstract

The recent recommendations for the management of lupus nephritis suggest that racial background should be considered while choosing induction therapy. However, the responses to different induction regimens have been poorly studied in Japanese population. Here, we assessed the renal response to different induction therapies in Japanese patients with lupus nephritis class III or IV. The records of 64 patients with biopsy-proven lupus nephritis class III or IV were retrospectively evaluated according to therapy received: monthly intravenous cyclophosphamide (IVCY), the Euro-lupus nephritis trial (ELNT) protocol-IVCY, tacrolimus (TAC), or mycophenolate mofetil (MMF). We investigated cumulative complete renal response (CR) rates and relapse rates for each group for 3 years. Organ damage was assessed with the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics/American College of Rheumatology Damage Index (SDI). There were 22 patients on monthly IVCY, 18 on ELNT-IVCY, 13 on TAC, and 11 on MMF. Lower systemic lupus erythematosus disease activity index (SLEDAI) and higher CH50 were found in the TAC group at baseline (p

Suggested Citation

  • Hironari Hanaoka & Tomofumi Kiyokawa & Harunobu Iida & Kana Ishimori & Yukiko Takakuwa & Takahiro Okazaki & Hidehiro Yamada & Daisuke Ichikawa & Sayuri Shirai & Junki Koike & Shoichi Ozaki, 2017. "Comparison of renal response to four different induction therapies in Japanese patients with lupus nephritis class III or IV: A single-centre retrospective study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(4), pages 1-16, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0175152
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0175152
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0175152
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0175152&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0175152?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0175152. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.