Therapeutic drug monitoring of mycophenolate mofetil and enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus

2010 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. 689-699 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Djabarouti ◽  
Pierre Duffau ◽  
Estibaliz Lazaro ◽  
Candice Chapouly ◽  
Carine Greib ◽  
...  
2017 ◽  
Vol 76 (9) ◽  
pp. 1575-1582 ◽  
Author(s):  
Josep Ordi-Ros ◽  
Luis Sáez-Comet ◽  
Mercedes Pérez-Conesa ◽  
Xavier Vidal ◽  
Francesca Mitjavila ◽  
...  

ObjectiveTo compare the efficacy and safety of enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium (EC-MPS) versus azathioprine (AZA) in patients with active systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) disease.MethodsA multicentre, 24-month, superiority, open-label, randomised controlled trial (NCT01112215) was conducted with 240 patients (120 per arm) receiving either EC-MPS (target dose: 1440 mg/day) or AZA (target dose: 2 mg/kg/day) in addition to prednisone and/or antimalarials. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving clinical remission, assessed by SLE Disease Activity Index 2000 (SLEDAI-2K) and British Isles Lupus Assessment Group (BILAG), at 3 and 24 months. Secondary endpoints included time to clinical remission, BILAG A and B flare rates, time to flare, corticosteroid reduction and adverse events (AEs).ResultsProportion of patients achieving clinical remission (clinical SLEDAI=0) was higher in the EC-MPS group at 3 (32.5% vs 19.2%; treatment difference, 13.3 (CI 2.3 to 24), p=0.034) and 24 months (71.2% vs 48.3%; treatment difference, 22.9 (CI 10.4 to 34.4), p<0.001). EC-MPS was superior with respect to time to clinical remission (HR 1.43; 95% CI 1.07 to 1.91; p=0.017). BILAG A/B and B flares occurred more frequently in the AZA group (71.7% vs 50%, p=0.001 and 21.67% vs 8.3%, p=0.004, respectively). EC-MPS was superior with respect to time to first BILAG A/B (HR 1.81; 95% CI 1.3 to 2.56; p=0.0004) and BILAG A flare (HR 2.84; 95% CI 1.37 to 5.89; p=0.003). AEs were similar in both groups except for leucopenia that occurred more frequently with AZA.ConclusionsEC-MPS was superior to AZA in treating SLE and preventing further relapses.Trial registration numberNCT01112215; Results.


2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 319-323 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean-Michel Hougardy ◽  
Laurette Maufort ◽  
Frédéric Cotton ◽  
Julien Coussement ◽  
Dimitri Mikhalski ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 588.2-588
Author(s):  
G. Olivieri ◽  
F. Ceccarelli ◽  
F. Natalucci ◽  
F. R. Spinelli ◽  
C. Alessandri ◽  
...  

Background:The updated EULAR recommendations for the management of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) underline the use of Mycophenolate Mofetil (MMF) in the treatment of different disease related manifestations (1). Several randomized controlled trials have demonstrated the efficacy of MMF in lupus nephritis (LN) patients but only case series and open-labelled trials have analyzed the use of this drug in other than LN features. Moreover, no data are available about the MMF retention rate in a real-life setting.Objectives:The present study aims at evaluating the 5-years drug retention rate (DRR) of MMF in a large monocentric SLE cohort. Secondly, we investigated the influence of MMF in disease activity changes and chronic damage progression.Methods:We performed a longitudinal study including all the SLE patients (ACR 1997 criteria) starting MMF treatment in our Lupus Clinic. Data about indications, mean dosage, duration of treatment and reasons for drug withdrawal were registered. The DRR was estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method. Disease activity and chronic damage were assessed by SLE Disease Activity Index 2000 (SLEDAI-2K) and SLICC Damage Index (SDI), respectively.Results:The present analysis included 162 SLE patients (M/F 22/140, median age at the disease diagnosis 25.5 years, IQR 13). At the beginning of MMF treatment, we registered a median age of 34 months (IQR 21) and a median disease duration of 72 months (IQR 123). The most frequent indications for prescribing MMF were LN (101 patients, 62.3%) and musculoskeletal manifestations (39, 24.1%), followed by neuropsychiatric involvement (10, 6.2%), and others disease related manifestations (12, 7.4%; in particular skin involvement, hematological features, myositis, vasculitis). MMF was administered at a mean daily dosage of 2.1±0.6 grams; no differences in dosage were found between the different indications (p=ns).At the longitudinal analysis, we registered a median treatment duration of 30 months (IQR 55). Figure 1 reported data about DRR: in particular, at 60 months follow-up we observed a DRR of 61.1% for LN patients, which was similar to that registered for patients without renal involvement (NLN) (60.5%; p=ns). Interestingly, the DRR at 60 months was higher in the subgroup of patients treated for joint involvement (75.4%), even without reaching a statistically significant difference. During the observation period, 92 patients (59.2%) discontinued MMF (median treatment duration at discontinuation 25 months, IQR 35). Interestingly, the main cause of withdrawal was the achievement of persistent remission, observed in 20 patients (21.7%), followed by loss of efficacy (19 patients, 20.5%), drug intolerance and pregnancy planning (17 patients for both reasons, 18,4%). Furthermore, our analysis confirmed MMF efficacy, as demonstrated by the significant reduction in SLEDAI-2k values after 4, 12 and 24 months of treatment (p< 0.0001 for all the time-points in comparison with baseline). In addition, MMF resulted able to control chronic damage progression, as demonstrated by the lack of significant increase in SDI values (baseline: 0.6, IQR 1; last observation: 0.93, IQR 1; p=ns).Conclusion:The evaluation of a large SLE cohort demonstrated a good retention rate for MMF. In particular, our results demonstrated that MMF is also a safe and effective drug for SLE manifestation other than LN, in particular for joint involvement. Moreover, it is able to control disease activity and to prevent the progression of chronic damage.References:[1]Fanouriakis A et al. Ann Rheum Dis. 2019 Jun;78(6):736-745.Disclosure of Interests:None declared


2011 ◽  
Vol 68 (8) ◽  
pp. 705-708
Author(s):  
Natasa Jovanovic ◽  
Jasmina Markovic-Lipkovski ◽  
Stevan Pavlovic ◽  
Biljana Stojimirovic

Introduction. Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a chronic immunological disease causing a significant morbidity and mortality in younger women and involving several organs and systems, most often the kidneys, being consequently the incidence of lupus nephritis (LN) about 60%. Case report. We reported a 57 year-old patient with the diagnosed SLE in 1995. Pathohistological analysis of kidney biopsy revealed LN type V. The patient was treated with corticosteroid pulses and azathioprine during one year. A remission was achieved and maintained with prednisone, 15 mg daily. Nephrotic relapse was diagnosed in 2006 and the second kidney biopsy revealed recent kidney infarction due to extensive vasculitis. Soon, a cerebrovascul insult developed and CT-scan revealed endocranial infarctus. The patient was treated with corticosteroids and cyclophosphamide pulses (totally VI monthly pulses), and also with low-molecular heparine, anticoagulants and salicylates because of the right leg phlebothrombosis. After the pulses, the patient was adviced to take prednisone 20 mg daily and azothioprine 100 mg daily, and 6 months later mycophenolate mofetil because of persistent active serological immunological findings (ANA 1 : 320) and nephrotic syndrome. Mycophenolate mofetil was efficient in inducing and maintaining remission of nephrotic syndrome. Conclusion. The aim of LN treatment is to achieve and maintain remission, improve patients? outcome, reduce the toxicity of immunosuppressive drugs and the incidence of relapses. Mycophenolate mofetil was shown to be efficient in inducing and maintaining remission of nephrotic syndrome in the frame of LN.


2019 ◽  
Vol 94 (5) ◽  
pp. 455-458
Author(s):  
Jung-Hun Kim ◽  
Hyunji Chung ◽  
Kyung-Ann Lee ◽  
Hae-Rim Kim ◽  
Sang-Heon Lee

2014 ◽  
Vol 36 (6) ◽  
pp. 1019-1020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giulia Perini ◽  
Roberta Pravettoni ◽  
Elisabetta Farina ◽  
Giulia Grande ◽  
Patrizia Contri ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document