These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Efficacy of mycophenolate mofetil in adolescent patients with lupus nephritis: evidence from a two-phase, prospective randomized trial.
    Author: Sundel R, Solomons N, Lisk L, Aspreva Lupus Management Study (ALMS) Group.
    Journal: Lupus; 2012 Nov; 21(13):1433-43. PubMed ID: 22922564.
    Abstract:
    The safety and efficacy of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) were evaluated in adolescent patients with systemic lupus erythematosus and active or active/chronic class III-V lupus nephritis. During the 24-week induction phase, patients were randomized to oral MMF (target dose 3.0 g/day) or intravenous cyclophosphamide (IVC) (0.5-1.0 g/m(2)/month), plus prednisone. Response was defined as a decrease in 24-hour urine protein:creatinine ratio (P:Cr) to < 3 in patients with baseline nephrotic range proteinuria, or by ≥ 50% if subnephrotic baseline proteinuria, and stabilization (± 25%) or improvement in serum creatinine. In the 36-month maintenance phase, induction therapy responders were randomized 1:1 to MMF (1.0 g twice daily) or oral azathioprine (AZA) (2 mg/kg/day), plus prednisone. In the induction phase, 10 patients received MMF and 14 received IVC; 15 (62.5%) achieved treatment response (MMF, 7 (70%); IVC, 8/15 (57.1%); p = 0.53, odds ratio (95% confidence interval) 2.0 (0.2, 15.5)). There was a non-statistically significant difference in maintenance of response to MMF (7/8; 87.5%) versus AZA (3/8; 37.5%). Seven patients withdrew (MMF, 2; AZA, 5). During both phases, rates of serious adverse events were similar in both arms. During both phases treatment response with MMF was as effective as the comparator.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]