MMF in proliferative lupus nephritis 505
pared with azathioprine.5 In murine models of lupus rate, urinalysis, 24 h urine protein, renal proﬁle, liver function test,
nephritis, MMF attenuates the severity of renal disease and fasting lipids, fasting glucose, antidouble stranded DNA antibody, com-
signiﬁcantly prolongs survival.6–8 MMF has also been used in plement C3 and C4 concentration and the Systemic Lupus Erythema-
tosus Disease Activity Index (SLEDAI) score.15
the treatment of human glomerulonephritis, lupus nephritis
and other autoimmune diseases.9–12 The success of these Renal biopsy was classiﬁed by the WHO classiﬁcation by a single
reports prompted this investigator-initiated study to evalu- histopathologist blinded to the treatment assignment. Staining of
ate the efﬁcacy of MMF in the treatment of proliferative slides included haematoxylin and eosin, periodic acid–Schiff and sil-
lupus nephritis in Malaysia. ver stains, and immunoﬂourescence for IgG, IgA, IgM and C3. A sec-
ond renal biopsy was required at 6 months if the patient had active
urinary sediments (presence of cellular casts or at least ﬁve red blood
SUBJECTS AND METHODS
cells (RBC) per high-power ﬁeld (HPF) of centrifuged urine), pro-
teinuria of at least 1 g per day or a rise in serum creatinine of more
We conducted a prospective, randomized, open-labelled clinical trial at
eight centres in Malaysia. The study was conducted in accordance with than 50% compared with the baseline. Activity and chronicity index
the Declaration of Helsinki and Good Clinical Practice guidelines. scores were determined by the same histopathologist.14 The activity
Ethics committee approval was obtained and all patients gave written score was the sum of the scores (on a scale of 1–3) of endocapillary
informed consent. An independent clinical research organization proliferation, karyorrhexis and ﬁbrinoid necrosis (with the score mul-
(CRO) managed and monitored the trial. The CRO undertook data tiplied by 2), cellular crescents (with the score multiplied by 2), hya-
management including data quality assurance. Data on efﬁcacy and line deposits, leucocyte exudation and interstitial inﬂammation. The
safety were veriﬁed against the source document. maximum score is 24. The chronicity score was the sum of the scores
(on a scale of 1–3) for glomerular sclerosis, ﬁbrous crescents, tubular
Study patients and randomization atrophy and interstitial ﬁbrosis. The maximum score is 12.
The primary outcome was remission of nephritis (combined par-
Between January 2001 and December 2002 patients who had SLE tial and complete remission) at 6 months deﬁned as stabilization or
fulﬁlling American Rheumatism Association criteria with newly improvement in renal function, urinary RBC of less than 10 per HPF
diagnosed World Health Organization (WHO) class III or IV lupus and reduction of proteinuria to less than 3 g/day if baseline pro-
nephritis and aged 16 years or older were enrolled into the study.13,14 teinuria was more than 3 g/day and at least a 50% reduction in pro-
Exclusion criteria were serum creatinine more than 200 mmol/L, white teinuria or to less than 1 g/day if the baseline proteinuria was in the
blood cell (WBC) count of less than 3.5 ¥ 109/L, evidence of major subnephrotic range. Stabilization of renal function was deﬁned as a
infection, history of cancer, alcohol or substance abuse, active peptic change in serum creatinine concentration of less than 20% com-
ulcer disease, pregnant or lactating women, known allergy to MMF pared with the baseline concentration and improvement in renal
or cyclophosphamide and the use of study drugs in the preceding function was deﬁned as a reduction in serum creatinine of at least
6 months. 20% compared with the baseline. Complete remission (CR) was
Eligible patients were randomized centrally in a one-to-one ratio to similarly deﬁned except for reduction of proteinuria to less than
receive MMF or IVC. This was done within 1 month of the renal 0.3 g/day.
biopsy. The randomization code was generated separately for each par- Secondary end-points were improvement in the SLEDAI score,
ticipating centre by using the random permuted block method with complement concentration, death and commencement of permanent
randomly varying block size. dialysis or renal transplantation.
At the end of the 6 month study, all patients were traced for patient
and kidney survival. This was reported as of 31 December 2004.
Patients were given either MMF (CellCept) 1.0 g orally twice daily for
6 months plus corticosteroids or intravenous cyclophosphamide (IVC)
Simon’s optimal two-stage design was used for the trial.16 In the ﬁrst
0.75–1 g/m2 monthly for 6 months plus corticosteroids. Dosage adjust-
stage, nine patients were randomly selected for treatment with MMF. If
ments for MMF were required if the WBC count was less than
one or more patients responded to treatment, the trial could proceed to
3.5 ¥ 109/L and for dose dependent side-effects (e.g. gastrointestinal
a second stage where 17 patients would be treated. A parallel group of
toxicity). The dose was halved or stopped and reviewed within 2 weeks.
randomly selected patients of equal number to the MMF arm would be
The dosage of IVC was adjusted to keep the WBC nadir between 3.5
treated with IVC.
and 4.0 ¥ 109/L at 10–14 days after administration. IVC was withheld if
The sample size estimate was based on the assumption that had the
the WBC count was less than 3.5 ¥ 109/L and reviewed within 2 weeks. remission rate in the MMF arm been 5% at 6 months we would regard
The starting dose of prednisolone was 60 mg/day for 4–6 weeks, then
this as an ‘uninteresting’ response rate. The target response rate was
40 mg/day for 2 weeks. The dose was reduced by 5 mg/day every
25%. For alpha risk = 0.05 and beta risk = 0.2 (80% power), the
2 weeks until 20 mg/day, then 2.5 mg/day every 2 weeks until 12.5 mg/
required sample size was nine patients for the ﬁrst stage and 17 patients
day followed by 2.5 mg/day reduction every 4 weeks until a mainte-
for the second stage.
nance dose of between 5–10 mg/day was achieved. Neither patients nor
Results of the efﬁcacy analysis were reported as the proportion of
the clinical team were blinded to treatment allocation. They could
subjects (with 95% conﬁdence intervals (CI)) with remission. All end-
request that the patient drop out of the trial at any time in case of
point analyses were performed on an intention-to-treat basis, with ran-
adverse events or non-response.
domized patients who had received at least a dose of study treatment
included in the analyses. Repeated measure ANOVA was used to analyse
Study assessments and endpoints all serial measurements. The study visit was the repeated measure factor
while the between group factor was the study treatment group. The
Patients were reviewed fortnightly for 6 months. Evaluation included Cockcroft and Gault formula was used to compute the creatinine
physical examination, full blood count, the erythrocyte sedimentation clearance.17
506 LM Ong et al.
RESULTS agents. Six patients (23.1%) in the IVC group and eight
patients (32%) in the MMF group had received either
Of the 54 subjects screened and randomized, two patients angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin
assigned to the IVC group defaulted before receiving the receptor blockers during the trial.
drug and one was withdrawn because of the exclusion cri-
teria; seven patients in the MMF arm were withdrawn
because of the exclusion criteria. The main reason for with- Primary outcome
drawal was reclassiﬁcation of the renal biopsies by the trial
histopathologist into a different WHO grade of lupus Remission occurred in 13 patients (52%, 95% CI 32%,
nephritis. Forty-one of the 44 patients who received the 72%) in the IVC group and 11 (58%, 95% CI 36%, 80%) in
study drugs completed therapy (Fig. 1). One patient in the MMF group (P = 0.70). Complete remission was
the IVC group withdrew from the study prematurely at achieved in three patients (12%, 95% CI 0%, 25%) in the
3 months because of persistent leucopenia. Two patients in IVC group and ﬁve patients (26%, 95% CI 7%, 46%) in the
the MMF arm did not complete the trial; one withdrew MMF group (P = 0.22). The mean time to remission was
voluntarily after 3 months and another patient developed 11.7 ± 7.3 weeks and 12.4 ± 5.0 weeks (P = 0.80) for the
end-stage renal failure (ESRF) at 5 months. IVC and MMF groups, respectively. The mean time to com-
Baseline characteristics of the patients were similar plete remission was 11.4 ± 9.4 weeks for the IVC group and
except for signiﬁcantly higher proteinuria in the IVC group 13.0 ± 5.7 weeks for the MMF group (P = 0.77).
compared with the MMF group (Table 1). Five patients in Proteinuria decreased in both arms (Fig. 2). Although
the MMF group and 12 patients in the IVC group had neph- the IVC group had a higher baseline proteinuria, the reduc-
rotic syndrome at presentation. There was also imbalance in tion in proteinuria over time was parallel to the MMF group.
the ethnic distribution but this was not statistically signiﬁ- Proteinuria decreased from 3.0 ± 1.8 g at baseline to
cant (P = 0.41). Renal impairment (creatinine clearance 1.9 ± 1.5 g at 6 months in the IVC arm and from 1.8 ± 1.2 g
less than 60 mL/min) was present at baseline in eight to 1.1 ± 0.6 g at baseline and at 6 months, respectively, in
patients (32%) in the IVC group and seven patients the MMF group. The improvement in proteinuria was
(36.8%) in the MMF group. reﬂected by an upward trend in serum albumin in both
The mean ± standard deviation (SD) cumulative dose of groups. The mean serum albumin increased from a baseline
steroids was 96.6 ± 42.5 mg/kg for the IVC group and of 28 ± 6 g/L to 34.5 ± 6.3 g/L at 6 months in the IVC group
87.2 ± 42.8 mg/kg for the MMF group (P = 0.47). Twenty and from 30.3 ± 7.9 g/L to 36.7 ± 4.3 g/L in the MMF group.
patients (80%) received at least six doses of IVC while ﬁve Serum creatinine remained stable in both groups. At the
patients received between three to ﬁve pulses. The mean end of 6 months there was no signiﬁcant difference in the
monthly dose of IVC was 713.5 ± 11.9 mg/m2 and the mean serum creatinine between groups (mean serum creatinine
cumulative dose was 121.6 ± 26 mg/kg. The mean daily dose was 94.4 ± 61.5 mmol/L and 109.5 ± 168.4 mmol/L in the
of MMF given was 1.6 ± 0.1 g and the mean cumulative IVC and MMF groups, respectively. Creatinine clearance
dose was 5.5 ± 1.7 g/kg. One patient was converted from at 6 months was better in the MMF group (mean
MMF to IVC at 5 months due to lack of efﬁcacy. 95.0 ± 36.3 mL/min) compared with the IVC group
Blood pressure (BP) control was similar. The systolic and (81.5 ± 30.4 mL/min) but this was not statistically signiﬁ-
diastolic BP decreased over time in both groups. Twenty- cant (Fig. 3).
nine patients (65.9%) were treated with antihypertensive There was improvement in other indices of SLE and
lupus nephritis activity. These included the SLEDAI score,
serum C3 and C4 concentration, erythrocyte sedimentation
rate (ESR), urinary RBC and urinary casts (Table 2). There
Subjects screened were no signiﬁcant differences in these parameters between
and randomized groups.
(n = 54)
One patient in the MMF group developed ESRF. The
patient had been dialysis-dependent 2 months before
recruitment. At randomization the patient had not been on
(n = 28) (n = 26) dialysis for 1 month and had a serum creatinine of
160 mmol, and was therefore eligible. There were, however,
severe chronic changes on the renal biopsy (chronicity
index score 11/12). She was withdrawn after receiving MMF
(n = 3) (n = 25) (n = 19) (n = 7) for 5 months.
Early Number completed Number completed Early
termination trial trial termination
(n = 1) (n = 24) (n = 17) (n = 2) Twenty (10 in the IVC group and 10 in the MMF group) of
the 34 patients with indications for repeat renal biopsy
Fig. 1 Trial proﬁle. IVC, intravenous cyclophosphamide; underwent the procedure. Three patients had early termi-
MMF, mycophenolate mofetil. nation while consent was not obtained from 11 patients.
MMF in proliferative lupus nephritis 507
Table 1 Baseline characteristics of trial patients by treatment group
Characteristic IVC (n = 25) MMF (n = 19)
Mean age (SD) (years) 30.5 (8.7) 31.3 (9.9)
Body mass index, mean (SD) (kg/m2) 21.2 (3.8) 21.8 (3.2)
Ethic group, n (%)
Malay 14 (56) 8 (42.1)
Chinese 10 (40) 10 (52.6)
Indian 0 (0) 1 (5.3)
Siamese 1 (4) 0 (0)
No. females (%) 22 (88) 15 (79)
Duration of SLE, mean (SD) (months) 32 (33.6) 48.7 (72.7)
Duration of lupus nephritis, mean (SD) (months) 7.2 (9.8) 5.9 (7)
Total SLEDAI score, mean (SD) 14.8 (6.3) 15.8 (7.7)
Systolic blood pressure, mean (SD) (mmHg) 130.2 (20.2) 127.9 (19.2)
Diastolic blood pressure, mean (SD) (mmHg) 83.9 (11.9) 85.4 (11)
Hemoglobin, mean (SD) (g/dL) 10.7 (1.8) 11 (1.5)
White blood cell count, mean (SD) (¥109/L) 8.6 (3.5) 8.1 (4)
Platelet count, mean (SD) (¥109/L) 265.2 (73.7) 255.8 (74.8)
ESR, mean (SD) (mm) 57 (36.4) 56.2 (41)
Creatinine, mean (SD) (mmol/L)† 94.0 (40.2) 96.5 (37.3)
Creatinine clearance, mean (SD) (mL/min) 77.2 (28.9) 76.8 (32.5)
Albumin, mean (SD) (g/L) 28.0 (6.0) 30.3 (7.9)
Anti-dsDNA antibody raised, n (%) 16 (64) 12 (63.2)
C3, mean (SD) (mg/dL)‡ 54.2 (14.4) 63.7 (26.8)
C4, mean (SD) (mg/dL)§ 14.0 (5.7) 16.9 (14.3)
Proteinuria, mean (SD) (g/day)* 3.0 (1.8) 1.8 (1.2)
Red blood cells per HPF, mean (SD) 13.7 (17.2) 14.2 (17.8)
Class III, n (%) 2 (8) 1 (5.3)
Class III with membranous change, n (%) 0 (0) 1 (5.3)
Class IV, n (%) 17 (68) 10 (52.6)
Class IV with membranous change, n (%) 6 (24) 7 (36.8)
Activity index score, mean (SD) 9.0 (4.1) 8.6 (2.9)
Chronicity index score, mean (SD) 2.8 (1.7) 3.2 (2.6)
†Normal range for serum creatinine is 50–120 mmol/L. ‡Normal range for C3 is 88–200 mg/dL. §Normal range for C4 is 16–47 mg/dL. *P = 0.02
for comparison between groups. ESR, erythrocyte sedimentation rate; HPF, high-power ﬁeld; IVC, intravenous cyclophosphamide; MMF, mycophe-
nolate mofetil; SLE, systemic lupus erythematosus; SLEDAI, Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index.
+SD /IVC IVC +SD /IVC IVC
-SD /MMF MMF -SD /MMF MMF
Mean ± SD
Mean ± SD
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Fig. 2 Mean 24 h urine protein (g/L). P = 0.042 for compari-
son between groups. P < 0.0001 for change over time. IVC, Fig. 3 Mean creatinine clearance (mL/min). P-value not sig-
intravenous cyclophosphamide; MMF, mycophenolate mofetil. niﬁcant for comparison between groups (P = 0.37). P = 0.0031
for change over time.
508 LM Ong et al.
There were no signiﬁcant differences in proteinuria, urinary Adverse events
red cells or serum creatinine at baseline or at 6 months
between the 20 patients who underwent biopsy and those There was no difference (P = 0.18) in the rate of adverse
who did not (14 patients). events at 6 months between groups (0.48 and 0.60 episodes
Among 24 patients who had a second renal biopsy (the per patient-month for the IVC and MMF groups, respec-
20 above and four others that were not indicated per pro- tively). There was one patient with oligomenorrhoea in the
tocol), the baseline activity and chronicity index scores IVC group and none in the MMF group.
were similar between groups (Table 3). There was a signiﬁ- Leucopenia (deﬁned as WBC count of less than
cant improvement in the activity score on the follow-up 3.5 ¥ 109/L) occurred more frequently in patients on IVC
biopsy. The chronicity index increased over the 6 months. (52% of patients) compared with MMF (36.8% of patients),
This was signiﬁcant in the IVC group but not in the MMF but this did not reach statistical signiﬁcance (P = 0.32). The
group. Mean activity and chronicity index scores on the WBC count showed a saw-tooth pattern with IVC as it
follow-up biopsy were not signiﬁcantly different between reached a nadir approximately 2 weeks following adminis-
groups. tration. There was no statistical difference in the mean
Three patients (27.3%) in the IVC group had downgrad- WBC between groups (P = 0.78).
ing in the WHO classiﬁcation from IV at baseline to III There was no difference in the incidence of infections
(two patients) and V (one patient) on the follow-up biopsy. between groups. Pneumonia or septicaemia occurred in
In the MMF group, six patients (46.2%) downgraded from three patients in each group. Herpes zoster occurred in six
class IV to I (one patient), II (two patients) and V (three patients (three patients on IVC and three patients on
patients). One patient in the MMF group upgraded from MMF). Gastrointestinal disturbances were similar in both
class III to IV. The difference was not statistically signiﬁcant groups. The incidence of gastrointestinal adverse events was
between groups. 0.07 episodes per patient-month in the IVC group and 0.08
episodes per patient-month in the MMF group (P = 0.68).
On 31 December 2004, all 44 patients were reassessed for
kidney and patient survival on an intention-to-treat basis.
Table 2 Secondary end-points There was one death in each group. One had gone into
ESRF 5 months into the trial (on MMF), started on contin-
Parameter IVC MMF uous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) and died
Mean change in SLEDAI -6.8 (6.6) -7.2 (7.7) 21 months later of cardiomyopathy. The other (from the
score (SD)†* IVC group) went into ESRF 6 months after the end of the
Mean change in C3, mg/dL 29.9 (28.8) 16.1 (34.2) trial and died 27 months after that of septicaemia while on
(SD)†* CAPD. Another patient on IVC went into ESRF
Mean change in C4, mg/dL 6.1 (8.0) 2.5 (21.2) 15 months after the trial ended and is alive on CAPD after
(SD)†* 18 months.
No. deaths (%) 0 (0) 0 (0) The mean follow up for the whole group was
Permanent dialysis, no. (%)* 0 (0) 1 (4) 37.8 ± 7 months, range 24.2–47.7 months. Patient survival
was 94% at 36 months for both groups (log rank P = 0.88).
†Change at 6 months from baseline value. *P-value not signiﬁcant Kidney survival was 92% for the IVC group and 94% for the
for comparison between groups. (P-values: Systemic Lupus Erythema-
MMF group at 36 months (log rank P = 0.75). All patients
tosus Disease Activity Index (SLEDAI), 0.86; C3, 0.1714; C4, 0.4531;
permanent dialysis, 0.38.) P < 0.0001 for change in SLEDAI over time. were on various doses of oral prednisolone. The main cyto-
P < 0.0001 for change in C3 over time. P = 0.12 for change in C4 over toxic agents the patients were prescribed after the 6 months
time. IVC, intravenous cyclophosphamide; MMF, mycophenolate trial was at the discretion of the attending nephrologists
mofetil. (Table 4). No one on MMF induction remained on MMF.
Table 3 Activity and chronicity index of renal biopsies at baseline and at 6 months among the 24 patients with follow-up biopsies
Activity index, mean (95% CI) Chronicity index, mean (95% CI)
IVC (n = 11) MMF (n = 13) IVC (n = 11) MMF (n = 13)
Baseline 9.4 9.7 2.4 2.9
(6.2, 12.5) (8.0, 11.4) (1.6, 3.2) (1.7, 4.1)
Follow-up 4.6 3.7 4.4 3.6
(2.5, 6.8) (2.5, 4.9) (3.2, 5.5) (2.9, 4.3)
Change from baseline -4.7* -6.3** 2.0*** 1.0****
(-8.7, -0.7) (-8.2, -4.5) (0.9, 3.1) (-0.1, 2.1)
P-value not signiﬁcant for comparison of activity index and chronicity index between groups at baseline and on the follow-up biopsy. *P = 0.03 for
comparison of baseline and follow-up activity index for the intravenous cyclophosphamide (IVC) group. **P < 0.0001 for comparison of baseline and
follow-up activity index for the mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) group. ***P = 0.003 for comparison of baseline and follow-up chronicity index for the
IVC group. ****P = 0.08 for comparison of baseline and follow-up chronicity index for the MMF group.
MMF in proliferative lupus nephritis 509
Table 4 Main cytotoxic drugs used postinduction (all were on teinuria was more marked in the IVC arm at commence-
prednisolone) ment, 3.0 ± 1.8 g compared with the MMF group
MMF group IVC group 1.8 ± 1.2 g/day (P = 0.02), which may have favoured a
better outcome for the MMF arm.
(n = 19) (n = 25) There is a suggestion that severe lupus nephritis behaves
n % n % differently in various ethnic groups and results might not be
generalized across borders.20 Our results are comparable to
Azathioprine 7 37 11 44
those of Appel.19 In another study from the US with mixed
Cyclosporine 1 5 0 0
ethnic groups, remission with IVC induction was achieved
IVC 5 26 6 24
IVC then azathioprine 1 5 4 16
in 83% of patients.21 Excellent results were reported in
IVC then cyclosporine 1 5 0 0 Chinese patients in the trial by Chan.12 Our cohort of
None 4 21 4 16 patients was heterogenous and half were non-Chinese.
MMF was efﬁcacious with respect to other secondary
IVC, intravenous cyclophosphamide; MMF, mycophenolate mofetil. end-points including activity of urinary sediment, renal
function, haematological parameters and the SLEDAI
index score. This index has been shown to be responsive to
The most common cytotoxics used after 6 months of induc- changes in disease activity.22,23 In the study by Gladman, the
tion therapy were azathioprine (n = 18) or IVC (n = 17). SLEDAI was more sensitive than the Systemic Lupus Activ-
Eight patients were on prednisolone alone and one was on ity Measure (SLAM) or British Isles Lupus Activity Group
cyclosporine. (BILAG) systems in detecting changes in severity of SLE
over time.22 In most trials on the treatment of lupus nephri-
DISCUSSION tis, the outcome was focused on renal end-points. In the
present study, we used the SLEDAI index to evaluate the
The aim of the present study was to demonstrate the efﬁcacy overall effect of the study drugs on SLE activity.
of MMF as an induction therapy for proliferative lupus Our data suggests that a signiﬁcant proportion of
nephritis. Mycophenolate mofetil was an attractive agent patients with lupus nephritis did respond clinically and his-
due to its speciﬁc inhibition of lymphocyte activation and tologically to MMF at 6 months. The histology results
had been shown to be effective in preventing acute rejec- should be interpreted with caution as biopsies were not per-
tion in renal transplant recipients.5 Its efﬁcacy in lupus formed routinely at the end of the treatment period and
nephritis was not established at the time of the study’s only 60% of patients with indications for repeat biopsy had
design. If the target response rate was changed to a higher one done.
percentage than 25% a smaller sample size would have been The short-term adverse event proﬁle of MMF and IVC
needed. We took a more cautious approach with a phase II were similar. Most events were mild and only two patients
trial design and excluded patients with severe renal impair- dropped out due to adverse events. The incidence of gas-
ment. The results may not be applicable to patients with the trointestinal disturbance was not increased with MMF. We
most severe forms of lupus nephritis. did not observe a leucocyte-sparing effect with MMF,
The dose of IVC was the standard one applied at the although the incidence of leucopenia was more common in
time and the mean monthly dose was slightly lower than the the IVC group. This was expected with intermittent boluses
target of 0.75 g/m2. Subsequent to the trial the efﬁcacy of of IVC and showed that adequate dose of the drug was deliv-
lower dose IVC was reported.18 In the present study we ered. The incidence of amenorrhea has been shown to be
achieved a total remission rate of 54.5% (52% with IVC and lower with MMF compared with IVC.19,21 The trial of
58% with MMF) and a complete remission rate of 18.2% 6 months was not designed to study this and a longer follow
(12% with IVC and 26% with MMF) over 6 months. There up would be needed.
has been no uniformly accepted deﬁnition of remission. In MMF provides an addition to our therapeutic armamen-
most studies, remission is a composite of improvement in tarium in treating moderately severe proliferative lupus
proteinuria, urinary sediments and renal function. The lit- nephritis. The cost of MMF would limit its long-term use in
erature differs widely in deﬁning proteinuria. Using 50% developing countries. As yet, no study has been done on the
reduction in proteinuria for partial remission (PR) and pro- cost effectiveness of MMF in the treatment of lupus nephri-
teinuria of less than 500 mg/day for CR, Appel achieved a tis compared with other cytotoxic agents. A possible strat-
PR rate of 20.3% with IVC and 29.6% with MMF and a CR egy is to use MMF for induction and other agents during the
rate of 5.8% and 19.7%, respectively, over 24 weeks.19 An maintenance phase.
earlier randomized controlled study by Chan reported a The medium-term follow-up data (up to 48 months) is
1 year complete remission rate of 81% and 76% with MMF reassuring as patient and kidney survival is more than 90%,
and oral cyclophosphamide for 6 months, respectively, fol- which is in keeping with recent reports.18,21 The protocol
lowed by azathioprine in both groups and a PR rate of 14% was not designed to document relapse rates and adverse
in each group.12 Patients with proteinuria of less than 0.3 g events beyond 6 months. The ﬁrst 6 months of treatment
per day were considered to have CR while patients with PR did not have any effect on the 3–4 year outcome of kidney
had a urinary protein excretion of 0.3–3 g per day. The and patient survival. Beyond 6 months, it was unfortunate
6 month results were not reported. In the present study, pro- that many patients on both arms received IVC as this was
510 LM Ong et al.
the preference of the local investigators. Continuation of 7. Van Bruggen MC, Walgreen B, Rijke TP, Berden JH. Attenuation
long-term MMF therapy was prevented by the high cost of of murine lupus nephritis by mycophenolate mofetil. J. Am. Soc.
the drug. Nephrol. 1998; 9: 1407–15.
8. Jonsson CA, Svensson L, Carlsten H. Beneﬁcial effect of the
In conclusion, we have provided additional evidence
inosine monophosphate dehydrogenase inhibitor mycophenolate
that MMF 2 g/day in conjunction with corticosteroids is an
mofetil on survival and severity of glomerulonephritis in systemic
effective induction therapy for patients with moderately lupus erythematosus (SLE)-prone MRLlpr/lpr mice. Clin. Exp.
severe proliferative lupus nephritis. A larger trial would be Immunol. 1999; 116: 534–41.
required to conﬁrm the therapeutic equivalence of MMF to 9. Dooley MA, Cosio FG, Nachman PH et al. Mycophenolate
IVC. mofetil therapy in lupus nephritis: Clinical observations. J. Am.
Soc. Nephrol. 1999; 10: 833–9.
10. Glicklich D, Acharya A. Mycophenolate mofetil therapy for lupus
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS nephritis refractory to intravenous cyclophosphamide. Am. J. Kid-
ney Dis. 1998; 32: 318–22.
We would like to thank the Director General of Health, 11. Briggs WA, Choi MJ, Scheel PJ Jr. Successful mycophenolate
Ministry of Health Malaysia for permission to publish this mofetil treatment of glomerular disease. Am. J. Kidney Dis. 1998;
paper. We thank Professor Phaik-Leng Cheah, histopathol- 31: 213–17.
ogist, University Malaya Medical Centre for interpreting 12. Chan TM, Li FK, Tang C et al. Efﬁcacy of mycophenolate mofetil
in patients with diffuse proliferative lupus nephritis. N. Engl. J.
the renal biopsies. We thank Roche Malaysia for supplying
Med. 2000; 343: 1156–62.
mycophenolate mofetil for the study. We are indebted to the 13. Tan EM, Cohen AS, Fries J. The 1982 revised criteria for the clas-
staff of the Clinical Research Centre, Kuala Lumpur siﬁcation of systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheum. 1982;
Hospital who managed the trial and provided the study 25: 1271–7.
monitoring, randomization, data management, safety sur- 14. Churg J, Bernstein J, Glassock RJ. Lupus nephritis. In: Churg J,
veillance and biostatistics services. Bernstein J, Glassock RJ, eds. Renal Diseases. Classiﬁcation and
Atlas of Glomerular Diseases. New York: Igaku-Shoin, 1995; 151–6.
15. Bombardier C, Gladman DD, Urowitz MB et al. Derivation of the
REFERENCES SLEDAI. A disease activity index for lupus patients. The Com-
mittee on Prognosis Studies in SLE. Arthritis Rheum. 1992; 35:
1. Golbus J, McCune WJ. Lupus nephritis. Classiﬁcation, prognosis, 630–40.
immunopathogenesis, and treatment. Rheum. Dis. Clin. North 16. Simon R. Optimal two-stage designs for phase II clinical trials.
Am. 1994; 20: 213–42. Control. Clin. Trials. 1989; 10: 1–10.
2. Austin HA 3rd, Klippel JH, Balow JE et al. Therapy of lupus 17. Cockcroft DW, Gault MH. Prediction of creatinine clearance
nephritis. Controlled trial of prednisone and cytotoxic drugs. N. from serum creatinine. Nephron 1976; 16: 31–41.
Engl. J. Med. 1986; 314: 614–19. 18. Houssiau F. Management of lupus nephritis: An update. J. Am.
3. Steinberg AD, Steinberg SC. Long-term preservation of renal Soc. Nephrol. 2004; 15: 2694–704.
function in patients with lupus nephritis receiving treatment that 19. Appel G, Ginzler E, Radhakrishnan J et al. Multicenter controlled
includes cyclophosphamide versus those treated with prednisone trial of mycophenolate mofetil vs intravenous cyclophosphamide
only. Arthritis Rheum. 1991; 34: 945–50. as induction therapy for severe lupus nephritis. J. Am. Soc.
4. Boumpas DT, Austin HA 3rd, Vaughn EM et al. Controlled trial of Nephrol. 2003; 14: 38A.
pulse methylprednisolone versus two regimens of pulse cyclophos- 20. Balow J, Austin H III. Maintenance therapy for lupus nephritis –
phamide in severe lupus nephritis. Lancet 1992; 340: 741–5. something old, something new. N. Engl. J. Med. 2004; 350: 1044–6.
5. Halloran P, Mathew T, Tomlanovich S et al. Mycophenolate 21. Contreras G, Pardo V, Leclerq B et al. Sequential therapies for pro-
mofetil in renal allograft recipients: A pooled efﬁcacy analysis of liferative lupus nephritis. N. Engl. J. Med. 2004; 350: 971–80.
three randomized, double-blind, clinical studies in prevention of 22. Gladman DD, Goldsmith CH, Urowitz MB et al. Sensitivity to
rejection. The International Mycophenolate Mofetil Renal change of 3 systemic lupus erythematosus disease activity indices:
Transplant Study Groups. Transplantation 1997; 63: 39–47. International validation. J. Rheumatol. 1994; 21: 1468–71.
6. Corna D, Morigi M, Facchinetti D et al. Mycophenolate mofetil 23. Fortin PR, Abrahamowicz M, Danoff D. Small changes in outpa-
limits renal damage and prolongs life in murine lupus autoimmune tients lupus activity are better detected by clinical instruments
disease. Kidney Int. 1997; 51: 1583–9. than by laboratory tests. J. Rheumatol. 1995; 22: 2078–83.