Comprehensive Analysis of Clinical Trials Registration for Lupus Nephritis Therapy on ClinicalTrials.gov

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Objective: Clinical trials are the most effective method for evaluating therapeutic strategies. The purpose of this study was to comprehensively assess the characteristics of trials on lupus nephritis (LN) and provide a reference for LN treatment and research.

Methods: Registered therapeutic trials on drug interventions for LN were obtained from ClinicalTrials.gov up to December 3, 2020. The general characteristics, methodological characteristics, detailed characteristics, investigated drugs, eligibility criteria, and outcome measures of these trials were analyzed.

Results: A total of 126 eligible trials were evaluated, and these trials mainly investigated the initial treatment of adult proliferative LN. Half of the trials enrolled <50 participants, and 70.7% of the trials lasted for 6–24 months. In total, 95.2% of trials adopted an interventional study design. Of intervention trials, 56.6% were in phase 2 or phase 3, 76.7% were randomized, 77.5% employed a parallel assignment, and 41.7% were masked. The eligibility criteria and outcome measures of the included trials varied and involved a variety of indicators. Chemical agents and biologics are the most widely studied immunotherapies, of which mycophenolate mofetil, tacrolimus, and rituximab are the most studied. In addition, some trials studied cell transplantation treatment.

Conclusions: The majority of clinical trials for LN therapy registered on ClinicalTrials.gov investigated the initial treatment of adult proliferative LN, and most of these trials were randomized, parallel assigned, and insufficiently masked interventional trials with small scale, short duration, various eligibility criteria, and outcome measures. We hope that more large-scale, long-term multicenter, and high-quality RCT trials with standardized inclusion criteria/exclusion criteria and treatment effect evaluation systems will be conducted and that more energy and funding will be put into exploring biological products and stem cell therapies. In addition, trials for membranous LN, childhood-onset LN, and maintenance phase LN are needed to establish optimal treatment strategies.

Related collections

Most cited references 46

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

New insights into the immunopathogenesis of systemic lupus erythematosus.

George C. Tsokos, Mindy Lo, Ana Patricia Costa Reis … (2016)

The aetiology of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is multifactorial, and includes contributions from the environment, stochastic factors, and genetic susceptibility. Great gains have been made in understanding SLE through the use of genetic variant identification, mouse models, gene expression studies, and epigenetic analyses. Collectively, these studies support the concept that defective clearance of immune complexes and biological waste (such as apoptotic cells), neutrophil extracellular traps, nucleic acid sensing, lymphocyte signalling, and interferon production pathways are all central to loss of tolerance and tissue damage. Increased understanding of the pathogenesis of SLE is driving a renewed interest in targeted therapy, and researchers are now on the verge of developing targeted immunotherapy directed at treating either specific organ system involvement or specific subsets of patients with SLE. Accordingly, this Review places these insights within the context of our current understanding of the pathogenesis of SLE and highlights pathways that are ripe for therapeutic targeting.

0 comments Cited 351 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Blinding in randomised trials: hiding who got what.

Kenneth F Schulz, David A Grimes (2002)

Blinding embodies a rich history spanning over two centuries. Most researchers worldwide understand blinding terminology, but confusion lurks beyond a general comprehension. Terms such as single blind, double blind, and triple blind mean different things to different people. Moreover, many medical researchers confuse blinding with allocation concealment. Such confusion indicates misunderstandings of both. The term blinding refers to keeping trial participants, investigators (usually health-care providers), or assessors (those collecting outcome data) unaware of the assigned intervention, so that they will not be influenced by that knowledge. Blinding usually reduces differential assessment of outcomes (information bias), but can also improve compliance and retention of trial participants while reducing biased supplemental care or treatment (sometimes called co-intervention). Many investigators and readers naïvely consider a randomised trial as high quality simply because it is double blind, as if double-blinding is the sine qua non of a randomised controlled trial. Although double blinding (blinding investigators, participants, and outcome assessors) indicates a strong design, trials that are not double blinded should not automatically be deemed inferior. Rather than solely relying on terminology like double blinding, researchers should explicitly state who was blinded, and how. We recommend placing greater credence in results when investigators at least blind outcome assessments, except with objective outcomes, such as death, which leave little room for bias. If investigators properly report their blinding efforts, readers can judge them. Unfortunately, many articles do not contain proper reporting. If an article claims blinding without any accompanying clarification, readers should remain sceptical about its effect on bias reduction.

0 comments Cited 231 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

2019 Update of the Joint European League Against Rheumatism and European Renal Association–European Dialysis and Transplant Association (EULAR/ERA–EDTA) recommendations for the management of lupus nephritis

Antonis Fanouriakis, Myrto Kostopoulou, Kim Cheema … (2020)

Objective To update the 2012 EULAR/ERA–EDTA recommendations for the management of lupus nephritis (LN). Methods Following the EULAR standardised operating procedures, a systematic literature review was performed. Members of a multidisciplinary Task Force voted independently on their level of agreeement with the formed statements. Results The changes include recommendations for treatment targets, use of glucocorticoids and calcineurin inhibitors (CNIs) and management of end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). The target of therapy is complete response (proteinuria <0.5–0.7 g/24 hours with (near-)normal glomerular filtration rate) by 12 months, but this can be extended in patients with baseline nephrotic-range proteinuria. Hydroxychloroquine is recommended with regular ophthalmological monitoring. In active proliferative LN, initial (induction) treatment with mycophenolate mofetil (MMF 2–3 g/day or mycophenolic acid (MPA) at equivalent dose) or low-dose intravenous cyclophosphamide (CY; 500 mg × 6 biweekly doses), both combined with glucocorticoids (pulses of intravenous methylprednisolone, then oral prednisone 0.3–0.5 mg/kg/day) is recommended. MMF/CNI (especially tacrolimus) combination and high-dose CY are alternatives, for patients with nephrotic-range proteinuria and adverse prognostic factors. Subsequent long-term maintenance treatment with MMF or azathioprine should follow, with no or low-dose (<7.5 mg/day) glucocorticoids. The choice of agent depends on the initial regimen and plans for pregnancy. In non-responding disease, switch of induction regimens or rituximab are recommended. In pure membranous LN with nephrotic-range proteinuria or proteinuria >1 g/24 hours despite renin–angiotensin–aldosterone blockade, MMF in combination with glucocorticoids is preferred. Assessment for kidney and extra-renal disease activity, and management of comorbidities is lifelong with repeat kidney biopsy in cases of incomplete response or nephritic flares. In ESKD, transplantation is the preferred kidney replacement option with immunosuppression guided by transplant protocols and/or extra-renal manifestations. Treatment of LN in children follows the same principles as adult disease. Conclusions We have updated the EULAR recommendations for the management of LN to facilitate homogenization of patient care.

0 comments Cited 222 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Contributors

Yanfang Gao: URI : http://loop.frontiersin.org/people/1209846/overview

Xiaoshuang Zhou: URI : http://loop.frontiersin.org/people/1285125/overview

Journal

Journal ID (nlm-ta): Front Med (Lausanne)

Journal ID (iso-abbrev): Front Med (Lausanne)

Journal ID (publisher-id): Front. Med.

Title: Frontiers in Medicine

Publisher: Frontiers Media S.A.

ISSN (Electronic): 2296-858X

Publication date (Electronic): 17 June 2021

Publication date Collection: 2021

Volume: 8

Electronic Location Identifier: 680302

Affiliations

[1] ¹Shanxi Medical University , Taiyuan, China

[2] ²Department of Nephrology, The Affiliated People's Hospital of Shanxi Medical University, Shanxi Provincial People's Hospital, Shanxi Kidney Disease Institute , Taiyuan, China

Author notes

Edited by: Ying Tan, Peking University First Hospital, China

Reviewed by: Dongdong Wang, Xuzhou Medical University, China; Ryota Sakai, Saitama Medical University, Japan

*Correspondence: Rongshan Li rongshanli@ 123456126.com

Xiaoshuang Zhou xiaoshuangzhou66@ 123456163.com

This article was submitted to Nephrology, a section of the journal Frontiers in Medicine

Article

DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2021.680302

PMC ID: 8248800

PubMed ID: 34222288

SO-VID: 91a1f8a0-361c-4e52-bf9f-4bf090761564

License:

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

History

Date received : 27 March 2021

Date accepted : 19 May 2021

Page count

Figures: 4, Tables: 3, Equations: 0, References: 46, Pages: 12, Words: 7275

Comments

Comment on this article

scite_

Cited by 4

See all cited by

Most referenced authors 961

See all reference authors

Comprehensive Analysis of Clinical Trials Registration for Lupus Nephritis Therapy on ClinicalTrials.gov

Read this article at

Abstract

Related collections

iGEM

Most cited references 46

New insights into the immunopathogenesis of systemic lupus erythematosus.

Blinding in randomised trials: hiding who got what.

2019 Update of the Joint European League Against Rheumatism and European Renal Association–European Dialysis and Transplant Association (EULAR/ERA–EDTA) recommendations for the management of lupus nephritis

Author and article information

Contributors

Journal

Affiliations

Author notes

Article

History

Page count

Categories

Comments

Comment on this article

Similar content 136

Cited by 4

Most referenced authors 961