霉酚酸酯对狼疮性肾炎诱导治疗的疗效及安全系统分析的Meta
Meta-Analysis on the Efficacy and Safety of Mycophenolate Mofete in the Induction Therapy of Lupus Nephritis
摘要: 目的:在应用糖皮质激素治疗的基础上,通过与环磷酰胺对比,评价霉酚酸酯对狼疮性肾炎诱导治疗的疗效和安全。方法:通过Cochrance Library、EMBASE、PubMed、中文科技期刊全文数据库(VIP)、中国期刊全文数据库(CNKI)和万方期刊全文数据库查询相关文献,时间均从建库至2020年2月,以纳入及排除标准为依据,获得关于霉酚酸酯对狼疮性肾炎诱导治疗的随机对照试验,汇总疗效指标:临床缓解率(CR + PR)、完全缓解率(CR)和部分缓解率(PR),安全指标:感染、白细胞减少、胃肠道反应(恶心、呕吐及腹泻)、脱发及月经紊乱。结果:共纳入20篇(中文12篇和英文8篇),经Meta分析得出:在临床缓解率[OR = 2.37, 95%CI (1.69~3.33), P < 0.00001]及完全缓解率[OR = 1.83, 95%CI (1.38~2.44), P < 0.0001]方面,MMF组均较高于CTX组,且有统计学意义;但两组的部分缓解率[OR = 1.14, 95%CI (0.90~1.44), P = 0.29],无统计学意义。安全指标:MMF组在感染、脱发、白细胞减少、月经紊乱及恶心、呕吐发生率方面均低于CTX组,结果提示两组差异均具有统计学意义,但在腹泻发生率方面较高。结论:MMF在狼疮性肾炎诱导阶段的治疗效果优于CTX,且不良反应发生率较低。
Abstract: Objective: On the basis of glucocorticoid therapy, the efficacy and safety of mycophenolate in induction therapy of lupus nephritis were evaluated by comparing with cyclophosphamide. Methods: Cochrance Library, PubMed, EMBASE, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), VIP and Wanfang database were screened about mycophenolate mofetil in induction therapy of lupus nephritis, until February 2020. The clinical remission rate (CR + PR), complete remission rate (CR) and partial remission rate (PR) were regarded as curative effect index. Infection, leukopenia, gastrointestinal reactions (nausea, vomiting and diarrhea), alopecia and menstrual disorders were regarded as safety indicators. Results: A total of 20 articles (12 in Chinese and 8 in English) were included. The clinical remission rate [OR = 2.37, 95%CI (1.69 - 3.33), P < 0.00001] and complete remission rate [OR = 1.81, 95%CI (1.43 - 2.28), P < 0.01] in MMF group were higher than those in CTX group, showing statistical significance differences. Safety indicators: The incidence of infection, leukopenia, alopecia, menstrual disorders, nausea and vomiting in MMF group were lower than that in CTX group, indicating statistically significant differences; but being higher than CTX group in the incidence of diarrhea. Conclusion: MMF is better than CTX in the induction therapy of lupus nephritis, and the incidence of adverse reactions is lower.
文章引用:李彦超, 邵晓珊, 张腾飞, 肖邦福, 田琼, 吴琼. 霉酚酸酯对狼疮性肾炎诱导治疗的疗效及安全系统分析的Meta[J]. 临床医学进展, 2020, 10(10): 2291-2301. https://doi.org/10.12677/ACM.2020.1010346

参考文献

[1] 刘瑞华, 余学清. 狼疮肾炎发病机制的研究进展[J]. 中华肾脏病杂志, 2019, 35(12): 950-953.
[2] Almaani, S., Meara, A. and Rovin, B.H. (2017) Update on Lupus Nephritis. Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology, 12, 825-835. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[3] Anders, H.J., Saxena, R., Zhao, M.H., et al. (2020) Lupus Nephritis. Nature Reviews Disease Primers, 6, 25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[4] Hoover, P.J. and Costenbader, K.H. (2016) Insights into the Epidemiology and Management of Lupus Nephritis from the US Rheumatologist’s Perspective. Kidney International, 90, 487-492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[5] Hochberg, M.C. (1997) Updating the American College of Rheumatology Revised Criteria for the Classification of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus. Arthritis & Rheumatology, 40, 1725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[6] Jadad, A.R., Moore, R.A., Carroll, D., et al. (1996) Assessing the Quality of Reports of Randomized Clinical Trials: Is Blinding Necessary? Controlled Clinical Trials, 17, 1-12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[7] 方艳玲. 霉酚酸酯与环磷酰胺治疗狼疮性肾炎效果对比[J]. 临床合理用药杂志, 2018, 11(31): 68-69.
[8] Sedhain, A., Hada, R., Agrawal, R.K., et al. (2018) Low Dose Mycophenolate Mofetil versus Cyclophosphamide in the Induction Therapy of Lupus Nephritis in Nepalese Population: A Randomized Control Trial. BMC Nephrology, 19, Article No. 175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[9] 苗小勇. 霉酚酸酯与间断环磷酰胺静脉冲击疗法治疗弥漫增生型狼疮性肾炎的效果比较[J]. 河南医学研究, 2017, 26(4): 697-698.
[10] 张世杰. 霉酚酸酯与环磷酰胺分别联合激素治疗狼疮性肾炎比较[J]. 中外医疗, 2016, 35(12): 27-29.
[11] 魏欣. 弥漫增生性狼疮性肾炎应用吗替麦考酚酯实施诱导治疗的效果[J]. 医学新知杂志, 2016, 26(2): 116-118.
[12] 秦测. 霉酚酸酯和环磷酰胺治疗Ⅳ型伴Ⅴ型狼疮性肾炎的临床疗效比较[J]. 中国医药科学, 2016, 6(3): 92-94.
[13] Rathi, M., Goyal, A., Jaryal, A., et al. (2016) Comparison of Low-Dose Intravenous Cyclophosphamide with Oral Mycophenolate Mofetil in the Treatment of Lupus Nephritis. Kidney International, 89, 235-242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[14] 张和平, 林玲, 樊雷, 等. 探讨霉酚酸酯与环磷酰胺治疗IV型伴V型狼疮性肾炎的疗效对比[J]. 中国医药指南, 2015, 13(13): 78.
[15] 吕先佑. 霉酚酸酯对比CTX方案治疗狼疮性肾炎Ⅳ型患者的干预效果评价[J]. 医学信息, 2015, 28(50): 194.
[16] 许圣淳, 刘正钊, 章海涛, 等. 吗替麦考酚酯诱导治疗弥漫增生性狼疮性肾炎的临床疗效[J]. 肾脏病与透析肾移植杂志, 2014, 23(6): 512-516+506.
[17] 刘春雅, 姜毅, 汪丽.霉酚酸酯与环磷酰胺治疗难治性狼疮性肾炎的疗效比较[J]. 中国现代医生, 2014, 51(31): 48-50.
[18] 彭少华, 陈婷, 陈勇. 霉酚酸酯与环磷酰胺治疗狼疮性肾炎的疗效及安全性对比研究[J]. 中国全科医学, 2012, 15(15): 1722-1724.
[19] Li, X., Ren, H., Zhang, Q., et al. (2012) Mycophenolate Mofetil or Tacrolimus Compared with Intravenous Cyclophosphamide in the Induction Treatment for Active Lupus Nephritis. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation, 27, 1467-1472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[20] 张延. 霉酚酸酯与环磷酰胺治疗IV型狼疮性肾炎的疗效比较[J]. 现代预防医学, 2011, 38(18): 3842-3844.
[21] 和青松, 张连云, 马海军, 等. 吗替麦考酚酯和环磷酰胺治疗狼疮性肾炎的对照研究[J]. 中国医疗前沿(下半月), 2010, 5(9): 3-4, 58.
[22] El-Shafey, E.M., Abdou, S.H. and Shareef, M.M. (2010) Is Mycophenolate Mofetil Superior to Pulse Intravenous Cyclophosphamide for Induction Therapy of Proliferative Lupus Nephritis in Egyptian Patients? Clinical and Experimental Nephrology, 14, 214-221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[23] Appel, G.B., Contreras, G., Dooley, M.A., et al. (2009) Mycophenolate Mofetil versus Cyclophosphamide for Induction Treatment of Lupus Nephritis. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology, 20, 1103-1112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[24] Wang, J., Hu, W., Xie, H., et al. (2007) Induction Therapies for Class IV Lupus Nephritis with Non-Inflammatory Necrotizing Vasculopathy: Mycophenolate Mofetil or Intravenous Cyclophosphamide. Lupus, 16, 707-712. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[25] Ong, L.M., Hooi, L.S., Lim, T.O., et al, J. (2005) Randomized Controlled Trial of Pulse Intravenous Cyclophosphamide versus Mycophenolate Mofetil in the Induction Therapy of Proliferative Lupus Nephritis. Nephrology (Carlton), 10, 504-510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[26] Ginzler, E.M., Dooley, M.A., Aranow, C., et al. (2005) Mycophenolate Mofetil or Intravenous Cyclophosphamide for Lupus Nephritis. The New England Journal of Medicine, 353, 2219-2228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[27] Kamanamool, N., McEvoy, M., Attia, J., et al. (2010) Efficacy and Adverse Events of Mycophenolate Mofetil versus Cyclophosphamide for Induction Therapy of Lupus Nephritis: Systematic Review and meta-Analysis. Medicine (Baltimore), 89, 227-235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[28] Liu, L.L., Jiang, Y., Wang, L.N., et al. (2012) Efficacy and Safety of Mycophenolate Mofetil versus Cyclophosphamide for Induction Therapy of Lupus Nephritis: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Drugs, 72, 1521-1533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[29] 张任, 杨一菲. 吗替麦考酚酯诱导治疗狼疮性肾炎的Meta分析[J]. 武汉大学学报(医学版), 2015, 36(5): 831-838.
[30] 陈晓青, 苑克晶, 王婉宁, 等. 霉酚酸酯和环磷酰胺诱导治疗狼疮性肾炎的系统评价[J]. 中国老年学杂志, 2015(2): 341-344.
[31] Li, Y.F., Yu, Q., Yu, W.L., et al. (2011) Mycophenolate Mofetil versus Cyclophosphamide in Induction Therapy for Lupus Nephritis: A Systematic Review. Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 11, 826-834.
[32] 段培, 宋霞. 狼疮肾炎患者妊娠时机的评估[J]. 中华肾脏病杂志, 2019, 35(6): 471-475.