Fernández‐Juárez, Gema

Key Points In phospholipase A2 receptor-membranous nephropathy, clinical variables and antibody levels over 3 or 6 months of treatment were predictors of remission at 1 year. Prediction models at 3 and 6 months had similar performance predicting remission, with the 3-month model allowing for earlier assessment of response. The 3-month and 6-month prediction models could be applied in those treated with supportive therapy, rituximab, calcineurin inhibitors, or cyclophosphamide. Background In patients with antiphospholipase A2 receptor antibody–associated membranous nephropathy, there is currently no accepted method to predict an individual's probability of remission after treatment with immunosuppression or supportive therapy using changes in antibody levels and clinical variables during the first 3–6 months of therapy. Methods Using a cohort of 187 patients from the Glomérulopathie extramembraneuse rituximab, Membranous Nephropathy Trial of Rituximab, and Sequential Treatment with Tacrolimus and Rituximab Versus Alternating Corticosteroids and Cyclophosphamide in primary Membranous Nephropathy clinical trials with antibody levels at baseline ≥14 RU/ml, we derived logistic regression models to predict proteinuria remission at 12 months that can be used at baseline or after 3 or 6 months of treatment. Treatment exposures in the trials included supportive therapy, rituximab, calcineurin inhibitors, and cyclophosphamide. Predictors in the models included male sex and baseline and changes in serum albumin, proteinuria, and antibody levels, with or without changes in eGFR. Results Proteinuria remission at 12 months was achieved in 107 patients. Compared with the model at baseline, the 3-month and 6-month models had better model fit with lower Akaike information criterion (186/158 versus 225) and higher R 2 (52.7%/62.4% versus 25.8%), better discrimination with higher C-statistic (0.87 and 0.91 versus 0.75, P < 0.001), and better calibration with lower integrated calibration index (0.89%/2.22% versus 2.51%). The 3-month and 6-month models had no consistent difference in prediction performance, and decision curve analysis demonstrated similar net benefit for treatment decisions based on either model up to a threshold probability of 31%. Prediction performance was similar after internal validation using optimism correction. Prediction performance was maintained within subgroups of different treatment regimens, including supportive therapy, rituximab, calcineurin inhibitors, and cyclophosphamide. Conclusions Either the 3-month or 6-month models can be used in patients with antiphospholipase A2 receptor antibody associated membranous nephropathy after 3 or 6 months of treatment with a variety of immunosuppression or supportive therapy to predict remission status at 12 months.

ABSTRACT Updated guidelines on the management of antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitis (AAV) were released in 2021 by the American College of Rheumatology jointly with the Vasculitis Foundation and, subsequently, in 2022 by the European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology. In addition, in 2021, the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes had released updated recommendations on the treatment of AAV with glomerulonephritis (AAV-GN). Kidney involvement is particularly relevant in microscopic polyangiitis and granulomatosis with polyangiitis, but is less frequent in eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis. The management of AAV-GN has been a focus for drug development and change over the past 10 years. Avoidance of progression to end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) or kidney failure is one of the main unmet needs in the management of AAV, with ESKD having a major impact on morbidity, health costs and mortality risk. Relevant changes in AAV-GN management are related to remission-induction treatment of patients with severe kidney disease, the use of glucocorticoids and avacopan, and remission-maintenance treatment. All the documents provide guidance in accordance with the evidence-based standard of care available at the time of their release. With our work we aim to (i) show the progress made and identify the differences between guidelines and recommendations, (ii) discuss the supporting rationale for those, and (iii) identify gaps in knowledge that could benefit from additional research and should be revised in subsequent updates.