Methotrexate for juvenile idiopathic arthritis.

BACKGROUND: Juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) is the most common rheumatic disease in childhood. Methotrexate has broad immunomodulatory properties and is the most commonly used disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD). This is an update of a 2001 Cochrane review. It supports a living guideline for children and young people with JIA. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of methotrexate for children and young people with juvenile idiopathic arthritis. SEARCH METHODS: The Australian JIA Living Guideline Working Group created a registry of all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of JIA by searching CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and trials registries. The date of the most recent search of online databases was 1 February 2023. SELECTION CRITERIA: We searched for RCTs that compared methotrexate with placebo, no treatment, or another DMARD (with or without concomitant therapies) in children and young people (aged up to 18 years) with JIA. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. The main comparison was methotrexate versus placebo. Our outcomes were treatment response, sustained clinically inactive disease, function, pain, participant global assessment of well-being, serious adverse events, and withdrawals due to adverse events. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome. MAIN RESULTS: We identified three new trials in this update, bringing the total number of included RCTs to five (575 participants). Three trials evaluated oral methotrexate versus placebo, one evaluated methotrexate plus intra-articular glucocorticoid (IAGC) therapy versus IAGC therapy alone, and one evaluated methotrexate versus leflunomide. Doses of methotrexate ranged from 5 mg/m2/week to 15 mg/m2/week in four trials, and participants in the methotrexate group of the remaining trial received 0.5 mg/kg/week. Trial size varied from 31 to 226 participants. The average age of participants ranged from four to 10 years. Most participants were females and most had nonsystemic JIA. The study that evaluated methotrexate plus IAGC therapy versus IAGC therapy alone recruited children and young people with the oligoarticular disease subtype of JIA. Two placebo-controlled trials and the trial of methotrexate versus leflunomide were adequately randomised and blinded, and likely not susceptible to important biases. One placebo-controlled trial may have been susceptible to selection bias due to lack of adequate reporting of randomisation methods. The trial investigating the addition of methotrexate to IAGC therapy was susceptible to performance and detection biases. Methotrexate versus placebo Methotrexate compared with placebo may increase the number of children and young people who achieve treatment response up to six months (absolute difference of 163 more per 1000 people; risk ratio (RR) 1.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.21 to 2.31; I2 = 0%; 3 trials, 328 participants; low-certainty evidence). However, methotrexate compared with placebo may have little or no effect on pain as measured on an increasing scale of 0 to 100 (mean difference (MD) -1.10 points, 95% CI -9.09 to 6.88; 1 trial, 114 participants), improvement in participant global assessment of well-being (absolute difference of 92 more per 1000 people; RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.72; 1 trial, 176 participants), occurrence of serious adverse events (absolute difference of 5 fewer per 1000 people; RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.04 to 8.97; 3 trials, 328 participants), and withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 3.46, 95% CI 0.60 to 19.79; 3 trials, 328 participants) up to six months. We could not estimate the absolute difference for withdrawals due to adverse events because there were no withdrawals in the placebo group. All outcomes were reported within six months of randomisation. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence to low for all outcomes due to indirectness (suboptimal dosing of methotrexate and diverse outcome measures) and imprecision (few participants and low event rates). No trials reported function or the number of participants with sustained clinically inactive disease. Serious adverse events included liver derangement, abdominal pain, and inadvertent overdose. Methotrexate plus intra-articular corticosteroid therapy versus intra-articular corticosteroid therapy alone Methotrexate plus IAGC therapy compared with IAGC therapy alone may have little or no effect on the probability of sustained clinically inactive disease or the rate of withdrawals due to adverse events up to 12 months in children and young people with the oligoarticular subtype of JIA (low-certainty evidence). We could not calculate the absolute difference in withdrawals due to adverse events because there were no withdrawals in the control group. We are uncertain if there is any difference between the interventions in the risk of severe adverse events, because none were reported. The study did not report treatment response, function, pain, or participant global assessment of well-being. Methotrexate versus an alternative disease-modifying antirheumatic drug Methotrexate compared with leflunomide may have little or no effect on the probability of treatment response or on function, participant global assessment of well-being, risk of serious adverse events, and rate of withdrawals due to adverse events up to four months. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence for all outcomes to low due to imprecision. The study did not report pain or sustained clinically inactive disease. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Oral methotrexate (5 mg/m2/week to 15 mg/m2/week) compared with placebo may increase the number of children and young people achieving treatment response but may have little or no effect on pain or participant global assessment of well-being. Oral methotrexate plus IAGC injections compared to IAGC injections alone may have little or no effect on the likelihood of sustained clinically inactive disease among children and young people with oligoarticular JIA. Similarly, methotrexate compared with leflunomide may have little or no effect on treatment response, function, and participant global assessment of well-being. Serious adverse events due to methotrexate appear to be rare. We will update this review as new evidence becomes available to inform the living guideline.

Efficacy and safety of low-dose corticosteroids combined with leflunomide for progressive IgA nephropathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The effectiveness of immunosuppressive and corticosteroid treatments for Immunoglobulin A (IgA) nephropathy (IgAN) remains thoroughly evaluated. We undertook a meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy and safety of low-dose corticosteroids plus leflunomide for progressive IgA nephropathy. METHODS: Eligible studies were obtained from PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases. We also searched the references of the included studies. Our protocol followed the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) checklist. Eligibility criteria were defined using a PICOS framework. RESULTS: Our study included three articles presenting 342 patient cases. Findings revealed that low-dose corticosteroids combined with the leflunomide group were effective in relieving urine protein excretion (UPE) [mean difference (MD) = -0.35, 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.41 to -0.30, P < 0.00001] compared with the full-dose corticosteroids group. Regarding serum creatinine (SCr), estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), complete remission rate, and overall response rate, there was no difference between the groups (p > 0.05). Regarding safety, low-dose corticosteroids combined with leflunomide significantly reduced the risk of serious adverse events [odds ratio (OR): 0.11, 95% CI: 0.01 to 0.91, P = 0.04]. Besides, no significant differences were observed between the two groups in the incidence of respiratory infection, abnormal liver function, diarrhea, herpes zoster, alopecia, pruritus, insomnia, pneumonia, diabetes, and urinary tract infection (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Low-dose corticosteroids combined with leflunomide are a safe and effective treatment for progressive IgA nephropathy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The PROSPERO registration number is CRD42022361883.

Comparison of outcomes of azathioprine, leflunomide and allergen avoidance in patients with patch test-positive pigmented contact dermatitis: a randomized comparative study.

BACKGROUND: Pigmented contact dermatitis (PCD) is a noneczematous form of allergic contact dermatitis characterized by dermal hyperpigmentation. Allergen avoidance is the cornerstone of therapy, but it is difficult to achieve. The use of immunosuppressives seems rational, but data are lacking. OBJECTIVES: To compare outcomes with azathioprine (AZA), leflunomide and allergen avoidance (AA) in patients with PCD. METHODS: A comparative study was conducted on 28 patients with patch test-positive PCD who were randomly allocated to one of three treatment groups: AZA 2 mg kg-1 daily for 24 weeks + AA (n = 10); leflunomide (LEF) 20 mg daily for 24 weeks + -AA (n = 8); AA alone (n = 10). Patients were followed up for an additional 24 weeks. The Dermal Pigmentation Area and Severity Index (DPASI) score and Hindi Melasma Quality of Life scale (MELASQOL) were used to assess hyperpigmentation and quality of life (QoL). respectively. RESULTS: Hair colorants (n = 12) and paraphenylenediamine (n = 8) were the most common allergens. Mean (SD) DPASI score decreased from 30.97 (3.69), 32.35 (3.90) and 31.86 (3.47) to 13.78 (4.25), 21.67 (2.99) and 20.64 (3.82) at 48 weeks in the three groups, respectively (P < 0.001); the maximum percentage decline was seen with AZA (56%). Mean (SD) MELASQOL score was reduced in the three treatment groups from 48.0 (6.46), 46.75 (3.69) and 46.6 (4.65) to 19.6 (6.98), 24.5 (5.80) and 24.0 (5.49), respectively, at 48 weeks (P < 0.001). Reductions in DPASI and Hindi MELASQOL scores were significantly correlated. The most frequent adverse event was transaminitis in both the AZA and LEF groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients on AZA achieved a statistically significantly greater reduction in DPASI and MELASQOL score; therefore, AZA may fulfil an unmet need in PCD treatment. An objective reduction in hyperpigmentation was paralleled by an improvement in QoL score, reiterating the need for active management of this disease.

Rhabdomyolysis and acute kidney injury potentiated by a drug-drug interaction between cyclosporine, leflunomide, and rosuvastatin in a kidney transplant recipient: A missed opportunity for pharmacist involvement.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to describe a case of rhabdomyolysis and acute kidney injury potentiated by a drug-drug interaction (DDI) between cyclosporine, leflunomide, and rosuvastatin in a kidney transplant recipient. CASE SUMMARY: A 74-year-old male with end-stage kidney disease secondary to type 2 diabetes mellitus and hypertension received a deceased by cardiac death kidney transplant. The patient's medical history included coronary artery disease and hyperlipidemia for which he was receiving rosuvastatin 40 mg daily. Five months after transplant, the patient developed BK viremia, which required multiple changes in immunosuppression and resulted in the initiation of leflunomide and cyclosporine modified. The patient used multiple pharmacies and coupon cards that delayed the identification of the DDIs between leflunomide, cyclosporine, and rosuvastatin. Approximately, 13 months after transplant, the biopsy report of the patient's allograft kidney showed acute cellular rejection Banff IB, hypertensive changes, and transplant glomerulopathy. This prompted the patient to receive a 3-day course of methylprednisolone 250 mg intravenous at the outpatient infusion center. Two weeks later, the patient presented to the transplant clinic with lightheadedness, dizziness, weakness, fatigue, bilateral eye drainage, and a decrease in appetite and was admitted to the hospital for further workup. On admission, creatine kinase was 2080 IU/L with myoglobin of 7601 ng/mL. The patient's diagnosis was statin myopathy with possible rhabdomyolysis acute kidney injury. Likely contributing factors included cyclosporine, leflunomide, and rosuvastatin DDI and administration of high-dose methylprednisolone. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: This case demonstrates the importance of pharmacist involvement throughout all phases of care in a kidney transplant recipient.

Subacute cutaneous lupus erythematosus as a rare complication of disease-modifying therapy administration in multiple sclerosis: case report.

BACKGROUND: Teriflunomide, the active metabolite of leflunomide, is a disease-modifying therapy drug used for the treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS), yet the complications associated with this drug remain not fully understood. Here we present the rare case of a 28-year-old female MS patient who developed subacute cutaneous lupus erythematosus (SCLE) following teriflunomide treatment. Though SCLE has been reported to be associated with leflunomide, the current report represents the first documented evidence demonstrating SCLE as a potential teriflunomide treatment-related complication. Additionally, a literature review on the leflunomide-induced SCLE was conducted to emphasize the association of SCLE with teriflunomide, specifically amongst the female demographic with a preexisting autoimmune diathesis. CASE PRESENTATION: A 28-year-old female first presented with MS symptoms in the left upper limb along with blurred vision in the left eye. Medical and family histories were unremarkable. The patient exhibited positive serum biomarkers including ANA, Ro/SSA, La/SSB, and Ro-52 antibodies. Relapsing-remitting MS was diagnosed according to the 2017 McDonald's diagnostic criteria, and remission was achieved upon intravenous administration of methylprednisolone followed by teriflunomide sequential therapy. Three months post-teriflunomide treatment, the patient developed multiple facial cutaneous lesions. SCLE was subsequently diagnosed and was attributed to treatment-related complication. Interventions include oral administration of hydroxychloroquine and tofacitinib citrate effectively resolved cutaneous lesions. Discontinuation of hydroxychloroquine and tofacitinib citrate treatment led to recurring SCLE symptoms under continuous teriflunomide treatment. Full remission of facial annular plaques was achieved after re-treatment with hydroxychloroquine and tofacitinib citrate. The patient's clinical condition remained stable in long-term outpatient follow-ups. CONCLUSIONS: As teriflunomide has become a standard disease-modifying therapy for MS, the current case report highlights the importance of monitoring treatment-related complications, specifically in relation to SCLE symptoms.

Leflunomide-induced liver injury: Differences in characteristics and outcomes in Indian and US registries.

BACKGROUND: Leflunomide, a disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, has been associated with elevations of serum aminotransferases. Herein, we describe the clinical, laboratory features and outcomes of 17 patients with leflunomide/teriflunomide hepatotoxicity from two large drug-induced liver injury (DILI) registries. METHODS: Consecutive, adjudicated cases of leflunomide (n = 16)-or teriflunomide (n = 1)-related DILI from a single centre in Bangalore, India and the multicentre US Drug-Induced Liver Injury Network (DILIN) were reviewed. RESULTS: Nine (0.8%) of the 1070 Indian patients and 8 (0.5%) of the 1400 DILIN patients fulfilled the criteria for DILI because of leflunomide- or teriflunomide. 89% of the Indian cases were women and all were associated with severe cutaneous adverse reaction (SCAR) and a median drug latency of 49 days, whereas 37.5% of the DILIN cases were female, none exhibited SCAR and the median drug latency was 166 days. Hepatocellular injury (70%) was more common in women than men (92% vs. 20%) and was associated with younger mean age (41 vs. 59 years), higher peak INR (2.3 vs. 1.2) and higher mortality (58% vs. 0%). Mortality was observed in six patients from India (2 of the three with myocarditis) and one received liver transplantation from the USA. CONCLUSION: Leflunomide-induced liver injury is predominantly hepatocellular. Leflunomide hepatotoxicity is more likely accompanied by SCAR, a short latency and a higher mortality in the Indian cohort, with a predominance of females, compared to US DILIN patients. The differences in skin involvement, immunoallergic features and outcomes among subjects from India vs. the USA suggest that genetic or environmental factors are important in the pathogenesis of liver injury.

Comparison between leflunomide and sulfasalazine based triple therapy in methotrexate refractory rheumatoid arthritis: an open-label, non-inferiority randomized controlled trial.

To compare efficacy and safety of two different combination csDMARD therapy in Methotrexate-failed Rheumatoid arthritis patients. In this 24-week open-label, parallel-group non-inferiority, single-center clinical trial, Methotrexate-failed Rheumatoid arthritis patients with disease duration < 2 years, were randomized to either of the two treatment regimens-Methotrexate + Leflunomide + Hydroxychloroquine or Methotrexate + Sulfasalazine + Hydroxychloroquine. Primary endpoint was proportion of patients achieving EULAR good response at 12 weeks. Non-inferiority of Leflunomide based therapy was confirmed if the upper limit of the 2-sided 95% confidence interval of treatment difference between the 2 groups was lower than the selected non-inferiority margin of (- 20%) in primary endpoint at 12 weeks. Secondary endpoints were improvement in DAS28, functional outcome and adverse events at 24 weeks. 136 eligible patients were randomized to either Leflunomide or Sulfasalazine group (68 in each group).63 and 59 patients in Leflunomide and 66 and 61 patients in Sulfasalazine group completed 12 and 24 weeks of trial, respectively. In Intension-to-treat analysis, EULAR good response was achieved by 58.8% and 54.4% patients (p = 0.7) at the end of 12 weeks, and 61.7% and 64.7% patients (p = 0.8) at the end of 24 weeks-in Leflunomide and Sulfasalazine group respectively. At 12 weeks, the difference in EULAR good response with 2-sided 95% confidence interval between 2 groups was 4.4% (- 12%, 20%) in intention-to-treat and 5.8% (- 11%, 23%) in perprotocol analysis.15 and 21 adverse events were recorded in Leflunomide and Sulfasalazine group respectively. Parenteral Methotrexate was required more in Sulfasalazine group due to gastrointestinal intolerance. Leflunomide based csDMARD therapy is non-inferior to Sulfasalazine based csDMARD therapy in Methotrexate-failed Rheumatoid arthritis patients with comparable safety profile. Trial registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02930343) dated 10.09.2016.

Efficacy and safety of leflunomide combined with corticosteroids for the treatment of IgA nephropathy: a Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the efficacy and safety of leflunomide combined with corticosteroids, compared with corticosteroids alone, for IgA nephropathy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Studies were retrieved by searching of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane's Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Wanfang databases on 11 October 2021. A random-effect model incorporating the heterogeneity was used to pool the results. The efficacy outcomes included the complete remission rate of proteinuria, overall response rate (the combined rates of patients with complete and partial remission of proteinuria), changes of urine protein excretion (UPE), serum creatinine (SCr), and estimated glomerular infiltrating rate (eGFR). RESULTS: Nineteen studies were included. Patients receiving the combined therapy had a higher complete remission rate (relative risk [RR]: 1.29, 95% CI: 1.08-1.55, p = 0.006; I2 = 0%) and overall response rate (RR: 1.18, 95% CI: 1.10-1.26, p < 0.001, I2 = 0%) compared to patients who received CS alone. Besides, combined therapy was associated with significantly reduced levels of UPE (mean difference [MD]: -0.30 g/24h, 95% CI: -0.43 to -0.16, p < 0.001; I2 = 34%) and SCr (MD: -7.55 mmol/L, 95% CI: -11.06 to -4.04, p < 0.001; I2 = 34%), and increased level of eGFR (MD: 6.51 mL/min/1.73 m2, 95% CI: 4.06-8.97, p < 0.001; I2 = 0%). The incidence of adverse events was not significantly different. CONCLUSIONS: Combined treatment with leflunomide and corticosteroids was more effective than corticosteroids alone for patients with IgA nephropathy.

Rituximab plus leflunomide in rheumatoid arthritis: a randomized, placebo-controlled, investigator-initiated clinical trial (AMARA study).

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the efficacy and safety of rituximab + LEF in patients with RA. METHODS: In this investigator-initiated, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial, patients with an inadequate response to LEF who had failed one or more DMARD were randomly assigned 2:1 to i.v. rituximab 1000 mg or placebo on day 1 and 15 plus ongoing oral LEF. The primary efficacy outcome was the difference between ≥50% improvement in ACR criteria (ACR50 response) rates at week 24 (P ≤ 0.025). Secondary endpoints included ACR20/70 responses, ACR50 responses at earlier timepoints and adverse event (AE) rates. The planned sample size was not achieved due to events beyond the investigators' control. RESULTS: Between 13 August 2010 and 28 January 2015, 140 patients received rituximab (n = 93) or placebo (n = 47) plus ongoing LEF. Rituximab + LEF resulted in an increase in the ACR50 response rate that was significant at week 16 (32 vs 15%; P = 0.020), but not week 24 (27 vs 15%; P = 0.081), the primary endpoint. Significant differences favouring the rituximab + LEF arm were observed in some secondary endpoints, including ACR20 rates from weeks 12 to 24. The rituximab and placebo arms had similar AE rates (71 vs 70%), but the rituximab arm had a higher rate of serious AEs (SAEs 20 vs 2%), primarily infections and musculoskeletal disorders. CONCLUSION: The primary endpoint was not reached, but rituximab + LEF demonstrated clinical benefits vs LEF in secondary endpoints. Although generally well tolerated, the combination was associated with additional SAEs and requires monitoring. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT: 2009-015950-39; ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01244958.

Efficacy of leflunomide in the treatment of vasculitis.

OBJECTIVES: Only a few small case series, case reports, and one small clinical trial suggested some benefit of leflunomide (LEF) in anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitis and other vasculitides. We analysed the clinical efficacy and tolerability of LEF in a large cohort of patients with various vasculitides. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of patients who received LEF for treatment of their vasculitis enrolled in the Vasculitis Clinical Research Consortium (VCRC) Longitudinal Study and in 3 additional centres from the Canadian vasculitis research network (CanVasc). RESULTS: Data for 93 patients were analysed: 45 had granulomatosis with polyangiitis (GPA), 8 microscopic polyangiitis (MPA), 12 eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA), 14 giant-cell arteritis (GCA), 9 Takayasu's arteritis (TAK), and 5 polyarteritis nodosa (PAN). The main reason for initiation of LEF was active disease (89%). LEF was efficacious for remission induction or maintenance at 6 months for 62 (67%) patients (64% with GCA, 89% with TAK, 80% with PAN, 69% with GPA, 75% with MPA, 33% with EGPA); 20% discontinued LEF before achieving remission because of persistent disease activity. Overall, 22 adverse events (gastrointestinal symptoms being the most common) led to drug discontinuation in 18 (19%) patients, of which 12 stopped LEF before month 6, before showing any benefit in 8/12 of these patients. CONCLUSIONS: Leflunomide can be an effective therapeutic option for various vasculitides, especially for non-severe refractory or relapsing ANCA-associated vasculitis or large-vessel vasculitis. No new safety signals for LEF were identified in this population.

Clinical efficacy and safety of full-dose versus half-dose corticosteroids plus leflunomide for IgA nephropathy.

BACKGROUND: The results of leflunomide (LEF) in patients with IgA nephropathy (IgAN) were inconsistent. METHODS: A total of 149 kidney biopsy-confirmed IgAN patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) ≥ 50 ml/min/1.73 m2 and protein excretion levels ≥0.75 g/d were enrolled, with 65 subjects receiving half-dose CS plus LEF (LEF group), and the 84 counterpart patients accepting full-dose corticosteroid (Full CS group). The primary outcomes included the complete remission (CR) rates and incidence of adverse events (AEs). The secondary outcomes were the overall remission (OR) rates and a combined event (eGFR reduced ≥30%, end-stage renal disease [ESRD], hemodialysis, peritoneal dialysis or kidney transplantation). RESULTS: During the 18 months of follow-up, the CR rates were 72 and 64% in the LEF and Full CS groups (P = 0.299), respectively. The proportion of patients with OR rates in the LEF group and Full CS group was 89% versus 75%, respectively (P = 0.027). Serious AEs were observed only in the Full CS group (P = 0.017). The incidences of total AEs (P = 0.036) and infections (P = 0.024) were lower in the LEF group than in the Full CS group. CONCLUSIONS: LEF combined with half-dose CS is superior to full-dose CS in the treatment of IgAN.

Immunosuppressive agents for treating IgA nephropathy.

BACKGROUND: IgA nephropathy is the most common glomerulonephritis world-wide. IgA nephropathy causes end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) in 15% to 20% of affected patients within 10 years and in 30% to 40% of patients within 20 years from the onset of disease. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2003 and updated in 2015. OBJECTIVES: To determine the benefits and harms of immunosuppression strategies for the treatment of IgA nephropathy. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 9 September 2019 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs of treatment for IgA nephropathy in adults and children and that compared immunosuppressive agents with placebo, no treatment, or other immunosuppressive or non-immunosuppressive agents. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed study risk of bias and extracted data. Estimates of treatment effect were summarised using random effects meta-analysis. Treatment effects were expressed as relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD) and 95% CI for continuous outcomes. Risks of bias were assessed using the Cochrane tool. Evidence certainty was evaluated using GRADE methodology. MAIN RESULTS: Fifty-eight studies involving 3933 randomised participants were included. Six studies involving children were eligible. Disease characteristics (kidney function and level of proteinuria) were heterogeneous across studies. Studies evaluating steroid therapy generally included patients with protein excretion of 1 g/day or more. Risk of bias within the included studies was generally high or unclear for many of the assessed methodological domains. In patients with IgA nephropathy and proteinuria > 1 g/day, steroid therapy given for generally two to four months with a tapering course probably prevents the progression to ESKD compared to placebo or standard care (8 studies; 741 participants: RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.65; moderate certainty evidence). Steroid therapy may induce complete remission (4 studies, 305 participants: RR 1.76, 95% CI 1.03 to 3.01; low certainty evidence), prevent doubling of serum creatinine (SCr) (7 studies, 404 participants: RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.65; low certainty evidence), and may lower urinary protein excretion (10 studies, 705 participants: MD -0.58 g/24 h, 95% CI -0.84 to -0.33;low certainty evidence). Steroid therapy had uncertain effects on glomerular filtration rate (GFR), death, infection and malignancy. The risk of adverse events with steroid therapy was uncertain due to heterogeneity in the type of steroid treatment used and the rarity of events. Cytotoxic agents (azathioprine (AZA) or cyclophosphamide (CPA) alone or with concomitant steroid therapy had uncertain effects on ESKD (7 studies, 463 participants: RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.20; low certainty evidence), complete remission (5 studies; 381 participants: RR 1.47, 95% CI 0.94 to 2.30; very low certainty evidence), GFR (any measure), and protein excretion. Doubling of serum creatinine was not reported. Mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) had uncertain effects on the progression to ESKD, complete remission, doubling of SCr, GFR, protein excretion, infection, and malignancy. Death was not reported. Calcineurin inhibitors compared with placebo or standard care had uncertain effects on complete remission, SCr, GFR, protein excretion, infection, and malignancy. ESKD and death were not reported. Mizoribine administered with renin-angiotensin system inhibitor treatment had uncertain effects on progression to ESKD, complete remission, GFR, protein excretion, infection, and malignancy. Death and SCr were not reported. Leflunomide followed by a tapering course with oral prednisone compared to prednisone had uncertain effects on the progression to ESKD, complete remission, doubling of SCr, GFR, protein excretion, and infection. Death and malignancy were not reported. Effects of other immunosuppressive regimens (including steroid plus non-immunosuppressive agents or mTOR inhibitors) were inconclusive primarily due to insufficient data from the individual studies in low or very low certainty evidence. The effects of treatments on death, malignancy, reduction in GFR at least of 25% and adverse events were very uncertain. Subgroup analyses to determine the impact of specific patient characteristics such as ethnicity or disease severity on treatment effectiveness were not possible. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In moderate certainty evidence, corticosteroid therapy probably prevents decline in GFR or doubling of SCr in adults and children with IgA nephropathy and proteinuria. Evidence for treatment effects of immunosuppressive agents on death, infection, and malignancy is generally sparse or low-quality. Steroid therapy has uncertain adverse effects due to a paucity of studies. Available studies are few, small, have high risk of bias and generally do not systematically identify treatment-related harms. Subgroup analyses to identify specific patient characteristics that might predict better response to therapy were not possible due to a lack of studies. There is no evidence that other immunosuppressive agents including CPA, AZA, or MMF improve clinical outcomes in IgA nephropathy.

Efficacy of leflunomide combined with prednisone for the treatment of PLA2R-associated primary membranous nephropathy.

Objective: To evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of leflunomide (LEF) combined with prednisone for the treatment of PLA2R-associated primary membranous nephropathy (PMN) and changes in anti-PLA2R antibody titers after treatment.Methods: Sixty patients with nephrotic syndrome, biopsy-proven MN and anti-PLA2R antibody positivity were included in this study conducted from December 2017 to February 2019. The patients were randomly divided into an experimental group (n = 30) and a control group (n = 30). The patients in the experimental group were treated with LEF combined with prednisone, whereas the patients in the control group were treated with cyclophosphamide (CTX) combined with prednisone. We assessed 24-h urinary protein and serum albumin levels, kidney function markers, blood lipid levels and anti-PLA2R antibody titers before and after treatment. Adverse reactions during treatment were recorded.Results: After 16 weeks of treatment, there were 2 cases of complete remission and 6 cases of partial remission in the experimental group, with a total effective rate of 26.67%. In the control group, there were 4 cases of complete remission and 8 cases of partial remission, with a total effective rate of 40% (p > .05). After 24 weeks of treatment, the total effective rates of the experimental and control groups were 66.67% and 76.67%, respectively (p > .05). There were no significant differences in 24-h urinary protein, serum albumin, kidney function marker or blood lipid levels between the two groups after treatment (p > .05). However, there were fewer adverse reactions in the experimental group than in the control group (p < .05). After treatment, serum anti-PLA2R antibody titers were clearly decreased in patients with complete remission and partial remission (p < .05), but these levels remained relatively high in patients without remission (p > .05).Conclusion: LEF combined with prednisone has a certain efficacy for the treatment of PLA2R-associated PMN and provokes few adverse reactions. A large-sample randomized double-blind controlled study with a long follow-up period is needed to verify the efficacy of LEF combined with prednisone.

Leflunomide treatment in juvenile idiopathic arthritis.

Juvenile idiopathic arthritis is the most common chronic rheumatic disease of childhood resulting in disability in untreated cases. Disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs form the first-line treatment in JIA. However, the data about leflunomide (LFN) in treatment of JIA is limited. We reviewed the medical files of JIA patients who were followed-up regularly and had received LFN. A total of 38 patients were included to the study. Among them, 24 had oligoarticular JIA, eleven had polyarticular JIA, two had ERA and one had psoriatic arthritis. 36 were initially treated with methotrexate and two patients diagnosed with ERA were treated with sulfasalazine. Sulfasalazine treatment was switched to LFN due to inadequate response at the 3rd month of therapy. Methotrexate was ceased due to gastrointestinal intolerance in 36 patients. Of these 36 patients, 19 patients had either low disease activity (n = 13) or remission (n = 6). LFN was administered to 13 patients with low disease activity. During the follow-up of the six patients in remission, relapse ensued and LFN treatment was started. The remaining 17 patients had moderate (n = 10) or high (n = 7) disease activity requiring biologic agents. But due to inadequate response to biologic agents, LFN was added to the therapy. All of the patients were clinically inactive at the last visit. Only two adverse events resolving within 2 weeks were noted (Lymphopenia = 1, elevated liver enzymes = 1). LFN may be an alternative therapy in case of MTX intolerance or toxicity.

Leflunomide use during pregnancy and the risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: Leflunomide is known to be embryotoxic and teratogenic in rodents. However, there is less evidence in humans. We quantified the risk of major congenital malformation (MCM), prematurity, low birth weight (LBW) and spontaneous abortion associated with leflunomide exposure during pregnancy in humans. METHODS: From a cohort of 289 688 pregnancies in Montreal, Quebec, Canada, from 1998 to 2015, first-trimester leflunomide exposure and other antirheumatic drug exposures were studied for their association with MCM and spontaneous abortions. Also second or third-trimester leflunomide exposures were examined for associations with prematurity and LBW. Logistic regression model-based generalised estimating equations were used. RESULTS: 51 pregnancies were exposed to leflunomide during the first trimester, and 21 during the second/third trimesters. Adjusting for potential confounders, use of leflunomide during the first trimester of pregnancy was not associated with the risk of MCM (adjusted OR (aOR) 0.97, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.16; 5 exposed cases). No association was found between second/third-trimester exposure to leflunomide and the risk of prematurity (aOR 4.03, 95% CI 0.91 to 17.85; 7 exposed cases) nor LBW (aOR 1.06, 95%CI 0.90 to 1.25; 8 exposed cases). Pregnancy exposure to leflunomide was also not associated with the risk of spontaneous abortion (aOR 1.09, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.32; 11 exposed cases). CONCLUSIONS: Maternal exposure to leflunomide during pregnancy was not associated with statistically significant increased risk of MCMs, prematurity, LBW or spontaneous abortions. However, given that relatively few women were exposed to leflunomide during pregnancy in this cohort, caution remains warranted.

Perforating disorder secondary to leflunomide and review of the literature of medications associated with perforating disorder.

The perforating dermatoses are a group of disorders characterized by transepidermal elimination of a material from the upper dermis. The most widely accepted classification consists of four primary perforating disorders that are defined by the type of material eliminated and the type of epidermal disruption. Pathogenesis of the perforating dermatoses is poorly understood, but some appear to have a genetic component. There are also acquired forms, which have been associated with underlying systemic diseases and the use of certain drugs. In this report, we describe a perforating disorder that occurred secondary to leflunomide therapy. To our knowledge, this is the first case in which this has been reported. We also review the recent literature on medications associated with perforating disorders.

Usage and effectiveness of systemic treatments in adults with severe atopic eczema: First results of the German Atopic Eczema Registry TREATgermany.

BACKGROUND: The goal of clinical registries is to document the use and effectiveness of therapeutic interventions under real-life conditions. They are an indispensable prerequisite of evidence-based health care. METHODS: Initiated in 2011, the German Atopic Dermatitis Registry TREATgermany is the first registry of patients with severe atopic dermatitis worldwide. Adults with severe atopic dermatitis (current/prior systemic antiinflammatory treatment and/or objective SCORAD ≥ 40) are prospectively followed over the course of 24 months. Employed treatment modalities are documented, and validated measuring tools are used to assess clinical disease severity (EASI, objective SCORAD), quality of life (DLQI), symptoms (POEM), global disease severity, as well as patient satisfaction. Herein, we describe the characteristics, therapeutic selection, and effectiveness of systemic antiinflammatory treatments of patients enrolled in the registry until October 2014. RESULTS: Overall, 78 individuals (mean age 39 years, 61 % men) were enrolled at five recruitment centers. Patients frequently made use of inpatient and outpatient services. Not only was cyclosporine the most frequently administered systemic treatment, but also the most effective (EASI 50 response rate 51 %; EASI 75 response rate 34 % at 12 weeks). Azathioprine, methotrexate, oral prednisolone, mycophenolate, alitretinoin, and leflunomide were also used in some patients. CONCLUSIONS: The present analysis of the German Atopic Dermatitis Registry provides important data with respect to current medical care of adults with severe atopic dermatitis in Germany. It shows the high disease burden, the benefits of current treatment options, and the need for additional effective and safe long-term treatment options.