Comparison of the Cockcroft-Gault, MDRD and CKD-EPI equations for estimating ganciclovir clearance.

AIMS: Accurately estimating kidney function is essential for the safe administration of renally cleared drugs such as ganciclovir. Current practice recommends adjusting renally eliminated drugs according to the Cockcroft-Gault equation. There are no data on the utility of the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) and Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equations in ganciclovir dosing. To evaluate which renal function equation best predicts ganciclovir clearance. METHODS: The performance of the Cockcroft-Gault equation, isotope dilution mass spectrometry (IDMS)-traceable 4-variable MDRD study (MDRD4-IDMS) equation and CKD-EPI equation in determining ganciclovir clearance were assessed retrospectively in patients treated with ganciclovir from 2004-2015. The MDRD4-IDMS and CKD-EPI equations adjusted to individual body surface area (MDRD4-IDMS·BSA and CKD-EPI·BSA, respectively) were also evaluated. Patients with intravenous ganciclovir peak and trough concentrations in their medical records were included in the study. Ganciclovir clearance was calculated from serum concentrations using a one-compartment model. The five equations were compared based on their predictive ability, the coefficient of determination, through a linear regression analysis. The results were validated in a group of patients. RESULTS: One hundred patients were included in the final analysis. Seventy-four patients were analysed in the learning group and 26 in the validation group. The coefficient of determination was 0.281 for Cockcroft-Gault, 0.301 for CKD-EPI·BSA, 0.308 for MDRD4-IDMS·BSA, 0.324 for MDRD4-IDMS and 0.360 for CKD-EPI. Subgroup analysis also showed that CKD-EPI is a better predictor of ganciclovir clearance. Analysis of the validation group confirmed these results. CONCLUSIONS: The CKD-EPI equation correlates better with ganciclovir clearance than the Cockcroft-Gault and MDRD4-IDMS equations, even the clinical difference between the equations is scarce.

Prevalence, diagnostic value and clinical characteristics associated with the presence of circulating levels and renal deposits of antibodies against the M-type phospholipase A2 receptor in idiopathic membranous nephropathy.

UNLABELLED: The M-type phospholipase A2 receptor (PLA2R) has been identified as one of the target antigens of the autoimmune response in idiopathic membranous nephropathy (MN). The prevalence of anti-PLA2R antibodies in patients with idiopathic MN is around 70% but this varies in accordance with geographic region, and until present, anti-PLA2R has not been shown to be associated with any particular clinical profile of the disease. METHODS: We studied 64 adults with nephrotic syndrome who were diagnosed with MN, confirmed by renal biopsy. Forty-seven patients had idiopathic MN and 17 had secondary MN. We determined the presence of circulating anti-PLA2R antibodies by indirect immunofluorescence (IIF) and their titre by ELISA, and we analysed the presence of anti-PLA2R antibody renal deposits by immunohistochemical techniques. We calculated the sensitivity and specificity of the IIF and ELISA techniques for the identification of patients with renal deposits and for the identification of those with idiopathic MN and we tested whether there were differences in the clinical profile of the disease at the time of diagnosis according to the presence or absence of anti-PLA2R antibodies. RESULTS: We did not observe significant differences in the clinical-demographic variables between patients with idiopathic and secondary MN. The prevalence of anti-PLA2R glomerular deposits by IHC was 76.6%. The IIF and ELISA techniques had a similar sensitivity (IIF 94.4% and ELISA 97.2%) and specificity (100%) for the identification of patients with anti-PLA2R renal deposits and the detection of circulating anti-PLA2R antibodies. The determination of anti-PLA2R by IIF identified patients with idiopathic MN with a sensitivity of 72.3% and a specificity of 94.2%. A titre of antibodies >15RU/ml measured by ELISA had a sensitivity of 74.45% and a specificity of 94.2% for the identification of patients with idiopathic MN. Patients with idiopathic MN and anti-PLA2R had significantly higher proteinuria figures (13.25 [P25-P75: 9.05-15.87] compared to 9.43 [P25-P75: 6.30-15] g/day, P:.018). No statistical correlation was observed between the antibody titre measured by ELISA and age, glomerular filtration rate or 24-hour proteinuria or albuminaemia. CONCLUSIONS: The techniques employed to determine anti-PLA2R in patients with MN are highly specific for the diagnosis of idiopathic forms of the glomerular disease. The frequency with which patients with MN and anti-PLA2R were identified is similar to that reported in previous studies. Staining by immunohistochemistry is the most sensitive method for detecting cases of MN associated with the presence of anti-PLA2R antibodies. The IIF and ELISA techniques allow circulating anti-PLA2R antibodies to be detected in most patients with renal deposits, but they may very infrequently have false negative results. The concordance of these tests is high. Patients with idiopathic MN and anti-PLA2R antibody renal deposits have higher proteinuria than patients that are anti-PLA2R negative, but the differences have little clinical importance.

Treatment of idiopathic focal segmental glomerulosclerosis: options in the event of resistance to corticosteroids and calcineurin inhibitors.

Half of patients with nephrotic syndrome caused by primary focal segmental glomerulosclerosis (FSGS) have resistance to treatment with steroids. In the case of corticosteroid resistance,  the best evidence-based option has classically been treatment with calcineurin inhibitors,  although recent studies indicate that mycophenolate may have similar efficacy. In patients with resistance to calcineurin inhibitors,  there is no option that allows the clinical course of the disease to be modified, and this is supported by appropriately designed clinical trials, although observational studies have suggested the potential usefulness of mycophenolate, sirolimus, rituximab, apheresis or high galactose doses as treatment options. In FSGS of idiopathic origin, resistant to steroids and calcineurin inhibitors, before taking the decision whether or not to test other immunosuppressive drugs, it might be appropriate to conduct a systematic analysis that considers: 1) evaluating whether the dose and duration of treatment with steroids and calcineurin inhibitors were suitable, 2) analysing the level of P-glycoprotein expression in lymphocytes, 3) performing a new renal biopsy if there is no electron microscopic study available for the first, 4) in young patients,  considering a genetic study to rule out the presence of the podocin variant pR229Q in combination with heterozygous mutations in NPHS2,  and 5) evaluating the seriousness and difficulty of managing the nephrotic syndrome and the likelihood of progressive loss of renal function. Currently, there are multiple study avenues that attempt to identify the pathogenic mechanisms that cause podocyte injury and there are also several studies underway to analyse the efficacy of drugs such as adalimumab, fresolimumab, rosiglitazone, ACTH (corticotropin) or galactose at high doses, whose preliminary results have generated expectations that require confirmation in larger-scale clinical studies.  In the future, it is possible that a better understanding of the pathogenic pathway or pathways that cause FSGS may allow differentiation between immunomodulable and non-immunomodulable forms,  however, this continues to be a challenge currently.

Biological markers of nephrotic syndrome: a few steps forward in the long way.

One of the major challenges modern nephrology should face is the identification of biomarkers that are associated with histopathological patterns or defined pathogenic mechanisms that might aid in the non-invasive diagnosis of the causes of nephrotic syndrome, or in establishing prognosis sub-groups based on each type of disease, thus predicting response to treatment and/or recurrence. Advancements in the understanding of the pathogenesis of the different diseases that cause nephrotic syndrome, along with the progressive development and standardisation of plasma and urine proteomics techniques, have facilitated the identification of a growing number of molecules that might be useful for these objectives. Currently, the available information for many of the possible candidates identified to date, above all those discovered using proteomics, are still very preliminary. In this review, we summarise the available evidence for the different molecules that have been best assessed using clinical studies.