Treatment of polyarteritis nodosa and microscopic polyangiitis without poor-prognosis factors: A prospective randomized study of one hundred twenty-four patients.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of systemic corticosteroids alone as first-line treatment of polyarteritis nodosa (PAN) and microscopic polyangiitis (MPA) without poor-prognosis factors as defined by the Five-Factors Score (FFS), and to compare the efficacy and safety of azathioprine versus pulse cyclophosphamide as adjunctive immunosuppressive therapy for patients experiencing treatment failure or relapse. METHODS: This prospective, multicenter, therapeutic trial included 124 patients with newly diagnosed PAN or MPA (FFS of 0) treated with corticosteroids alone. At the time of treatment failure or disease relapse, patients were randomized to receive 6 months of therapy with oral azathioprine or 6 pulses of cyclophosphamide. Analyses was performed according to an intent-to-treat strategy. RESULTS: The mean +/- SD followup period was 62 +/- 33 months. Treatment with corticosteroids alone induced remission in 98 patients; 50 (40%) of these patients had sustained disease remission, 46 (37%) experienced a relapse, and 2 became corticosteroid dependent (daily prednisone dose > or = 20 mg). In 26 patients (21%), treatment with corticosteroids alone failed, and 49 patients (40%) required additional immunosuppression. Among the 39 patients randomized, 13 of 19 achieved remission with cyclophosphamide pulses, and 14 of 20 achieved remission with azathioprine. Among all patients, the 1-year and 5-year survival rates were 99% and 92%, respectively. Six deaths occurred in the cyclophosphamide-treated group compared with 2 deaths in the azathioprine-treated group. Disease-free survival was significantly lower for patients with MPA than for those with PAN (P = 0.046). CONCLUSION: For patients with PAN or MPA with an FFS of 0, overall 5-year survival was good, but first-line corticosteroid treatment was able to achieve and maintain remission in only about half of the patients, and 40% of the patients required additional immunosuppressive therapy. Azathioprine or pulse cyclophosphamide was fairly effective for treating corticosteroid-resistant disease or major relapses.

Treatment of Churg-Strauss syndrome without poor-prognosis factors: a multicenter, prospective, randomized, open-label study of seventy-two patients.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of systemic corticosteroids (CS) alone as first-line treatment in patients with Churg-Strauss syndrome (CSS) without poor-prognosis factors, as defined by the Five-Factors Score (FFS), and to compare the efficacy and safety of oral azathioprine (AZA) versus intravenous pulse cyclophosphamide (CYC) as adjuvant immunosuppressive therapy for treatment failure or relapse. METHODS: This multicenter, prospective, randomized, open-label therapeutic trial included 72 patients with newly diagnosed CSS (FFS of 0) treated with CS alone. At treatment failure or relapse, patients were randomized to receive 6 months of oral AZA or 6 pulses of CYC. Analyses were performed according to an intent-to-treat strategy. RESULTS: The mean +/- SD followup was 56.2 +/- 31.7 months. Among the 72 patients studied, 93% achieved remission with CS therapy alone, and 35% relapsed, mainly during the first year of treatment. Among the 19 patients randomized to additional immunosuppression because of treatment failure or relapse, 5 of 10 receiving AZA and 7 of 9 receiving pulse CYC achieved remission, but the difference was not statistically significant. Survival rates in all patients at 1 and 5 years were 100% and 97%, respectively. At the end of followup, 79% of the patients whose disease was in remission required low-dose CS therapy, mainly to control respiratory disease. CS-related adverse events were observed in 31% of the 72 patients. CONCLUSION: In CSS patients with an FFS of 0, survival was excellent, confirming the predictive value of the FFS in this disease. First-line therapy with CS achieved remission in most patients, but relapses were common, and one-third of them required additional immunosuppressive therapy. AZA or pulse CYC was fairly effective in treating CS-resistant disease or major relapses. Over the long term, most patients continued to take oral CS, which might explain the high rate of CS-related adverse events.

Churg-Strauss syndrome with poor-prognosis factors: A prospective multicenter trial comparing glucocorticoids and six or twelve cyclophosphamide pulses in forty-eight patients.

OBJECTIVE: To compare long and short durations of adjunctive cyclophosphamide for the treatment of severe Churg-Strauss syndrome (CSS). METHODS: In this prospective multicenter therapeutic trial, 48 patients with CSS with at least 1 poor-prognosis factor at baseline were treated with glucocorticoids and either 12 or 6 intravenous cyclophosphamide pulses. RESULTS: At 8 years, complete remission rates and severe side effects of therapy were comparable for both groups. The overall difference in relapses was not significant between the 12-pulse and the 6-pulse regimens (P = 0.07), but when considering only the number of mild relapses this difference became statistically significant (P < 0.02). Although the total number of inclusions was not reached, the study was stopped prematurely in response to the superiority of the 12-pulse regimen. CONCLUSION: We concluded that 12 cyclophosphamide pulses were better able to control severe CSS than a 6-pulse regimen. The optimal duration of therapy remains to be determined.

Treatment of polyarteritis nodosa and microscopic polyangiitis with poor prognosis factors: a prospective trial comparing glucocorticoids and six or twelve cyclophosphamide pulses in sixty-five patients.

OBJECTIVE: Because the optimal cyclophosphamide (CY) treatment duration for severe polyarteritis nodosa (PAN) without virus infection and microscopic polyangiitis (MPA) has not been established, we conducted a trial to compare the effectiveness of 6 versus 12 CY pulses given in combination with corticosteroids (CS). METHODS: Sixty-five (18 PAN, 47 MPA) previously untreated patients were randomized to receive 12 (n = 34) or 6 (n = 31) CY pulses combined with CS. PAN and MPA were histologically proven or met ACR criteria. All patients presented >or=1 factor of severity according to the five factor score (FFS). CY pulses were administered every 2 weeks for 1 month, then every 4 weeks. The end point of the study was the number of events (relapses and/or deaths) occurring in each group, analyzed according to an intention-to-treat strategy. The outcome was evaluated by Cox proportional hazards analysis. RESULTS: The baseline characteristics were similar for both groups. The mean (+/- SD) followup was 32 +/- 21 months. Survival analysis showed a significantly lower relapse probability (P = 0.02; hazards ratio [HR] = 0.34) and higher event-free survival (P = 0.02, HR = 0.44) for the 12 CY-pulse group while the mortality rates were not significantly different (P = 0.47). CONCLUSION: These results suggest that 6 CY pulses are less effective than 12 CY pulses to treat severe PAN and MPA, particularly with respect to the risk of relapses.