ABSTRACT
A transdermal patch formulation of a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) used by a 44-year-old man resulted in acute interstitial nephritis and acute tubular injury. This patient also had a history of mild kidney dysfunction and osteoporosis. The NSAID patch had been prescribed after a traffic accident. He was also receiving a vitamin D analog and taking over-the-counter calcium supplements. Two months later, renal dysfunction and hypercalcemia were discovered. A renal biopsy showed acute interstitial nephritis and acute tubular injury. Once these agents were withdrawn, the renal function recovered. This is the first reported occurrence of biopsy-proven acute interstitial nephritis attributable to NSAID patch usage.
Subject(s)
Acute Kidney Injury/chemically induced , Acute Kidney Injury/physiopathology , Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal/adverse effects , Kidney Diseases/drug therapy , Nephritis, Interstitial/chemically induced , Nephritis, Interstitial/physiopathology , Phenylpropionates/adverse effects , Transdermal Patch/adverse effects , Adult , Humans , Japan , MaleABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: The efficacy and safety of sunitinib versus sorafenib in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma with renal impairment remains poorly documented. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We assessed the efficacy and safety of sunitinib and sorafenib in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma with an estimated glomerular filtration rate of 15-60 mL/min/1.73 m2 by reviewing the medical records of patients treated at Jichi Medical University Hospital, Japan, between May 2008 and August 2016. RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients were treated with sunitinib and 14 with sorafenib. Median progression-free survival in sunitinib- and sorafenib-treated patients was comparable, at 6.6 vs 5.8 months, respectively (HR, 1.618; 95% CI, 0.689-3.798; P = 0.2691). Median overall survival was also comparable, at 65.9 vs 58.0 months (HR, 0.985; 95% CI, 0.389-2.479; P = 0.9748). Grade 3 or higher adverse events were significantly more frequent in the sunitinib-treated than sorafenib-treated patients (P = 0.0357). Compared to pre-treatment values, estimated glomerular filtration rate at the discontinuation of treatment was not decreased in either group. In contrast, estimated glomerular filtration rate was decreased on long-term treatment, particularly in previously nephrectomized patients. CONCLUSIONS: Sunitinib and sorafenib had similar efficacy in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma and severe renal impairment. Although renal function was not markedly impaired in either group, close attention to decreased renal function may be necessary in previously nephrectomized patients on long-term treatment.