Induction and maintenance of remission with mycophenolate mofetil in ANCA-associated vasculitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Uncertainties exist about the use of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) in anti-neutrophil cytoplasmatic antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitis (AAV), particularly for remission maintenance. METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analysis of phase II and III trials assessing the use of MMF in AAV, granulomatosis with polyangiitis and microscopic polyangiitis (MPA). A comprehensive search of several databases (Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane, Web of Science, Scopus) from inception to 5 May 2020 has been conducted. Trial data were extracted to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and estimates (ES) for MMF efficacy (remission-induction and maintenance). Severe adverse effects (SAEs) were collected. RESULTS: From 565 articles captured, 10 met the predefined criteria, 5 phase II and 5 III trials; 4 assessed remission-induction, 3 remission maintenance and 3 both. The pooled OR for remission-induction at 6 months was 1.06 (95% confidence interval 0.74, 1.52), with no significant difference by subgroup meta-analysis of trials stratified by different study-level features (i.e. kidney disease, MPA, myeloperoxidase-ANCA positivity, newly diagnosed disease) (P > 0.05). The overall ES for remission maintenance at the end of follow-up ranged between 51% and 91% (I2 = 74.8%). Subgroup meta-analysis identified kidney involvement as a possible source of heterogeneity, yielding a significantly higher rate of sustained remission in trials enrolling only patients with kidney involvement (92%, 76-100%) versus those enrolling patients with and without kidney involvement (56%, 45-66%). Results were similar in multiple sensitivity analyses. During follow-up, the frequency of SAEs in MMF-based treatment arms was 31.8%. CONCLUSIONS: In AAV, MMF use was significantly associated with higher sustained remission rates in trials enrolling only patients with kidney involvement. These findings might influence clinical practice.

Perspective on COVID-19 vaccination in patients with immune-mediated kidney diseases: consensus statements from the ERA-IWG and EUVAS.

Patients with immune-mediated kidney diseases are at increased risk of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The international rollout of COVID-19 vaccines has provided varying degrees of protection and enabled the understanding of vaccine efficacy and safety. The immune response to COVID-19 vaccines is lower in most patients with immune-mediated kidney diseases; either related to immunosuppression or comorbidities and complications caused by the underlying disease. Humoral vaccine response, measured by the presence of antibodies, is impaired or absent in patients receiving rituximab, mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), higher doses of glucocorticoids and likely other immunosuppressants, such as cyclophosphamide. The timing between the use of these agents and administration of vaccines is associated with the level of immune response: with rituximab, vaccine response can only be expected once B cells start to recover and patients with transient discontinuation of MMF mount a humoral response more frequently. The emergence of new COVID-19 variants and waning of vaccine-induced immunity highlight the value of a booster dose and the need to develop mutant-proof vaccines. COVID-19 vaccines are safe, exhibiting a very low risk of de novo or relapsing immune-mediated kidney disease. Population-based studies will determine whether this is causal or coincidental. Such cases respond to standard management, including the use of immunosuppression. The Immunonephrology Working Group and European Vasculitis Society recommend that patients with immune-mediated kidney diseases follow national guidance on vaccination. Booster doses based on antibody measurements could be considered.