Tacrolimus in membranous nephropathy

Co-administration of Wuzhi capsules and tacrolimus in patients with idiopathic membranous nephropathy: clinical efficacy and pharmacoeconomics

PURPOSE

Tacrolimus is an effective (but relatively expensive) immunosuppressant that is used widely in patients with membranous nephropathy. To reduce the tacrolimus dose while maintaining an equivalent therapeutic effect, we studied the clinical efficacy and pharmacoeconomic impact of co-administration of Wuzhi capsules (WZC that protects against damage to liver cells) and tacrolimus.

METHODS

Sixty patients with membranous nephropathy were divided randomly into two groups: experimental (tacrolimus + WZC + corticosteroids) and control (tacrolimus + corticosteroids). Each group received treatments continuously for >6 months. Liver function; renal function; and whole-blood concentrations of tacrolimus, sugars, lipids, as well as 24-h urinary protein levels were used in the clinical evaluation. The cost of drugs was calculated, and the pharmacoeconomic cost-effectiveness analyses were carried out to compare indices between the two groups.

RESULTS

Doses and costs of tacrolimus differed significantly between experimental and control groups (p < 0.01 or p < 0.05). Costs in the experimental group were 13,702.62 ± 1,458.6 CNY (2,194.10 ± 233.56 USD) and those in the control group were 17,796.87 ± 2,469.27 CNY (2,849.69 ± 395.39 USD), with clinical efficacy of 93.3 and 90.0 %, respectively. The cost-effectiveness ratios were 146.86 ± 15.63 and 197.73 ± 27.44, respectively. Compared with the experimental group, the control group showed an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 1,240.68 ± 306.25 CNY (198.66 ± 49.04 USD), whereas remission between the two groups was similar.

CONCLUSION

Co-administration of WZCs and tacrolimus can reduce the dose of tacrolimus and decrease the costs incurred by patients within the same therapeutic window to that seen for treatment with tacrolimus alone.

Idiopathic membranous nephropathy: management strategies

Treatment of idiopathic membranous nephropathy is based on a 'symptomatic' therapy that includes ACE inhibitors or angiotensin II receptor antagonists, and on an 'aetiological' therapy aimed at modulating underlying immunological mechanisms. The role of the latter is still debated given the usually indolent course of disease; furthermore, traditional immunosuppressants would not have an impact on patient and renal survival according to a systematic review of literature. However, up to 40% of untreated patients eventually develop end-stage renal disease and remission of nephrotic syndrome protects patients from related life-threatening complications and is the strongest positive prognostic factor for long-term kidney function. Therefore, immunosuppressive therapy seems to be rational in high-risk patients with nephrotic syndrome or deteriorating renal function. This article outlines a possible role for each 'aetiological' therapy on the basis of available evidence in order to provide some practical recommendations. The first-line therapy is based on a 6-month regimen of alternating corticosteroids and an alkylating agent ('Ponticelli' regimen), whereas oral ciclosporin and intramuscular corticotrophin (adrenocorticotrophic hormone) are alternatives that provide comparable results in terms of remission of proteinuria, with a different adverse effect profile. New drugs are emerging as potential treatments, such as mycophenolate mofetil, tacrolimus, intravenous immunoglobulins and rituximab. Specific settings, such as chronic renal failure or elderly age, require a careful balance between benefits and toxicity of immunosuppression. The tailor-made use of this repertoire of drugs can provide a tool to achieve remission of proteinuria and modify the natural course of idiopathic membranous nephropathy.