Abstract
Objectives
To compare the treatments used for the first episode of lupus nephritis (LN) in two Latin American cohorts (historical and contemporary) over a 25-year period, and their associations with clinical outcomes.
Methods
Patients with biopsy-confirmed first LN episode were classified as non-proliferative (class V) or proliferative (classes III/IV). Sociodemographic, clinical, and treatment variables were described. Propensity score matching was used to examine the associations with four outcomes: mortality, damage accrual (SDI), hospitalization, and end-stage renal disease (ESRD).
Results
A total of 532 SLE patients were included: 362 from GLADEL 1.0 (historical cohort) and 170 from GLADEL 2.0. (contemporary). Compared to GLADEL 1.0, patients in GLADEL 2.0 received lower doses of oral glucocorticoids (GC), more frequently GC pulses and antimalarials but less frequently cyclophosphamide. An increase in the use of mycophenolate mofetil and other immunosuppressants was also observed. In the logistic regression models, SDI was associated with baseline SDI and GC pulses, whereas belonging to the GLADEL 2.0 was a protective factor. Mortality was associated with Mestizo ethnicity and partial health coverage; antimalarial was identified as a protective factor. Hospitalizations were associated with baseline SLEDAI and SDI, follow-up time, and lower educational level. Belonging to the GLADEL 2.0 cohort was protective against the occurrence of ESRD.
Conclusions
Patients in the contemporary cohort benefited from advances in treatment strategies, with less cumulative damage and progression to ESRD, although mortality remained unchanged. These improvements likely reflect the increased use of newer therapies, more targeted approaches, in line with current treatment guidelines, and better access to specialized care.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
