Skip to main content
Log in

Immunsuppressive Therapie der Lupusnephritis

Immunosuppressive therapy of lupus nephritis

  • Leitthema
  • Published:
Der Nephrologe Aims and scope

Zusammenfassung

Hintergrund

Der systemische Lupus erythematodes (SLE) ist eine autoimmune Systemerkrankung unklarer Ätiologie, die nahezu jedes Organsystem betreffen kann, wobei die Nierenbeteiligung (Lupusnephritis, LN) entscheidend für die Morbidität und Mortalität der Patienten ist. Dies wird zum einen durch die LN-bedingte Niereninsuffizienz sowie durch die notwendige starke immunsuppressive Therapie maßgeblich beeinflusst. Bis zu 50% der Patienten mit SLE haben bereits bei der Diagnosestellung klinische Zeichen einer Nierenbeteiligung. Im weiteren Krankheitsverlauf kommt es bei über 60% der Patienten mit SLE zu einer Nierenbeteiligung

Ergebnisse

Die Infiltration der Niere durch T-Zellen und Makrophagen (Mø; mononukleäre Zellen) ist neben der Ablagerung von Immunglobulinen ein wichtiges histomorphologisches Kennzeichen der LN und hat auch eine prognostische Bedeutung. Insbesondere die glomerulären Veränderungen korrelieren mit der klinischen Präsentation, dem Verlauf und dem Ansprechen der Therapie der LN. Die LN wird entsprechend dem histologischen Erscheinungsbild in 6 Klassen unterteilt [ISN (International Society of Nephrology)/RPS (Renal Pathology Society)-Klassifikation 2004]. Da sich die Therapie der LN an dieser Klassifikation orientiert, ist die Durchführung einer Nierenbiopsie bei Verdacht auf das Vorliegen einer LN notwendig. Basis der Therapie einer jeden LN ist die optimale Blutdruckeinstellung und die Blockade des Renin-Angiotensin-Systems als antiproteinurisch und wahrscheinlich immunmodulatorisch wirksame Komponente.

Schlussfolgerung

Abhängig vom Vorliegen der Klasse der LN erfolgt bei Klasse III, IV und V sowie ggf. auch bei Klasse II eine immunsuppressive Therapie. Bei Vorliegen einer LN Klasse I und VI besteht keine Indikation zur immunsuppressiven Therapie.

Abstract

Background

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is an autoimmune systemic disease of mainly unknown etiology with a variety of organ manifestations. Lupus nephritis (LN) is the main cause of morbidity and mortality for patients with SLE. Besides renal damage and failure the immunosuppressive treatment and relapses or flares of LN that are common (27–66 %) contribute to the morbidity and mortality of SLE. Up to 50 % of SLE patients present with renal involvement at the time of diagnosis while > 60 % develop a renal manifestation during the course of the disease.

Results

The intrarenal infiltration of T cells and macrophages as well as immunoglobulin deposits are the hallmark of histopathological findings in LN and show prognostic relevance. The histological changes, in particular the glomerular damage, correlate with presentation, course of disease and response to therapy in patients with LN. Histologically six different classes of LN have been described in the International Society of Nephrology and Renal Pathology Society (ISN-RPS) classification from 2004 and these classes lead to different treatment regimens. As the treatment of LN is dependent on the histological findings, a kidney biopsy should be done if renal involvement is expected. In all types of LN the basic therapy should include optimal blood pressure control.

Conclusion

Depending on the class of LN treatment will include immunosuppression, such as in types III, IV and V while types I, II and VI do not need immunosuppression. Moreover, for type V LN blockade of the renin-angiotensin system is most important.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Abb. 1

Literatur

  1. Contreras G, Roth D, Pardo V et al (2002) Lupus nephritis: a clinical review for practicing nephrologists. Clin Nephrol 57:95–107

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Waldman M, Appel GB (2006) Update on the treatment of lupus nephritis. Kidney Int 70:1403–1412

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Kuroiwa T, Lee EG (1998) Cellular interactions in the pathogenesis of lupus nephritis: the role of T cells and macrophages in the amplification of the inflammatory process in the kidney. Lupus 7:597–603

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Markowitz GS, D’Agati VD (2009) Classification of lupus nephritis. Curr Opin Nephrol Hypertens 18:220–225

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Hiramatsu N, Kuroiwa T, Ikeuchi H et al (2008) Revised classification of lupus nephritis is valuable in predicting renal outcome with an indication of the proportion of glomeruli affected by chronic lesions. Rheumatology 47:702–707

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Weening JJ, D’Agati VD, Schwartz MM et al (2004) The classification of glomerulonephritis in systemic lupus erythematosus revisited. Kidney Int 65:521–530

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Dooley MA, Aranow C, Ginzler EM (2004) Review of ACR renal criteria in systemic lupus erythematosus. Lupus 13:857–860

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Austin HA III, Muenz LR, Joyce KM et al (1983) Prognostic factors in lupus nephritis. Contribution of renal histologic data. Am J Med 75:382–391

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Austin HA III, Boumpas DT, Vaughan EM, Balow JE (1994) Predicting renal outcomes in severe lupus nephritis: contributions of clinical and histologic data. Kidney Int 45:544–550

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Austin HA III, Muenz LR, Joyce KM et al (1984) Diffuse proliferative lupus nephritis: identification of specific pathologic features affecting renal outcome. Kidney Int 25:689–695

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Schwartz MM, Lan SP, Bernstein J et al (1993) Irreproducibility of the activity and chronicity indices limits their utility in the management of lupus nephritis. Lupus Nephritis Collaborative Study Group. Am J Kidney Dis 21:374–377

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Korbet SM, Lewis EJ, Schwartz MM et al (2000) Factors predictive of outcome in severe lupus nephritis. Lupus Nephritis Collaborative Study Group. Am J Kidney Dis35:904–914

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Agodoa LY, Appel L, Bakris GL et al (2001) Effect of ramipril vs amlodipine on renal outcomes in hypertensive nephrosclerosis: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 285:2719–2728

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Banfi G, Bertani T, Boeri V et al (1991) Renal vascular lesions as a marker of poor prognosis in patients with lupus nephritis. Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio della Nefrite Lupica (GISNEL). Am J Kidney Dis 18:240–248

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Pons-Estel GJ, Alarcon GS, McGwin G Jr et al (2009) Protective effect of hydroxychloroquine on renal damage in patients with lupus nephritis: LXV, data from a multiethnic US cohort. Arthritis Rheum 61:830–839

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Jung H, Bobba R, Su J et al (2010) The protective effect of antimalarial drugs on thrombovascular events in systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheum 62:863–868

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Appel GB, Contreras G, Dooley MA et al (2009) Mycophenolate mofetil versus cyclophosphamide for induction treatment of lupus nephritis. J Am Soc Nephrol 20:1103–1112

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Henderson LK, Masson P, Craig JC et al (2013) Induction and maintenance treatment of proliferative lupus nephritis: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Am J Kidney Dis 61:74–87

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Aringer M, Burkhardt H, Burmester GR et al (2012) Current state of evidence on ‚off-label‘ therapeutic options for systemic lupus erythematosus, including biological immunosuppressive agents, in Germany, Austria and Switzerland – a consensus report. Lupus 21:386–401

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Isenberg D, Appel GB, Contreras G et al (2010) Influence of race/ethnicity on response to lupus nephritis treatment: the ALMS study. Rheumatology 49:128–140

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Houssiau FA, Vasconcelos C, D’Cruz D et al (2010) The 10-year follow-up data of the Euro-Lupus Nephritis Trial comparing low-dose and high-dose intravenous cyclophosphamide. Ann Rheum Dis 69:61–64

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Dooley MA, Jayne D, Ginzler EM et al (2011) Mycophenolate versus azathioprine as maintenance therapy for lupus nephritis. N Engl J Med 365:1886–1895

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Radhakrishnan J, Moutzouris DA, Ginzler EM et al (2010) Mycophenolate mofetil and intravenous cyclophosphamide are similar as induction therapy for class V lupus nephritis. Kidney Int 77:152–160

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio della Nefrite Lupica (GISNEL) (1992) Lupus nephritis: prognostic factors and probability of maintaining life-supporting renal function 10 years after the diagnosis. Am J Kidney Dis 19:473–479

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Reich HN, Gladman DD, Urowitz MB et al (2011) Persistent proteinuria and dyslipidemia increase the risk of progressive chronic kidney disease in lupus erythematosus. Kidney Int 79:914–920

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Houssiau FA, Vasconcelos C, D’Cruz D et al (2004) Early response to immunosuppressive therapy predicts good renal outcome in lupus nephritis: lessons from long-term followup of patients in the Euro-Lupus Nephritis Trial. Arthritis Rheum 50:3934–3940

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. So MW, Koo BS, Kim YG et al (2011) Predictive value of remission status after 6 months induction therapy in patients with proliferative lupus nephritis: a retrospective analysis. Clin Rheumatol 30:1399–1405

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Moroni G, Ventura D, Riva P et al (2004) Antiphospholipid antibodies are associated with an increased risk for chronic renal insufficiency in patients with lupus nephritis. Am J Kidney Dis 43:28–36

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Hahn BH, McMahon MA, Wilkinson A et al (2012) American College of Rheumatology guidelines for screening, treatment, and management of lupus nephritis. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 64:797–808

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Bertsias GK, Tektonidou M, Amoura Z et al (2012) Joint European League Against Rheumatism and European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association (EULAR/ERA-EDTA) recommendations for the management of adult and paediatric lupus nephritis. Ann Rheum Dis 71:1771–1782

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Rovin BH, Furie R, Latinis K et al (2012) Efficacy and safety of rituximab in patients with active proliferative lupus nephritis: the Lupus Nephritis Assessment with Rituximab study. Arthritis Rheum 64:1215–1226

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Rovin BH, Parikh SV (2014) Lupus nephritis: the evolving role of novel therapeutics. Am J Kidney Dis 63:677–690

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Einhaltung ethischer Richtlinien

Interessenkonflikt. J. Weinmann-Menke und D. Sollinger geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Die dargestellten Therapieoptionen beinhalten bereits publizierte Studienergebnisse (klinische Studien, Fallberichte) an Mensch und Tier, diese sind immer mit einer Referenz versehen.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J. Weinmann-Menke.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Weinmann-Menke, J., Sollinger, D. Immunsuppressive Therapie der Lupusnephritis. Nephrologe 10, 24–30 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11560-014-0906-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11560-014-0906-9

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Navigation