Overestimation of the risk of progression to end-stage renal disease in the poor prognosis’ group according to the 2002 Japanese histological classification for immunoglobulin A nephropathy
- 191 Downloads
The current (2012) histological classification of immunoglobulin A nephropathy was established using a case–control study of 287 patients. However, the risk of progression to end-stage renal disease (ESRD) has not been validated for the previous (2002) classification. This study aimed to determine whether the previous classification could identify the risk of long-term renal outcome through re-analysis of the 2012 cohort.
On the basis of the 2002 classification, namely ‘good prognosis’, ‘relatively good prognosis’, ‘relatively poor prognosis’, and ‘poor prognosis’, we examined the clinical data at the time of biopsy, the correlation between the 2002 classification and long-term renal outcomes, and a patient-by-patient correlation between the 2002 and 2012 classification systems. This was performed by analyzing samples from the 287 patients used to establish the 2012 classification.
The rate of decline of estimated glomerular filtration rate was greater and the odds ratio of progression to ESRD was higher in the ‘poor prognosis’ group. In contrast, the odds ratio for renal death was comparable between the groups described as ‘relatively poor prognosis’ and ‘relatively good prognosis’ in the 2002 classification. Many patients in the 2002 classification were classified with a lower histological grade in the current classification, but none were classified with a higher grade.
The 2002 classification could also identify the risk of progression to ESRD. However, it was overestimated for patients in the ‘poor prognosis’ group in the 2002 classification, as that group included patients with milder histological damage.
KeywordsCurrent histological classification IgA nephropathy classification Tuft adhesion Multicenter Case–control study EGFR decline
This study was supported by a Grant-in-Aid for Progressive Renal Diseases Research, from the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan.
Conflict of interest
- 11.Working Group of the International IgA Nephropathy Network and the Renal Pathology Society, Robert IS, Cook HT, Troyanov S, Alpers CE, Amore A, Barratt J, et al. The Oxford classification of IgA nephropathy: Pathology definitions, correlations and reproducibility. Kidney Int. 2009;76:546–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.Working Group of the International IgA Nephropathy Network and the Renal Pathology Society, Cattran DC, Coppo R, Cook HT, Feehally J, Roberts IS, Troyanov S, et al. The Oxford classification of IgA nephrolaty: rationale, clinicopathological correlations, and classification. Kidney Int. 2009; 76:534–45.Google Scholar
- 16.Hirano K, Kawamura T, Tsuboi N, Okonogi H, Miyazaki Y, Ikeda M et al. The predictive value of attenuated proteinuria at 1 year after steroid therapy for renal survival in patients with IgA nephropathy. Clin Exp Nephrol (in press).Google Scholar
- 17.Miura N, Imai H, Kikuchi S, Hayashi S, Endoh M, Kawamura T, et al. Tonsillectomy and steroid pulse (TSP) therapy for patients with IgA nephropathy: a nationwide survey of TSP therapy in Japan and an analysis of the predictive factors for resistance to TSP therapy. Clin Exp Nephrol. 2009;13:460–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 18.Matsuzaki K, Suzuki Y, Nakata J, Sakamoto N, Horikoshi S, Kawamura T, et al. Nationwide survey on current treatments for IgA nephropathy in Japan. Clin Exp Nephrol. (in press).Google Scholar