Tibor Fülöp Tibor, Csongrádi Éva, Lerant Anna A, Lewin Matthew, Lewin Jack R
Department of Internal Medicine, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, MS, USA.
Department of Internal Medicine, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, MS, USA ; Department of Medicine, Medical and Health Science Centre University of Debrecen, Hungary.
J Nephropathol. 2015 Apr;4(2):54-8. doi: 10.12860/jnp.2015.11. Epub 2015 Apr 1.
The natural evolution of C1q nephropathy (C1qNP) during immunosuppressive treatment is relatively little studied or understood.
A 30 year-old Caucasian female was referred to us for further management of biopsy-proven C1qNP and severe nephrotic syndrome. Serologic work-up remained negative, including complement C3 and C4 levels and repeated testing for antinuclear antibodies. A renal biopsy revealed minimal change nephropathy vs. focal sclerosis on light microscopy and C1qNP on immunopathology. She has failed trials of high-dose oral prednisone, mycophenolate mofetil 1,500 mg twice a day and a subsequent regimen of monthly IV cyclophosphamide 750 mg × 9 cycles. She also received the maximum tolerated angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and spironolactone therapy. Random urine protein-to-creatinine (UPC) ratio predicted proteinuria in the range between 5-35 gm/day, while serum creatinine rose progressively from 1.0 mg/dL to 1.4 mg/dL (to convert to μmol/L, multiply by 88.4). A decision was made to repeat renal biopsy to reassess the underlying histology. The biopsy revealed focal sclerosis but no C1q deposition.
Our case illustrates at least two points: first, an established pathologic diagnosis does not obviate the need for repeated renal biopsy later on, should diagnostic uncertainty persist. Second, histological diagnoses may evolve over time, especially in a patient receiving active and powerful immune-modulating treatment. In our case, the clinical nephrosis did not change with immunosuppressive therapy while C1q deposition ceased, making this latter entity likely the immunologically mediated process.
免疫抑制治疗期间C1q肾病(C1qNP)的自然演变相对较少被研究或了解。
一名30岁的白人女性因活检证实的C1qNP和严重肾病综合征被转诊至我院进行进一步治疗。血清学检查结果均为阴性,包括补体C3和C4水平以及反复检测抗核抗体。肾活检在光镜下显示为微小病变性肾病与局灶节段性肾小球硬化,免疫病理学检查显示为C1qNP。她接受大剂量口服泼尼松、霉酚酸酯1500mg每日两次以及随后每月静脉注射环磷酰胺750mg共9个周期的治疗均失败。她还接受了最大耐受剂量的血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂和螺内酯治疗。随机尿蛋白/肌酐(UPC)比值预测蛋白尿范围为5 - 35g/天,而血清肌酐从1.0mg/dL逐渐升至1.4mg/dL(换算为μmol/L时,乘以88.4)。决定重复肾活检以重新评估潜在的组织学情况。活检显示为局灶节段性肾小球硬化但无C1q沉积。
我们的病例至少说明了两点:第一,如果诊断不确定性持续存在,已确立的病理诊断并不能排除日后重复肾活检的必要性。第二,组织学诊断可能随时间演变,尤其是在接受积极强效免疫调节治疗的患者中。在我们的病例中,免疫抑制治疗后临床肾病情况未改变,但C1q沉积停止,这使得后者可能是免疫介导的过程。