[Comparison of two cyclophosphamide treatment regimens in nephrotic patients with chronic glomerulonephritis].

AIM

Comparison of two cyclophosphamide (CPA) treatment regimens in chronic glomerulonephritis (CGN) patients: oral daily CPA versus intravenous CPA pulses (IV-CPA) MATERIALS AND METHODS: 31 nephrotic patients entered the trial: 12, 16 and 3 with membraneous, mesangial proliferative and mesangiocapillary CGN, respectively. The patients were randomized into two groups. 13 patients of group 1 received oral CPA (1.5-2.0 mg/kg/day for 6 months, while 18 patients of group 2 received IV-CPA pulses (20 mg/kg/monthly, at least 6 pulses) combined with oral prednisolone (40-6-mg/day during 1.5 mo with subsequent tapering). At entry, no statistical differences (p > 0.05) were found between groups 1 and 2 by age, gender, duration of the renal disease, serum creatinine levels, frequency of arterial hypertension. Mean duration of follow-up was 27.6 and 22.6 mo (p > 0.05) for group 1 and 2, respectively.

RESULTS

After 6 months of follow-up there was no difference in the rate of complete and partial remission between the groups (69 and 83% for group 1 and 2, respectively). The rate of renal function deterioration was also similar. Side effects occurred 3 times more frequently in group 1 than group 2. The mean cumulative course dose of CPA per 1 patient in group 1 was 35.6 g, in group 2--5.6 g.

CONCLUSION

The effectiveness of methods was similar irrespective of CGN morphological form, but in spite of similar rates of remission of nephrotic syndrome, pulse CPA is preferable being more safe as to possible complications.