Re-biopsy in lupus nephritis

Is per-protocol kidney biopsy required in lupus nephritis?

Baseline kidney biopsy is recommended in lupus nephritis (LN). Biopsy allows to classify different forms of LN and differentiate other forms of renal involvement, such as tubulo-interstitial nephritis or thrombotic microangiopathy. The indications for repeat biopsy are more controversial. Some authors feel that good clinical monitoring is sufficient to assess prognosis and make therapeutic decisions. Based on the recently demonstrated discordance between clinical and histological response, some physicians recommend per-protocol biopsies either at 6 months in stable patients to verify the response to induction therapy, or after one-to-two years to assess treatment efficacy and tune the duration of maintenance therapy. Others recommend repeating kidney biopsy in case of incomplete response or to discriminate between active and chronic lesions. By definition, a per-protocol kidney biopsy differs from a repeat biopsy in that the former is foreseen at fixed timepoints, regardless of the clinical response. Although any decision should always consider the patient's overall clinical condition, there are no doubts that repeat kidney biopsy represents a useful tool in difficult cases to evaluate treatment response, modulate treatment intensity, and predict long-term renal outcome both in quiescent lupus and during flares. How to harmonize per-protocol biopsies in the LN course remains challenging.

The management of lupus nephritis as proposed by EULAR/ERA 2019 versus KDIGO 2021

In 2019 and 2021, the European League for Rheumatism (EULAR) jointly with the European Renal Association (ERA) and the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO), respectively, released updated guidelines on the management of lupus nephritis (LN). The Immunology Working Group of the ERA reviewed and compared both updates. Recommendations were either consistent or differences were of negligible clinical relevance for: indication for kidney biopsy, kidney biopsy interpretation, treatment targets, hydroxychloroquine dosing, first-line initial immunosuppressive therapy for active class III, IV (±V) LN, pregnancy in LN, LN in paediatric patients and LN patients with kidney failure. Relevant differences in the recommended management relate to the recognition of lupus podocytopathies, uncertainties in steroid dosing, drug preferences in specific populations and maintenance therapy, treatment of pure class V LN, therapy of recurrent LN, evolving alternative drug options and diagnostic work-up of thrombotic microangiopathy. Altogether, both documents provide an excellent guidance to the growing complexity of LN management. This article endeavours to prevent confusion by identifying differences and clarifying discrepancies.

A Histology-Guided Approach to the Management of Patients with Lupus Nephritis: Are We There Yet?

Renal involvement is a frequent complication of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). It occurs in up to two-thirds of patients, often early during the disease course, and is the most important predictor of the morbidity and mortality of SLE patients. Despite tremendous improvements in the approach of the lupus nephritis (LN) therapy, including the recent approval of two new disease-modifying therapies, up to 50% of patients do not obtain a renal response and up to 25% will eventually progress to end-stage renal disease (ESRD) within 10 years of diagnosis. Given the lack of correlation between clinical features and histological lesions, there is an increasing need for a histology-guided approach to the management of patients with LN. Apart from the initial diagnosis of type and severity of renal injury in SLE, the concept of a repeat kidney biopsy (either in a for-cause or a per-protocol scenario) has begun to gain increasing popularity in the nephrology community. Herein, we will provide a comprehensive overview of the most important areas of utility of the kidney biopsy in patients with LN.

Clinical and histological findings at second but not at first kidney biopsy predict end-stage kidney disease in a large multicentric cohort of patients with active lupus nephritis

Objective

To investigate second kidney biopsy as predictor of end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) in active lupus nephritis (LN).

Methods

Patients with biopsy-proven LN (International Society of Nephrology/Renal Pathology Society 2003) who had undergone a second kidney biopsy between January 1990 and December 2018 were included. Clinical and histological findings at first and at second biopsy were analysed with Cox proportional hazard models to predict ESKD, defined as start of kidney replacement therapy. Survival curves were calculated with Kaplan-Meier method.

Results

Ninety-two patients with LN were included, 87% females, mean follow-up 17.9±10.1 years. Reasons for second kidney biopsy encompassed nephritic flares (n=28, 30.4%), proteinuric flares (n=46, 50%) or lack of renal response (n=18, 19.5%). Class switch from first biopsy occurred in 50.5% of cases, mainly from non-proliferative towards proliferative classes. Class IV remained stable in over 50% of cases. Twenty-five patients (27.2%) developed ESKD, mostly belonging to the nephritic flare group (17/28, 60.7%). Independent predictors of ESKD at second biopsy were activity index (AI; (HR 95% CI) 1.20 (1.03 to 1.41), p=0.022), chronicity index (CI; 1.41 (1.09 to 1.82), p=0.008) and 24h-proteinuria (1.22 (1.04 to 1.42), p=0.013). AI≥2 (log-rank p=0.031), CI >4 (log-rank p=0.001) or proteinuria ≥3.5 g/day (log-rank=0.009) identified thresholds for higher ESKD risk. In a subgroup analysis, glomerular activity and tubular chronicity mostly accounted for AI and CI association with ESKD. No histological or laboratory predictors emerged at first biopsy (95% CI): AI: 0.88 to 1.19; CI: 0.66 to 1.20; proteinuria 0.85 to 1.08.

Conclusions

Findings at second but not at first kidney biopsy in patients with persistently active or relapsing LN inform about ESKD development in a long-term follow-up.

Treat-to-Target in Lupus Nephritis. What is the Role of the Repeat Kidney Biopsy?

Kidney involvement, termed lupus nephritis (LN), develops in 35-60% of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus, often early during the disease course. When not treated promptly and efficiently, LN may lead to rapid and severe loss of kidney function, being the reason why it is considered one of the most severe lupus manifestations. Despite improved pharmacotherapy, 5-20% of LN patients develop end-stage kidney disease within ten years from the LN diagnosis. While the principal ground of LN therapy is prevention of renal function worsening, resembling a race against nephron loss, consensual agreement upon outcome measures and clinically meaningful short- and long-term targets of LN therapy have yet to be determined. Literature points to the importance of inclusion of tissue-based approaches in the determination of those targets, and evidence accumulates regarding the importance of per-protocol repeat kidney biopsies in the evaluation of the initial phase of therapy and prediction of long-term renal prognosis. The latter leads to the hypothesis that the information gleaned from repeat biopsies may contribute to optimised therapeutic decision making, and, therefore, increased probability to attain complete renal response in the short term, and a more favourable renal prognosis within a longer prospect. The multinational project ReBioLup was recently designed to serve as a key contributor to form evidence about the role of per-protocol repeat biopsies in a randomised fashion and aspires to unify the global LN community towards improved kidney and patient survival.

Per-protocol repeat kidney biopsy portends relapse and long-term outcome in incident cases of proliferative lupus nephritis

OBJECTIVES

In patients with LN, clinical and histological responses to treatment have been shown to be discordant. We investigated whether per-protocol repeat kidney biopsies are predictive of LN relapses and long-term renal function impairment.

METHODS

Forty-two patients with incident biopsy-proven active proliferative (class III/IV±V) LN from the database of the UCLouvain were included in this retrospective study. Per-protocol repeat biopsies were performed after a median [interquartile range (IQR)] time of 24.3 (21.3-26.2) months. The National Institutes of Health activity index (AI) and chronicity index (CI) scores were assessed in all biopsies.

RESULTS

Despite a moderate correlation between urinary protein/creatinine ratios (UPCR) and AI scores at repeat biopsy (r = 0.48; P = 0.001), 10 patients (23.8%) with UPCR < 1.0 g/g still had a high degree of histological activity (AI > 3). High AI scores (continuous) in repeat biopsies were associated with an increased probability and/or shorter time to renal relapse (n = 11) following the repeat biopsy [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.2, 95% CI: 1.1, 1.3; P = 0.007], independently of proteinuria levels. High CI scores (continuous) in repeat biopsies were associated with a sustained increase in serum creatinine levels corresponding to ≥120% of the baseline value (HR = 1.8, 95% CI: 1.1, 2.9; P = 0.016) through a median (IQR) follow-up time of 131.5 (73.8-178.2) months, being also the case for acute tubulointerstitial inflammation and interstitial fibrosis/tubular atrophy in repeat but not baseline biopsies.

CONCLUSION

Our results highlight the usefulness of per-protocol repeat biopsies, herein performed after a median time of 24 months from baseline, as an integral part of the treatment evaluation, also in patients showing adequate clinical response.

Identification of the tubulointerstitial infiltrating immune cell landscape and immune marker related molecular patterns in lupus nephritis using bioinformatics analysis

Background

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a multisystem autoimmune disease that commonly affects the kidneys. Research into markers that can predict the prognosis of tubulointerstitial lupus nephritis (LN) has been impeded by the lack of well-designed studies.

Methods

In this study, we selected and merged 3 sets of renal biopsy tubulointerstitial data from GSE32591, GSE69438, and GSE127797, including 95 LN and 15 living healthy donors. CIBERSORTx was utilized for differentially infiltrating immune cell (DIIC) analysis. Weighted Gene Co-Expression network analysis (WGCNA) was employed to explore differentially expressed gene (DEG) related modules. Combined WGCNA hub genes and protein-protein interaction (PPI) validation was used for immune marker identification. Lastly, unsupervised clustering was carried out to validate the correlation between these markers and clinical characteristics.

Results

Our findings unveiled TYROBP, C1QB, LAPTM5, CTSS, PTPRC as the 5 immune markers, which were negatively correlated with glomerular filtration rate (GFR). Specifically, the expression levels of TYROBP and C1QB were significantly different between proliferative LN (PLN) and membranous LN (MLN). Unsupervised clustering could aggregate LN by these immune marker expression spectrums.

Conclusions

This study is the first to identify infiltrating immune cells and associated molecular patterns in the tubulointerstitium of LN by utilizing bioinformatics methods. These findings contribute to a better understanding of the mechanisms behind LN, and promote more precise diagnosis.

Lupus nephritis: clinical presentations and outcomes in the 21st century

Lupus nephritis (LN) is a frequent and severe manifestation of SLE. Along the decades, the epidemiology of LN and its clinical presentation have been changing. However, even though retrospective cohort studies report a decreased mortality rate and an improvement in the disease prognosis, the percentage of patients progressing into end stage renal disease (ESRD) keeps steady despite the improvements in therapeutic strategies. Current in-use medications have been available for decades now, yet over the years, regimens for optimizing their efficacy and minimizing toxicity have been developed. Therapeutic research is now moving towards the direction of precision medicine and several new drugs, targeting selectively different pathogenetic pathways, are currently under evaluation with promising results. In this review, we address the main changes and persistent unmet needs in LN management throughout the past decades, with a focus on prognosis and upcoming treatments.

What is the value of repeat kidney biopsies in patients with lupus nephritis?

INTRODUCTION

Recent studies with protocol biopsies have shown a mismatch between clinical and histological remission in lupus nephritis (LN). We aimed to evaluate histological changes in repeat kidney biopsies by clinical indication in patients with LN.

METHODS

We analyzed 107 patients with LN in which a kidney biopsy was performed between 2008 and 2018. Of those, we included 26 (24.2%) who had ≥2 kidney biopsies. Classification was done according to the International Society of Nephrology/Renal Pathology Society.

RESULTS

Mean time between biopsies was 71.5 ± 10.7 months. 73.1% of patients presented a change of class at repeat biopsy; 38.4% to a higher class and 34.6% to a lower class. A significant increase in glomerulosclerosis (% GS) (3.8% vs 18.7%, p = 0.006), interstitial fibrosis (3.8% vs 26.9%, p = 0.021), tubular atrophy (15.4% vs 57.7%, p = 0.001) and chronicity index (CI) (1 vs 3, p < 0.001) was observed at repeat biopsy. Subjects who developed chronic kidney disease progression had a lower rate of complete remission at 12 months (0% vs 37.5%, p = 0.02), higher % GS at first biopsy (7.9% vs 1.2%, p = 0.02) and higher CI (4 vs 2, p = 0.006), tubular atrophy (90% vs 37.6%, p = 0.008), interstitial fibrosis (50% vs 12.5%, p = 0.036) and vascular lesions (60% vs 18.8%, p = 0.031) at second biopsy.

CONCLUSIONS

Our major finding was that patients with LN showed a significant increase in % GS, interstitial fibrosis, tubular atrophy and vascular lesions in repeat biopsies performed by clinical indication. This suggest that a second kidney biopsy may provide valuable and useful information regarding kidney disease progression.

Acute interstitial nephritis and drug-induced systemic lupus erythematosus due to chlorthalidone and amiodarone: A case report

Drug-induced lupus erythematosus has features distinct from primary systemic lupus erythematosus. It can occur with a wide variety of agents that result in the generation of anti-histone or other types of antibodies. Systemic manifestations of drug-induced systemic lupus erythematosus may include renal dysfunction due to circulating immune complexes or due to other immune reactions to the culprit medication(s). Acute interstitial nephritis occurs due to DNA–drug or protein–drug complexes that trigger an allergic immune response. We report a patient who developed acute kidney injury, rash, and drug-induced systemic lupus diagnosed by serologies after starting chlorthalidone and amiodarone. A renal biopsy showed acute interstitial nephritis and not lupus-induced glomerulonephritis. It is important to note that systemic lupus erythematosus and acute interstitial nephritis can occur together, and this report highlights the role of the kidney biopsy in ascertaining the pathological diagnosis and outlining therapy in drug-induced lupus erythematosus.

Prediction of prognosis and renal outcome in lupus nephritis

Lupus nephritis (LN) is a severe manifestation of SLE, characterised by subendothelial and/or subepithelial immune complex depositions in the afflicted kidney, resulting in extensive injury and nephron loss during the acute phase and eventually chronic irreversible damage and renal function impairment if not treated effectively. The therapeutic management of LN has improved during the last decades, but the imperative need for consensual outcome measures remains. In order to design trials with success potentiality, it is important to define clinically important short-term and long-term targets of therapeutic and non-therapeutic intervention. While it is known that early response to treatment is coupled with favourable renal outcomes, early predictors of renal function impairment are lacking. The information gleaned from kidney biopsies may provide important insights in this direction. Alas, baseline clinical and histopathological information has not been shown to be informative. By contrast, accumulating evidence of pronounced discrepancies between clinical and histopathological outcomes after the initial phase of immunosuppression has prompted investigations of the potential usefulness of per-protocol repeat kidney biopsies as an integral part of treatment evaluation, including patients showing adequate clinical response. This approach appears to have merit. Hopefully, clinical, molecular or genetic markers that reliably reflect kidney histopathology and portend the long-term prognosis will be identified. Novel non-invasive imaging methods and employment of the evolving artificial intelligence in pattern recognition may also be helpful towards these goals. The molecular and cellular characterisation of SLE and LN will hopefully result in novel therapeutic modalities, maybe new taxonomy perspectives, and ultimately personalised management.