Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews Protocol - Intervention

Interventions for preventing and treating renal disease in Henoch‐Schönlein Purpura (HSP)

This is not the most recent version

Collapse all Expand all

Abstract

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows:

To evaluate the benefits and harms of different agents (used singularly or in combination) compared with placebo or no treatment or a single agent for:

  • the treatment of established severe nephritis (nephritic syndrome, nephrotic syndrome with or without acute renal failure) in HSP,

  • the prevention of severe nephritis in patients with HSP and mild renal involvement (microscopic or macroscopic haematuria, proteinuria),

  • the prevention of recurrent episodes of HSP nephritis,

  • the prevention of severe nephritis in patients with HSP without renal involvement.

Background

Henoch‐Schönlein Purpura (HSP) is a primary small vessel vasculitis. This immunologically mediated vasculitis involves various organ systems including skin, kidney, muscle, joints, gut and brain. Clinical manifestations include purpuric skin lesions, abdominal pain, gastrointestinal bleeding, arthropathy and renal involvement (Saulsbury 1999). HSP was first describing by William Heberden 200 years ago. Subsequently Schönlein described "Peliosis rheumatica" in patients who had arthralgia and purpura. In 1874 Eduard Henoch, Schönlein's former student, reported gastrointestinal involvement and also recognised that haemorrhagic nephritis may be a serious complication in this syndrome (Fervenza 2003). The international Consensus Conference on Nomenclature of Systemic Vasculitides has characterised this syndrome as " a vasculitis with IgA dominant immune deposits affecting small vessels and typically involving skin, gut, and glomeruli and associated with arthralgias and arthritis" (Jennette 1994). The criteria for diagnosing HSP proposed by The American Collage of Rheumatology included: palpable purpura, age less than 20 years old at onset, bowel angina and gut wall granulocytes on biopsy (Mills 1990). Although HSP can be found both in children and adults, it is the most common systemic vasculitis in children (Fervenza 2003). The annual incidence of HSP in children varies between 13.5 and 20/100,000 (Neilson 1998; Niaudet 1993; Steward 1988). The incidence is highest in children aged 4‐6 years (70.3/100,000 children) (Gardner‐ Medwin 2002).

Glomerulonephritis is one of the major complications of HSP. In a series of patients referred to renal units the incidence of kidney involvement in HSP was about 50% (Haycock 1992; Saulsbury 1999). However the incidence of kidney involvement in HSP from an unselected series of patients presenting to emergency or to a general medical clinic is found only 20% (Steward 1988). Clinically renal involvement is manifested by microscopic or macroscopic haematuria, proteinuria, nephrotic syndrome and reduced renal function. Among children with HSP and renal involvement nephritis occurs in 40% of patients; 83% had microscopic hematuria alone,17% had macroscopic hematuria, 63 % had hematuria and proteinuria, 3% had nephrotic syndrome (Saulsbury 1999). Eighty percent of patients, who develop renal involvement, do so within four weeks of the onset of HSP and 95% develop renal involvement within three months. Hypertension was found to be 61% in one series of patients (Scharer 1999). It is rare for renal involvement to precede other manifestations of HSP (Haycock 1992 ).

In general, the prognosis for long‐term renal function in HSP is excellent in children with microscopic or macroscopic haematuria alone. However patients with nephrotic syndrome and reduced renal function frequently show a progressive course to end‐stage renal failure (ESRF). In one study, 47% of patients with acute nephritic syndrome (haematuria, hypertension, reduced renal function), nephrotic syndrome or combined nephritic‐nephrotic syndrome at presentation continued to have active renal disease (proteinuria > 1 g/m²/d) or progressed to ESRF over 6.1 ± 4.9 years of follow‐up (median 4.3, range 1 to 22.8 years). In contrast none of the patients, who presented with low grade proteinuria (proteinuria < 1 g/m²/d) or haematuria progressed to chronic renal failure (CRF) or end‐stage renal disease (ESRD). In this study 45% of patients with crescentic glomerulonephritis at initial renal biopsy had active nephropathy (proteinuria > 1 g/m²/d with or without hypertension) at the last observation 22.8years after presentation. In contrast 87.5% of those who had only minimal glomerular alteration or mesangial proliferation at the initial biopsy, were in clinical remission or had only minor urine abnormalities at follow‐up (proteinuria (0.15 to 1.0 g/d with or without haematuria, no hypertension and normal serum creatinine) (Goldstein 1992).

Few studies have considered whether interventions in children with HSP, who are at risk of renal involvement, can prevent development of renal involvement or reduce its severity. In general treatment has been aimed at preventing progression to CRF and ESRD in patients with acute nephritis, nephrotic syndrome or reduced renal function. Corticosteroid therapy, azathioprine, cyclophosphamide, antiplatelet therapy, anticoagulants and plasmapheresis have been used in such patients (Bergstein 1998; Foster 2000; Kaku 1998; Iijima 1998; Niaudet 1998; Ronkainen 2003). In a multivariate analysis of prognostic factors, corticosteroid therapy was associated with a hazard ratio of 0.36 and was considered to decrease the risk of developing renal involvement (Kaku 1998). Non randomised studies have reported that corticosteroid therapy with cyclophosphamide reduces proteinuria (Flynn 2001; Tanaka 2003). In a randomised controlled trial (RCT) of early prednisolone therapy at diagnosis of HSP, there was no evidence that treatment reduced the risk of serious renal disease (Huber 2004). Although multiple treatment modalities has been used for treat glomerulonephritis in HSP, there is no consensus on the efficacy of various therapies. The aims of this study are to determine the benefits and harms of different treatment modalities used to treat established renal involvement in HSP or to prevent or ameliorate renal involvement in HSP.

Objectives

To evaluate the benefits and harms of different agents (used singularly or in combination) compared with placebo or no treatment or a single agent for:

  • the treatment of established severe nephritis (nephritic syndrome, nephrotic syndrome with or without acute renal failure) in HSP,

  • the prevention of severe nephritis in patients with HSP and mild renal involvement (microscopic or macroscopic haematuria, proteinuria),

  • the prevention of recurrent episodes of HSP nephritis,

  • the prevention of severe nephritis in patients with HSP without renal involvement.

Methods

Criteria for considering studies for this review

Types of studies

All RCTs and quasi‐RCTS (RCTs in which allocation to treatment was obtained by alternation, use of alternate medical records, date of birth or other predictable methods) looking at the benefits and harms of different therapeutic modalities for the prevention or treatment of renal involvement in HSP. The first period of randomised cross‐over studies shall also be included.

Types of participants

Inclusion criteria

Patients of any age with HSP with or without renal manifestations (microscopic haematuria, macroscopic haematuria, proteinuria, nephrotic syndrome, acute nephritic syndrome, reduced renal function, acute renal failure).

Exclusion criteria

Patients with other forms of primary or secondary glomerulonephritis such as IgA nephropathy, mesangiocapillary glomerulonephritis, membranous glomerulonephritis, systemic lupus erythematosus, rapidly progressive glomerulonephritis not associated with HSP, other systemic vasculitides.

Types of interventions

1. Immunosuppressive agents including corticosteroids, alkylating agents, azathioprine, mycophenolate, cyclosporin.
2. Anticoagulants and antiplatelet agents including warfarin, dypyridamole, aspirin, heparin.
3. Angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) and angiotensin‐receptor blockers (ARB).
4. Fish oil.
5. Immunoglobulin G, plasma exchange, antibody therapy.
6. Dapsone.
7. The above agents used individually or in combination will be studied.
8. Different durations of the same interventions.

Types of outcome measures

  1. ESRD ( including dialysis and transplantation).

  2. Significant increase in serum creatinine as defined by the triallists.

  3. Significant reduction in glomerular filtration rate (GFR) as defined by the triallists.

  4. Hypertension due to HSP nephritis.

  5. Development, persistence or worsening of proteinuria as defined by the triallists.

  6. Nephrotic syndrome, nephritic syndrome, acute renal failure.

  7. Patient mortality.

  8. Biopsy result including percent of crescent formation, chronicity index, sclerosis, fibrosis.

  9. Quality of life.

  10. Complications of therapy e.g. infection, bleeding, neutropenia, hypertension.

Search methods for identification of studies

1). The Cochrane Renal Group's Specialised Register and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, (most recent) which will be searched using the following terms:‐
#1 Henoch Schonlein purpura, Schonlein Henoch purpura, Anaphylactoid purpura, Allergic purpura, Henoch purpura, Non thrombocytopenic purpura, Peliosis purpura, Purpura rheumatica, leukocytoclastic vasculitis and Schonlein disease.

CENTRAL and the Renal Group's Specialised Register contain the handsearched results of conference proceedings from general and speciality meetings. This is an ongoing activity across the Cochrane Collaboration and is both retrospective and prospective (http://www.cochrane.us/masterlist.asp). Therefore we will not specifically search conference proceedings.

2). MEDLINE using the optimally sensitive strategy developed for the Cochrane Collaboration for the identification of randomised controlled trials (Dickersin 1994) with a specific search strategy developed with input from the Cochrane Renal Group Trial Search Coordinators.
MEDLINE search strategy (1966 to most recent):
1. randomized controlled trial.pt.
2. controlled clinical trial.pt.
3. randomized controlled trials/
4. random allocation/
5. double blind method/
6. single blind method/
7. or/1‐7
8. animals/ not (animals/ and human/)
9. 7 not 8
10. clinical trial.pt.
11. exp clinical trials/
12. (clinic$ adj25 trial$).ti,ab.
13. cross‐over studies/
14. (crossover or cross‐over or cross over).tw.
15. ((singl$ or doubl$ or trebl$ or tripl$) adj25 (blind$ or mask$)).tw.
16. placebos/
17. placebo$.ti,ab.
18. random$.ti,ab.
19. research design/
20. or/10‐19
21. 20 not 8
22. 9 or 21
23. (Henoch Schonlein purpura or Schonlein Henoch purpura or Anaphylactoid purpura or Allergic purpura or Henoch purpura or Non thrombocytopenic purpura or Peliosis purpura or Purpura rheumatica or leukocytoclastic vasculitis and Schonlein disease.

3). EMBASE using a search strategy adapted from that developed for the Cochrane Collaboration for the identification of randomised controlled clinical trials (Lefebvre 1996) together with a specific search strategy developed with input from the Cochrane Renal Group Trial Search Coordinators.
EMBASE search strategy (1980 to most recent):
1. exp clinical trial/
2. comparative study/
3. drug comparison/
4. major clinical study/
5. randomization/
6. crossover procedure/
7. double blind procedure/
8. single blind procedure/
9. placebo/
10. prospective study/
11. ((clinical or controlled or comparative or placebo or prospective or randomi#ed) adj3 (trial or study)).ti,ab.
12. (random$ adj7 (allocat$ or allot$ or assign$ or basis$ or divid$ or order$)).ti,ab.
13. ((singl$ or doubl$ or trebl$ or tripl$) adj7 (blind$ or mask$)).ti,ab.
14. (cross?over$ or (cross adj1 over$)).ti,ab.
15. ((allocat$ or allot$ or assign$ or divid$) adj3 (condition$ or experiment$ or intervention$ or treatment$ or therap$ or control$ or group$)).ti,ab.
16. or/1‐10
17. or/11‐15
18. 16 or 17
19. Henoch Schonlein purpura or Schonlein Henoch purpura or Anaphylactoid purpura or Allergic purpura or Henoch purpura or Non thrombocytopenic purpura or Peliosis purpura or Purpura rheumatica or leukocytoclastic vasculitis and Schonlein disease.

4). Reference lists of nephrology textbooks, review articles and relevant trials.
5). Letters seeking information about unpublished or incomplete trials to investigators known to be involved in previous trials.

Data collection and analysis

Included and excluded studies

The review will be undertaken by two reviewers (WC and SO). The search strategy described will be used to obtain titles and abstracts of studies that may be relevant to the review. The titles and abstracts will be screened independently by WC and SO, who will discard studies that are not applicable, however studies and reviews that might include relevant data or information on trials will be retained initially. Two reviewers (WC, SO) will independently assess retrieved abstracts and, if necessary the full text, of these studies to determine which studies satisfy the inclusion criteria. Data extraction will be carried out by the same reviewers independently using standard data extraction forms. Both reviewers will enter data in Review Manager. Studies reported in non‐English language journals will be translated before assessment. Where more than one publication of one trial exists, relevant data from any publication will be included. Any further information required from the original author will be requested by written correspondence and any relevant information obtained in this manner will be included in the review. Disagreements will be resolved in consultation with a third reviewer (EH).

Study quality

The quality of studies to be included will be assessed independently by WC and SO without blinding to authorship or journal using the checklist developed for the Cochrane Renal Group. Discrepancies will be resolved by discussion with EH. The quality items to be assessed are allocation concealment, intention‐to‐treat analysis, completeness to follow‐up and blinding of investigators, participants and outcome assessors.

Quality checklist

Allocation concealment

  • Adequate (A): Randomisation method described that would not allow investigator/participant to know or influence intervention group before eligible participant entered in the study

  • Unclear (B): Randomisation stated but no information on method used is available

  • Inadequate (C): Method of randomisation used such as alternate medical record numbers or unsealed envelopes; any information in the study that indicated that investigators or participants could influence intervention group

Blinding

  • Blinding of investigators: Yes/No/not stated

  • Blinding of participants: Yes/No/not stated

  • Blinding of outcome assessor: Yes/No/not stated

  • Blinding of data analysis: Yes/No/not stated

The above are considered not blinded if the treatment group can be identified in > 20% of participants because of the side effects of treatment.

Intention‐to‐treat

  • Yes: Specifically reported by authors that intention‐to‐treat analysis was undertaken and this was confirmed on study assessment.

  • Yes: Not stated but confirmed on study assessment

  • No: Not reported and lack of intention‐to‐treat analysis confirmed on study assessment. (Patients who were randomised were not included in the analysis because they did not receive the study intervention, they withdrew from the study or were not included because of protocol violation)

  • No: Stated but not confirmed upon study assessment

  • Not stated

Completeness to follow‐up

Per cent of participants excluded or lost to follow‐up.

Statistical assessment

For dichotomous outcomes (death, acute renal failure) results will be expressed as relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Data will be pooled using the random effects model but the fixed effect model will also be analysed to ensure robustness of the model chosen . Where continuous scales of measurement are used to assess the effects of treatment ( blood pressure, serum creatinine, proteinuria), the weighted mean difference (WMD) will be used, or the standardised mean difference (SMD) if different scales have been used. Heterogeneity will be analysed using a chi squared test on N‐1 degrees of freedom, with an P of 0.05 used for statistical significance.

If sufficient trials are available, subgroup analysis will be used to explore possible sources of heterogeneity (e.g. participants, treatments and study quality). Heterogeneity among participants could be related to age, severity of renal disease clinically and on renal pathology. Heterogeneity in treatments could be related to prior agent(s) used and the agent, dose and duration of therapy. Adverse effects will be tabulated and assessed with descriptive techniques, as they are likely to be different for the various agents used. Where possible, the risk difference with 95% CI will be calculated for each adverse effect, either compared to no treatment or to another agent. . Heterogeneity will be analysed using a chi squared test on N‐1 degrees of freedom, with an alpha of 0.05 used for statistical significance and with the I² test (Higgins 2003).

If sufficient RCTs are identified, an attempt will be made to examine for publication bias using a funnel plot (Egger 1997).