| Literature DB >> 32652953 |
P Puri1, G D Walters2,3,4,5, M N Fadia2,6, M Konia2,6, K A Gibson2, S H Jiang2,3,4,5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: C3 glomerulonephritis is a recently described entity with heterogeneous histopathological features. This study was conducted to assess the effect of reclassification of C3 glomerulopathies on renal outcomes, mortality, and response to therapy.Entities:
Keywords: C3 glomerulonephritis; Electron microscopy; Membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis
Year: 2020 PMID: 32652953 PMCID: PMC7351649 DOI: 10.1186/s12882-020-01923-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Nephrol ISSN: 1471-2369 Impact factor: 2.388
Fig. 1section criteria of renal biopsies assessed for reclassification. C3 predominant samples were considered C3 + > 2 of magnitudes higher than any other immunereactant on IF
Fig. 2Histological features of samples used A-C is example of one C3GN patient D-F normal healthy Control, and two C3 Controls
Fig. 3C3GN and C3 Control cohort’s original diagnosis at biopsy prior to reclassification. P value < 0.05 = *, p < 0.01 = **, p < 0.001 = *** P > 0.5 = n.s
Baseline characteristics of C3GN and C3 Control patients
| Category | C3GN | C3 Controls | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 50 ( | 33( | 0.4 | |
| 57 (41–61) | 55 (35–65) | 0.9 | |
| 140 (122–160) | 145 (128–154) | 0.9 | |
| 83 (68–89) | 80 (70–87) | 0.7 | |
| 60 ( | 85 ( | 0.08 | |
| 0 | 10 (n = 2) | 0.2 | |
| 0 | 0 | – | |
| 10 (n = 1) | 5 ( | 0.04 | |
| 0 | 5 | 0.3 | |
| 0 | 0 | – | |
| 60 (n = 6) | 57 ( | 0.9 | |
| 30 ( | 14 ( | 0.3 | |
| 30 (n = 30) | 10 (n = 2) | 0.3 | |
| 100 (n = 10) | 80 ( | 0.3 | |
| 300 (106–947) | 154 (55–573) | 0.7 | |
| 253 (103–333) | 127 (105–182) | 0.01 | |
| 0.91 (0.56–1.04) | 1.15 (0.93–1.39) | 0.4 | |
| 20 | 19 | 1 | |
| 80 (80–329) | 80 (0–200) | 0.6 | |
| 0 | 20 | 0.2 | |
| 0 (n = 0/2) | 0 not tested | – | |
| 0 (n = 0/4) | 0 ( | – | |
| 0 (n = 0/2) | 50 (n = 1/2) | 0.2 |
All data reported in median plus IQR unless otherwise indicated
Features of histological scoring and features of C3GN and C3 Control biopsy samples
| Histology features | C3GN patients | C3 Control | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Normal (%) | 10 (n = 1) | 14 (n = 3) | 1 |
| MPGN (%) | 60 (n = 6) | 5 (n = 1) | < 0.01 |
| Mesangial proliferation (%) | 30 (n = 3) | 57 (n = 12) | 0.3 |
| Endocapillary proliferation (%) | 40 ( | 14 (n = 3) | 0.2 |
| Leucocyte infiltration (%) | 30 (n = 3) | 19 ( | 0.7 |
| Cellular or fibrocellular crescents (%) | 30 (n = 3) | 38 (n = 7) | 1 |
| C3 alone | 80 ( | 24 (n = 5) | 0.05 |
| C3 dominant (with trace or 1+ Ig) | 20 (n = 2) | 38 (n = 7) | 0.4 |
| C3 dominant (with trace > 2+ Ig) | 0 | 38 (n = 7) | 0.03 |
| No deposits | 0 | 38 (n = 7) | 0.02 |
| Any deposits | 100 (n = 10) | 62 ( | 0.5 |
| Mesangial | 40 (n = 4) | 19 (n = 4) | 0.7 |
| Subendothelial | 20 (n = 2) | 24 (n = 5) | 0.6 |
| Subepithelial | 10 (n = 1) | 5 ( | 1.00 |
| All 3 locations | 30 (n = 3) | 14 ( | 0.4 |
| Amorphous | 50 (n = 5) | 5 (n = 1) | 0.007 |
| Dense | 10 (n = 1) | 14 (n = 3) | 0.6 |
| Patchy | 30 (n = 3) | 52 ( | 0.2 |
| Subendothelial humps | 10 (n = 1) | 30 (n = 6) | 0.4 |
Distribution of outcomes and progression of diseases between both groups
| Outcomes | C3GN | C3 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Follow up (days) | 405 (203–1197) | 1822 (1243–3948) | 0.02 |
| Remission with immunosuppression (%) | 20 (n = 2) | 33(n = 7) | 0.5 |
| Partial remission with immunosuppression (%) | 10 (n = 1) | 10 (n = 2) | 0.9 |
| Remission without immunosuppression (%) | Nil | 19 (n = 4) | |
| Partial remission without immunosuppression (%) | Nil | Nil | |
| Relapse (%) | nil | 5 (n = 1) | 0.5 |
| Creatinine doubling (%) | 10 (n = 1) | 19 (n = 4) | 0.2 |
| Median Creatinine doubling time (days) | 350 NA | 1107.5 (522–2076) | 0.3 |
| Median Creatinine doubling amount (umol/L) | 353** NA | 245 (229–277) | 0.3 |
| Latest Creatinine (umol/L) | 125 (110–194) | 110 (88–197) | 0.8 |
| Pre-emptive transplant (%) | 0 | 14 (n = 3) | 0.08 |
| ESRF (HD/PD) | 10 (n = 1) | 14 (n = 3) | 0.09 |
| Death (% at 5 year follow up) a | 30 (n = 3) | 14 (n = 3) | 0.02 |
| Loss to follow up (%) | 30 (n = 3) | 10 (n = 2) | 0.1 |
Mann Whitney and Fishers exact test used. Logrank analysis used for ESRF and survival analysis. a Note not median single patient
Distribution of treatments received and progression of dieses between both groups
| Treatment | C3GN | C3 Controls | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 70 (n = 7) | 85 (n = 18) | 0.3 | |
| 30 ( | 72 ( | 0.05 | |
| 20 (n = 2) | 33 (n = 7) | 0.4 | |
| 0 | 10 (n = 2) | 1 | |
| 10 (n = 1) | 14 (n = 3) | 1 | |
| e | 0 | 19 (n = 4) | 0.3 |
| f | 0 | 10 (n = 2) | 1 |
| 40 (n = 4) | 28 (n = 6) | 0.7 | |
| 20 (n = 2) | 0 | 0.09 | |
| 40 (n = 4) | 72 (n = 15) | 0.4 | |
| 263 (IQR 126–629) | 302 (IQR 184–1496) | 0.5 |
Mann Whitney and Fishers exact test used
RAS Renin-angiotensin system blockade, MMF Mycophenolate mofetil, Tac Tacrolimus, CP cyclophosphamide, eCsA Ciclosporin, fAZA azathioprine
Fig. 4Diagnosis and treatment algorithm for C3GN used at The Canberra Hospital