No abstract

No abstract

IntroductionThere is a wide variety of drugs for the clinical treatment of immunoglobulin A (IgA) nephropathy; however, previous studies have failed to clarify the quantitative differences in the efficacy of various drugs. In this study, we aimed to quantitatively compare the clinical efficacy of 6 classes of drugs with different pharmacological mechanisms for the treatment of IgA nephropathy and to identify relevant influencing factors.MethodsClinical trials of drugs for the treatment of IgA nephropathy were obtained from public databases. The change in daily urinary protein excretion from baseline was used as the efficacy index, and the time–effect model was established using a model-based meta-analysis method. Based on the final model, the typical efficacy was simulated, and the differences in efficacy were compared.ResultsA total of 40 studies with 2288 subjects were included in this study. The results showed that the time–effect relationship of the placebo and 6 classes of drugs was consistent with the Emax model. The placebo reduced urinary protein excretion by up to 0.44 g/day, and it took more than 27 months to reach half of its maximum effect. The onset of the 6 classes of drugs were the same; they all reached half of their maximum effect after 5.59 months. More importantly, we found a significant influence of urinary protein baseline on drug efficacy, as indicated by an increase of 0.63 g/day in the theoretical maximum effect of drugs for every 1 g/day increase in urinary protein baseline. After correcting for the urinary protein baseline, the order of efficacy of the 6 classes of drugs was as follows: corticosteroids > immunosuppressants > other drugs > renin–angiotensin system blockers > antiplatelet agents > N-3 fatty acids.ConclusionThis study provides the first comprehensive quantitative analysis of the differences in the efficacy of 6 classes of drugs with different pharmacological mechanisms for treating IgA nephropathy. The results of this study provide an important reference for the rational clinical use of drugs for IgA nephropathy, and also provide a reliable efficacy standard for the development of new drugs for IgA nephropathy.

No abstract

No abstract