. 2016 Jun 11;1(2):73–84. doi: 10.1016/j.ekir.2016.05.002

Table 6.

Summary of remission and relapse rates using various immunosuppressive regimens compared to protocol induction/maintenance regimen for treatment of membranous nephropathy

Treatment regimens	6 mo remissions		12 mo remissions		24 mo remissions		Relapse rates during trial period (%)
Treatment regimens	% CR	% PR	% CR	% PR	% CR	% PR	Relapse rates during trial period (%)
Cyclosporine (6–24 mo) + steroids13, 15	0–7	50–68	7–10	39–40	7–40	32–40	13–48
Tacrolimus (18 mo)14, 45	12–23	37–44	26–34	44–48	32	44	44–47
Rituximab20, 21, 22, 23, 41, 46, 47	0	29–63	0–18	43–63	20–27	45–60	6–29
Alkylating agent alternating with steroids for 6 mo48, 49, 50, 51	10–15	45–50	15–28	35–65	30–40	30–50	10–31
Oral cytoxan for 12 mo + steroids for 6 mo⁵²	NA	NA	NA	NA	17	77	28
MMF ± steroids53, 54, 55	5	21	5	31	NA	NA	29–57
Adrenocorticotropic hormone (synthetic) for 12 mo⁵⁶	19	44	38	50	NA	NA	21
Protocol regimen Cyclosporine + rituximab	23	62	54	31	54	31	15

Percentage of complete remissions (CR) and partial remissions (PR) achieved in patients with membranous nephropathy at various time points using other immunosuppression regimens versus the protocol induction/maintenance regimen.

MMF, mycophenolate mofetil; NA, data not available at these time points.