Comparison of a voclosporin-based triple immunosuppressive therapy to high-dose glucocorticoid-based immunosuppressive therapy: a propensity analysis of the AURA-LV and AURORA 1 studies and ALMS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: High-dose glucocorticoid (GC)-based dual immunosuppressive treatment regimens are still frequently used in active lupus nephritis (LN) despite their known association with dose-dependent toxicities and incomplete efficacy. We hypothesised that the addition of voclosporin to low-dose GCs and mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) would reduce exposure to the toxicities of high-dose GC-based dual immunosuppressive therapy regimens, resulting in an improved safety profile without compromising efficacy. METHODS: Propensity score matching generated two groups of matched participants from the voclosporin arms (in combination with MMF (2 g/day) and low-dose GCs) of the Phase 2 AURA-LV and Phase 3 AURORA 1 studies and the MMF (3 g/day) and intravenous cyclophosphamide (IVC) arms (both in combination with high-dose GCs) of the Aspreva Lupus Management Study (ALMS) induction study. Safety and efficacy outcomes were assessed over 6 months. RESULTS: There were 179 matched participants identified between the AURA-LV/AURORA 1 studies and ALMS. The overall incidence of adverse events (AEs) was higher in IVC- and MMF-treated participants of ALMS; more voclosporin-treated participants reported AEs by preferred term of glomerular filtration rate decreased, hypertension and anaemia. The incidence of serious AEs was similar across treatments. There were four (2.2%) deaths in IVC- and MMF-treated participants of ALMS compared with seven (3.9%) deaths in voclosporin-treated participants. Significantly more voclosporin-treated participants achieved a ≥25% reduction in urine protein creatinine ratio (UPCR) from baseline at 3 months and ≥50% reduction in UPCR from baseline at 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with the high-dose GC-based regimens used in ALMS, voclosporin-based triple immunosuppressive therapy resulted in fewer AEs overall and greater and earlier reductions in proteinuria over the first 6 months of treatment. These data reinforce the feasibility of using low doses of GCs and MMF to treat LN when combined with voclosporin as a third agent.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.016 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".