Skip to main content
Download PDF
  • Research article
  • Open access
  • Published:

Is podocytopathy another image of renal affection in p-SLE?

Pediatric Rheumatology volume 19, Article number: 57 (2021) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Lupus podocytopathy (LP) is a renal affection described in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) patients with nephrotic range proteinuria, characterized by diffuse foot process effacement without immune deposits and glomerular proliferation. This study describes LP, its pathological features and outcomes of pediatric (p-SLE) patients in comparison to the usual lupus nephritis (LN) cases.

Methodology

A retrospective cohort study conducted on a 10-year registration (2010–2019) of 140 p-SLE patients at the Pediatric Department, Tanta University. Histopathological analysis with light microscopy (LM) and immunofluorescence (IF) of all renal biopsies were evaluated according to the International Society of Nephrology Renal Pathology Society (ISN/RPS) grading system. In addition, some biopsies were examined with electron microscopy (EM).

Results

Eighty-six p-SLE cases (61.4%) had renal involvement; seventy-nine biopsies (91.86%) of them met the classification criteria of LN as defined by ISN/RPS system. Five biopsies were normal (MCD) and two showed focal segmental sclerosis (FSGN) that did not meet any known classification of LN. Hence, they were reevaluated using EM that revealed diffuse effaced podocytes without glomerular sub-epithelial, endocapillary or basement membrane immune deposits, and were classified as having lupus podocytopathy, representing (8.14%) of all LN biopsies. Those seven cases showed good response to steroids with a complete remission duration of 3.40 ± 1.95 weeks. However, some case had 1–3 relapses during the duration of follow up.

Conclusions

LP is a spectrum of p-SLE, not an association as it is related to disease activity and its initial presentation.

Introduction

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is an inflammatory autoimmune disease affecting multi-systems with periods of activities and remissions [1, 2]. About 15 to 20% of all SLE patients have a disease onset before the age of 16 years (p-SLE), and 60% of cases have lupus nephritis (LN) at early disease onset [3, 4]. The classification of LN revised by the International Society of Nephrology and the Renal Pathology Society (ISN/RPS) in 2018, emphasized that immune complex aggregation is central to LN and universally present in all subclasses [5]. The increasingly recognized phenomenon of apparent minimal change disease (MCD) and focal segmental glomerular sclerosis (FSGS) without significant immune deposits in a patient with SLE is termed lupus podocytopathy (LP) [6]. The diagnosis of LP in a patient with SLE and nephrotic syndrome is based on the finding of diffuse foot process effacement in the absence of peripheral capillary wall immune deposits [7]. LP is not included in the current ISN/RPS classification. Therefore, we aimed in this study to evaluate different histopathological patterns of LN and prevalence of LP, in an attempt to clarify its association with disease activity.

Methodology

This is a retrospective cohort study conducted on a 10-year registration (2010–2019) of 140 p-SLE patients at the Pediatric Department, Tanta University. The revised 1997 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria was used to establish SLE diagnosis in studied children [8]. The patient’s age at disease onset, sex, clinical symptoms and manifestations at the time of initial presentation and routine investigations [CBC, ESR, serum creatinine and blood urea, 24-h urinary proteins, serum C3 and C4, antinuclear anti-bodies (ANA), anti-double-stranded DNA (anti-dsDNA)] were recorded. SLE Disease Activity Index (SLEDAI) and renal SLEDAI were used to assess the global disease and renal activity respectively [9]. Histopathological analysis of 86 renal biopsies was done in children presented with renal affection at initial diagnosis and evaluated according to the International Society of Nephrology Renal Pathology Society (ISN/RPS) grading system [10]. All biopsies were examined using light microscopy (LM) and immunofluorescence microscopy (IF). In this study, all the cases found to have normal LM examination and did not meet the ISN/RPS classification were examined with EM. Group I (LN) “79 biopsies” had one of the histopathological classifications of LN. Group II (LP) “7 biopsies” did not meet ISN/RPS classification of LN, five of them were normal and two showed focal segmental sclerosis (FSGN), hence they were reevaluated using EM examination to document the presence of any glomerular sub-epithelial, endocapillary or basement membrane immune deposits. Our treatment regimen; LN class I and II were treated using hydroxychloroquine (5 mg/kg/d), steroids (0.5-2 mg/kg/d) and other immunosuppressants according to the extrarenal manifestations. LN class III, IV, III/IV + V, V and LP (nephrotic syndrome) received high-dose steroids (2 mg/kg/d), Mycophenolate Mofetil (MMF) (1200 mg/m2/d) combined with angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and hydroxychloroquine for 4 weeks then steroids were tapered to (5 mg/day) after 6 months (Induction phase). This regimen was continued for another 18 months (Maintenance phase). A pulse dose of methylprednisolone (500 mg/m2) was given for 5 days in severe cases (neurolupus, vasculitis, renal failure). If complete remission (proteinuria reduction < 500 mg/day, normalized GFR and serum creatinine with controlled blood pressure) was not achieved after 6 months of follow up, we shift MMF to cyclophosphamide (CYC) (500 mg/m2/4w) for 6 doses, then once every 3 months for another 18 months. In case of failure to induce remission and in LP cases with FSGS, we give cyclosporine (CsA) (5 mg/kg/d) as a second line in addition to steroids or augmentation regimen (Steroids +MMF + CsA). Lastly, Rituximab is resorted to in resistant cases.

Statistics

Analysis of data was performed using SPSS statistical software version 21. Qualitative data described using number and percent (n, %). The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was used to verify the normality of distribution. Quantitative data was described using mean and standard deviation (Mean ± SD), median and interquartile range (Median ± IQR). Chi-Square test (X2), Student t-test (t) and Mann Whitney test (U) were used to compare data between studied groups. Cox regression was used to compare the time of event occurrence (complete remission).

Results

The demographic and laboratory data (Table 1) of the 86 p-SLE studied patients with renal affection (61.43%) of all diagnosed lupus children show that: In group I (LN cases) Female to male ratio was (F/M: 7.8/1), the mean age at diagnosis was (12.24 ± 3.31y), SLEDAI was (27.13 ± 19.968). In group II (LP cases): Female to male ratio was (F/M: 7/0), the mean age at diagnosis was (13.60 ± 2.30y) with significant lower SLEDAI (17.20 ± 6.38) than the LN group. Seven cases of LP were presented with edema, four of them had hypertension. The 24 h urinary proteins (3.41 ± 0.30 g) in LP group were significantly higher than the LN group (1.10 ± 0.79 g). Significantly lower Anti-ds-DNA (230.80 ± 66.44 IU/ml) and higher C3 (75.40 ± 12.70 mg %) and C4 (13.60 ± 5.68 mg %) were noticed when compared to the LN group’s results. Renal biopsies results (Table 2) Group I: LN classes III, IV and III/IV were the commonest (40.70, 20.93 and 15.12%) respectively. Group II: Five cases showed MCD (5.81%) with normal LM and effaced podocytes with no immunological deposits in EM examination (Fig. 1), two cases (2.32%) had FSGS in LM examination with > 80% effaced podocytes without immune deposits in EM examination (Fig. 2). Response to steroids was satisfactory in LP patients with short complete remission time (3.40 ± 1.95 weeks) but with more frequent relapses when compared to the LN patients as shown in Table 3 and Fig. 3. LN class II showed a shorter duration for remission on low dose steroids without relapse when compared to LP patients (Table 4).

Table 1 Demographic and laboratory data
Full size table
Table 2 Histopathological results of the taken renal biopsies
Full size table
Fig. 1
figure 1

(LM and EM renal biopsy of p-SLE female patient aged 15y presented with massive edema and nephrotic range proteinuria after 2 months of disease diagnosis). a LM (H&E), there is no mesangial thickening, normal basement membrane, no hypercellualrity. b LM (silver stain) does not show any spikes or vacuolization (no active or chronic. glomerular lesions of lupus nephritis).c EM (Mag × 2500) shows diffuse effaced podocytes (black arrows) without any immunological deposits

Full size image
Fig. 2
figure 2

(LM and EM renal biopsy of p-SLE female patient aged 14y presented with weight loss, fever, pericardial effusion, edema, proteinuria and renal impairment at initial disease presentation). a LM (H&E) shows FSGS (black arrow). b EM (Mag × 2500) shows diffuse effaced podocytes (black arrows) without any immunological deposits

Full size image
Table 3 Treatment outcome
Full size table
Fig. 3
figure 3

Cox-regression comparing time (weeks) for occurrence of complete remission in the two groups

Full size image
Table 4 Comparison between LP and LN class II
Full size table

Discussion

This study presented the histopathological classes of 86 p-SLE patients with renal affection. Female to male ratio were 7.8:1 in the LN group and 7:0 in LP group that is consistent with the ratio provided by many studies on children, which found a ratio of 5:1 to 8:1 [11,12,13,14,15,16]. Seventy-nine cases (91.86%) showed different classes of LN according to (ISN/RPS) grading system [10] “LN II (6 cases 6.98%), LN III (35 cases 40.70%), LN III/IV (13 cases 15.12%), LN IV (18 cases 20.93%), LN IV/V (4 cases 4.65%), and LN V (3 cases 3.49%)”. Seven cases (8.14%) had a podocytopathy morphology “MCD (5 cases 5.81%) and FSGS (2 cases (2.32%)”. In 2002, Dube et al. [17] and Hertig et al. [6] were the first to described small series of adult SLE (a-SLE) with nephrotic syndrome and biopsy findings of MCD or FSGS. In 2005, Kraft et al. [18] reported eight additional a-SLE patients with nephrotic syndrome and light microscopic findings of MCD, FSGS, or mesangial proliferative GN. Hu et al. [19] presented 50 patients with lupus podocytopathy from a 14-year biopsy registry (2000–2013) representing 1.3% of all LN biopsies. The development of nephrotic-range proteinuria in SLE without peripheral immune aggregate deposition or endocapillary proliferation on renal biopsy is a manifestation of SLE than the coexistence of idiopathic minimal-change glomerulopathy and SLE [20] with concomitant apolipoprotein L1 (APOL1) nephropathy [21]. A glomerular permeability factor released during SLE flaring due to dysregulated T cells is considered an important clue to understanding the relationship of idiopathic nephrotic syndrome and SLE [20,21,22,23,24]. Unfortunately, the commonly used (ISN/RPS) classification of LN does not include lupus podocytopathy [20]. Simple criteria to diagnose lupus podocytopathy are (1) lupus patient with nephrotic syndrome, (2) diffuse and severe foot process effacement and (3) the absence of subendothelial or subepithelial immune deposits [20]. Up till now, the frequency, prognosis and treatment of LP are not well established in p-SLE except for one case report of Ito et al. [25] who reported an 11-year lupus girl who developed steroid-resistant nephrotic syndrome (SRNS) at disease onset and her histological findings were consistent with LP. LP represents 8.93% of renal pathology in our patients, which is consistent with other reports [6, 17,18,19]. LP patients had a high serum creatinine with heavy proteinuria and less disease activity index (SLEDAI) than LN patients, that comes in agreement with other studies [26,27,28]. Patients with proliferative LN should receive more aggressive therapies rather than patients with LP [29]. In this study, the seven LP cases responded rapidly to steroids therapy and achieved complete remission within 1–3 weeks with a median time of 2 weeks. However, three cases experienced one or multiple renal relapses. Similar findings were reported in multiple studies [20, 28, 29]. Those three patients when relapsed, had an extra-renal and serological activity that supports the idea that SLE is the cause rather than an association. We repeated the renal biopsy for two cases of LP during relapse and the results were the same as the previous biopsies so the recurrence was not related to pathological transformation. The rapid response to glucocorticoid, high response rate, and high relapse rate shown by LP patients are similar to children with idiopathic MCD.

Conclusions

  • Lupus podocytopathy is rarely described in p-SLE with renal affection and its pathophysiology is still unclear without immune deposits that may be related to T cell dysfunction, which is the pathogenesis of idiopathic NS in children that makes LP a clinicopathological pattern that behaves like it.

  • We think LP is a spectrum of SLE, not an association as it is related to disease activity and its initial presentation but to add LP as a class in ISN/RPS, needs more studies and larger sample size for an accurate evaluation and documentation of its pathogenesis.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets used and analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

  1. Tiffin N, Adeyemo A, Okpechi I. A diverse array of genetic factors contribute to the pathogenesis of systemic lupus erythematosus. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2013;8(1):2. https://doi.org/10.1186/1750-1172-8-2.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Bertsias G, Cervera R, Boumpas DT. Systemic lupus erythematosus: pathogenesis and clinical features. EULAR textbook on rheumatic diseases. Geneva: European League Against Rheumatism; 2012. p. 476–505.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Sadun RE, Ardoin SP, Schanberg LE. Systemic lupus erythematosus. In: Kliegman RM, Stanton BF, Geme JW, Schor NF, Berhrman RE, editors. Nelson Textbook of Pediatrics, vol. 158. 21st ed. Philadelphia: Saunders Company; 2019. p. 1176–80.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Niaudet P, Salomon R. Systemic lupus erythematosus. In Avner ED, Harmon WE, Niaudet P, et al, editors: Pediatric nephrology, 6th ed, Heidelburg, Springer-Verlag, 2009;1127–1154, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-76341-3_47.

  5. Bajema I, Wilhelmus S, Alpers C, Bruijn J, Colvin R, Cook T, et al. Revision of the International Society of Nephrology/Renal Pathology Society classification for lupus nephritis: clarification of definitions, and modified National Institutes of Health activity and chronicity indices. Kidney Int. 2018;93(4):789–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.kint.2017.11.023.

  6. Hertig A, Droz D, Lesavre P, Grunfeld JP, Rieu P. SLE and idiopathic nephrotic syndrome: coincidence or not? Am J Kidney Dis. 2002;40(6):1179–84. https://doi.org/10.1053/ajkd.2002.36875.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Han TS, Schwartz MM, Lewis EJ. Association of glomerular podocytopathy and nephrotic proteinuria in mesangial lupus nephritis. Lupus. 2006;15(2):71–5. https://doi.org/10.1191/0961203306lu2264oa.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hochberg MC. Updating the American college of rheumatology revised criteria for the classification of systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheumatol. 1997;40(9):1725–7. https://doi.org/10.1002/art.1780400928.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Bertsias G, Ioannidis J, Aringer M, et al. EULAR recommendations for the management of systemic lupus erythematosus with neuropsychiatric manifestations: report of a task force of the EULAR standing committee for clinical affairs. Ann Rheum Dis. 2010;69(12):2074–82. https://doi.org/10.1136/ard.2010.130476.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Weening JJ, D'agati VD, Schwartz MM, Seshan SV, Alpers CE, Appel GB, et al. The classification of glomerulonephritis in systemic lupus erythematosus revisited. Kidney Int. 2004;65(2):521–30. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1755.2004.00443.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Ramirez Gomez L, Uribe Uribe O, Osio Uribe O, Grisales Romero H, Cardiel M, Wojdyla D, et al. Childhood systemic lupus erythematosus in Latin America. The GLADEL experience in 230 children. Lupus. 2008;17(6):596–604. https://doi.org/10.1177/0961203307088006.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Takei S, Maeno N, Shigemori M, Imanaka H, Mori H, Nerome Y, et al. Clinical features of Japanese children and adolescents with systemic lupus erythematosus: results of 1980-1994 survey. Pediatr Int. 1997;39(2):250–6. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-200X.1997.tb03594.x.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Salah S, Lotfy HM, Sabry SM, El Hamshary A, Taher H. Systemic lupus erythematosus in Egyptian children. Rheumatol Int. 2009;29(12):1463–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00296-009-0888-5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. White P. Pediatric systemic lupus erythematosus and neonatal lupus. Rheum Dis Clin N Am. 1994;20(1):119–27.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Bader-Meunier B, Armengaud J, Haddad E, Salomon R, Deschenes G, Kone-Paut I, et al. Initial presentation of childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus: a French multicenter study. J Pediatr. 2005;146(5):648–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpeds.2004.12.045.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Gheita TA, Fawzy SM, Nour El-din AM, El-Fishawy HS. Juvenile and adult onset systemic lupus erythematosus outcome in Egyptian patients. Egypt Rheumatol. 2011;33(2):99–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejr.2011.03.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Dube GK, Markowitz GS, Radhakrishnan J, Appel GB, D’Agati VD. Minimal change disease in systemic lupus erythematosus. Clin Nephrol. 2002;57(02):120–6. https://doi.org/10.5414/CNP57120.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Kraft SW, Schwartz MM, Korbet SM, Lewis EJ. Glomerular podocytopathy in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2005;16(1):175–9. https://doi.org/10.1681/ASN.2004050350.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Hu WX, Chen YH, Bao H, Liu ZZ, Wang SF, Zhang HT, et al. Glucocorticoid with or without additional immunosuppressant therapy for patients with lupus podocytopathy: a retrospective single-center study. Lupus. 2015;24(10):1067–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/0961203315578766.

  20. Andrew SB, Glen SM. Lupus Podocytopathy: a distinct entity. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2016;11:547–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Larsen CP, Freedman BI. Apolipoprotein L1-associated nephropathy and the future of renal diagnostics. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2015;26(6):1232–5. https://doi.org/10.1681/ASN.2014101052.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Lewis EJ, Schwartz MM. Pathology of lupus nephritis. Lupus. 2005;14(1):31–8. https://doi.org/10.1191/0961203305lu2056oa.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Trivedi S, Zeier M, Reiser J. Role of podocytes in lupus nephritis. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2009;24(12):3607–12. https://doi.org/10.1093/ndt/gfp427.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Almaani S, Meara A, Rovin BH. Update on Lupus Nephritis. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2017;12:825–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Ito I, Nishida M, Morioka S, Nozaki T, Imamura T, Morimoto A, et al. A case of steroid-resistant nephrotic syndrome associated with systemic lupus erythematosus. Lupus. 2014;23(7):703–6. https://doi.org/10.1177/0961203311432740.

  26. Sugimoto T, Yamasaki Y, Kobayashi M, Usui H, MatsudaM OT, Ichikawa H, et al. A case of minimal change nephrotic syndrome manifesting acute renal failure in the course of systemic lupus erythematosus [in Japanese]. Nihon Jinzo Gakkai Shi. 2002;44:476–82.

  27. Wilhelmus S, Alpers CE, Cook HT, Ferrario F, Fogo AB, Haas M, et al. The revisited classification of GN in SLE at 10 years: time to re-evaluate histopathologic lesions. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2015;26:2938–46.

  28. Muray S, Herranz T, Alcázar C, Andreu J, Cabezuelo B. Podocitopatía como inicio de un lupus eritematoso sistémico. Nefrologia. 2018;38:660–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Watanabe T. Nephrotic syndrome in mesangial proliferative lupus nephritis. Pediatr Int. 2007;49(6):1009–11. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-200X.2007.02459.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Great thanks to all staff members of the Histopathology Department, EM Unit, Faculty of Medicine, Tanta University for success of this work.

Funding

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Nephrology Unit, Pediatric Department, Tanta University, El-Geesh Street, Tanta, Egypt

    Hend H. Abdelnabi

Authors
  1. Hend H. Abdelnabi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Author designed the study, analyzed data, wrote discussion, revised the work and approved submission manuscript.

Authors’ information

Dr. Hend Hassan Abdelnabi, Assistant Professor of Pediatrics, Pediatric Department, Faculty of Medicine, Tanta University, Addres: El-Geesh Street, Tanta- Egypt, Email ‘hend.abdelnabi@yahoo.com’.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hend H. Abdelnabi.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Ethical committee approval of Tanta Faculty of Medicine obtained (32,603/ 09/ 18), informed consent obtained from parents and participants in the study.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

None.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Abdelnabi, H.H. Is podocytopathy another image of renal affection in p-SLE?. Pediatr Rheumatol 19, 57 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12969-021-00547-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12969-021-00547-9

Keywords

Pediatric Rheumatology

ISSN: 1546-0096