Momen Mohamed Ibrahim, Bisher Sawaf, Noheir Ashraf Ibrahem Fathy Hassan, Momen Hassan Moussa, Mayar Ibrahim, Karam R Motawea, Muhammed Elhadi, Yaseen Alastal
{"title":"Comparative Efficacy of Mycophenolate Mofetil vs. Azathioprine in Autoimmune Hepatitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Momen Mohamed Ibrahim, Bisher Sawaf, Noheir Ashraf Ibrahem Fathy Hassan, Momen Hassan Moussa, Mayar Ibrahim, Karam R Motawea, Muhammed Elhadi, Yaseen Alastal","doi":"10.1159/000548140","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Azathioprine (AZA) is the standard treatment for both induction and maintenance of response in autoimmune hepatitis (AIH). However, lifelong administration is often required, and the combination therapy of prednisolone and azathioprine raises significant concerns regarding efficacy and tolerability, especially given the high relapse rates following AZA cessation. Consequently, there is a need to explore alternative treatment options. This systematic review and meta-analysis compared the efficacy and safety of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) versus AZA, combined with prednisolone, for treating AIH.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched to identify randomized clinical trials and cohort studies comparing AZA and MMF for treating AIH. Four studies compared steroid withdrawal and complete biochemical response (CBR) between the MMF and AZA groups. Subgroup analyses were performed based on age (above and below 50 years) and IgG levels (above and below 2400 mg/dL). RevMan (version 5.4) software was used for meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Four studies (three cohort studies and one RCT) comprising 505 patients were included in the final analysis. The pooled analysis showed a statistically significant association between the MMF group and increased CBR compared with the AZA group (RR = 1.44, 95% CI = 1.03 to 2.01, p-value = 0.03), with no significant difference between the two groups regarding steroid withdrawal. Subgroup analysis by age revealed a significant association between the MMF group and increased CBR in patients over 50 years (RR = 1.63, 95% CI = 1.00-2.64, p-value = 0.05). IgG subgroup analysis revealed a significant association between the MMF group and increased biochemical remission compared with the AZA group in patients with IgG levels of less than 2400 mg/dL (RR = 1.63, 95% CI = 1.00-2.64, p-value = 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The use of MMF was significantly associated with increased CBR compared to AZA in patients with AIH. Additionally, there was no significant association between the two groups regarding steroid withdrawal. Further research is needed to fully elucidate the optimal treatment strategy for AIH patients across different subpopulations.</p>","PeriodicalId":11315,"journal":{"name":"Digestion","volume":" ","pages":"1-14"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Digestion","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000548140","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Azathioprine (AZA) is the standard treatment for both induction and maintenance of response in autoimmune hepatitis (AIH). However, lifelong administration is often required, and the combination therapy of prednisolone and azathioprine raises significant concerns regarding efficacy and tolerability, especially given the high relapse rates following AZA cessation. Consequently, there is a need to explore alternative treatment options. This systematic review and meta-analysis compared the efficacy and safety of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) versus AZA, combined with prednisolone, for treating AIH.
Methods: PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched to identify randomized clinical trials and cohort studies comparing AZA and MMF for treating AIH. Four studies compared steroid withdrawal and complete biochemical response (CBR) between the MMF and AZA groups. Subgroup analyses were performed based on age (above and below 50 years) and IgG levels (above and below 2400 mg/dL). RevMan (version 5.4) software was used for meta-analysis.
Results: Four studies (three cohort studies and one RCT) comprising 505 patients were included in the final analysis. The pooled analysis showed a statistically significant association between the MMF group and increased CBR compared with the AZA group (RR = 1.44, 95% CI = 1.03 to 2.01, p-value = 0.03), with no significant difference between the two groups regarding steroid withdrawal. Subgroup analysis by age revealed a significant association between the MMF group and increased CBR in patients over 50 years (RR = 1.63, 95% CI = 1.00-2.64, p-value = 0.05). IgG subgroup analysis revealed a significant association between the MMF group and increased biochemical remission compared with the AZA group in patients with IgG levels of less than 2400 mg/dL (RR = 1.63, 95% CI = 1.00-2.64, p-value = 0.05).
Conclusion: The use of MMF was significantly associated with increased CBR compared to AZA in patients with AIH. Additionally, there was no significant association between the two groups regarding steroid withdrawal. Further research is needed to fully elucidate the optimal treatment strategy for AIH patients across different subpopulations.
期刊介绍:
''Digestion'' concentrates on clinical research reports: in addition to editorials and reviews, the journal features sections on Stomach/Esophagus, Bowel, Neuro-Gastroenterology, Liver/Bile, Pancreas, Metabolism/Nutrition and Gastrointestinal Oncology. Papers cover physiology in humans, metabolic studies and clinical work on the etiology, diagnosis, and therapy of human diseases. It is thus especially cut out for gastroenterologists employed in hospitals and outpatient units. Moreover, the journal''s coverage of studies on the metabolism and effects of therapeutic drugs carries considerable value for clinicians and investigators beyond the immediate field of gastroenterology.