Evidence Hub

Efficacy and safety of avacopan in antineutrophil cytoplasmic autoantibody-associated vasculitis: a retrospective cohort study in Japan

Genri Tagami, M. Yamaguchi, H. Sugiyama, H. Kinashi, Kentaro Imai, Keisuke Kamiya, Takayuki Katsuno, Takahiro Imaizumi et al.

BMC Rheumatology, 2025

21 participants · 18 citations

Abstract

Avacopan, an oral C5a receptor antagonist, demonstrated efficacy as an alternative to glucocorticoid therapy in patients with antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitis (AAV) in the phase 3 ADVOCATE trial. However, limited real-world data exist on the outcomes and experiences associated with avacopan use for AAV in Japan. We performed a single-centre retrospective analysis and evaluated 21 patients with newly diagnosed or relapsed AAV who received avacopan. The co-primary outcomes were clinical remission at 6 and 12 months. Among the 21 patients, 20 (95.2%) achieved clinical remission at 6 months, and 19 (90.4%) sustained remission at 12 months. The median time from initiation of immunosuppressive therapy to the start of avacopan was 12 days (interquartile range, 5–26). Adverse events were reported in 10 patients (47.6%), with elevated liver enzyme levels observed in eight patients (38.1%) as the most frequent complication. Avacopan was discontinued in nine patients (42.9%). Despite early discontinuation, these patients achieved comparable rates of clinical remission at 6 months, sustained remission at 12 months, and experienced a reduction in glucocorticoid doses relative to those who continued avacopan. A high incidence of adverse events, particularly liver enzyme elevation, and frequent early discontinuations of avacopan were observed. Nevertheless, favourable clinical outcomes and reduced glucocorticoid doses were achieved regardless of avacopan…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 21 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free