Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15495098›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2004

Immunosuppressive treatment for idiopathic membranous nephropathy in adults with nephrotic syndrome.

A Schieppati, A Perna, J Zamora, G A Giuliano, N Braun, G Remuzzi

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Evidence-based practice guideline for the treatment of CKD.Clinical and experimental nephrology · 2009
    Guideline
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Membranous nephropathy.Clinical medicine (London, England) · 2012
    Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

A SchieppatiRenal Medicine, Clinical Research Center for Rare Diseases "Aldo e Cele Daccò", Mario Negri Institute for Pharmacological Research, Via Gavazzeni, 11, Bergamo, Italy, 24125. manuelap@marionegri.it
A Perna
J Zamora
G A Giuliano
N Braun
G Remuzzi
Mario Negri Institute for Pharmacological Research · ITCentro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Epidemiología y Salud Pública · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIdiopathic membranous nephropathy (IMN) is the most common form of nephrotic syndrome in adults. The disease shows a benign or indolent course in the majority of patients, with a rate of spontaneous complete or partial remission of nephrotic syndrome as high as 30% or more. Despite this, 30-40% of patients progress toward end-stage renal failure (ESRF) within 5-15 years.

objectivesTo assess the benefits and harms of immunosuppressive treatment for IMN in adults. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Renal Group Specialised Register (December 2003), The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Cochrane Library Issue 4, 2003), MEDLINE and Pre-MEDLINE (1966 - December 2003), EMBASE (1980 - December 2003), reference lists of nephrology textbooks, review articles, prospective trial registers, relevant trials and abstracts from nephrology scientific meetings and the internet without language restriction. We also contacted principal investigators of controlled studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing any immunosuppressive interventions for the treatment of IMN in adults. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently assessed and extracted information. Information was collected on method, participants, interventions and outcomes (death, ESRF, proteinuria, serum creatinine, GRF, remission, adverse events). MAIN

resultsA total of 18 trials with 1025 patients were included. No differences were found when we combined data of all treatment categories as a group and compared them with placebo or no treatment. Oral glucocorticoids. No beneficial effect on any of the end points chosen for efficacy was observed. Alkylating agents showed a significant beneficial effect on complete remission (RR 2.37, 95%CI 1.32 to 4.25, P = 0.004) but not on partial remission (RR 1.22, 95%CI 0.63 to 2.35, P = 0.56) or complete or partial remission (RR 1.55, 95%CI 0.72 to 3.34, P = 0.27). Cyclophosphamide treatment resulted in significantly lower rate of discontinuations due to adverse events as compared to chlorambucil (RR 2.34, 95%CI 1.25 to 4.39, P = 0.008). There was no evidence of clinically relevant differences in favour of cyclosporin and there was insufficient data on anti-proliferative agents. REVIEWERS'

conclusionsThis review failed to show any long-term effect of immunosuppressive treatment on patient and/or renal survival. There was an increased number of discontinuations due to adverse events in immunosuppressive treatment groups. Within the class of alkylating agents there is weak evidence supporting the efficacy of cyclophosphamide as compared to chlorambucil. On the other hand, cyclophosphamide had fewer side effects leading to patient withdrawal than chlorambucil.

Indexed as

AdultCyclosporineGlomerulonephritis, MembranousHumansImmunosuppressive AgentsNephrotic SyndromeRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicCyclosporineImmunosuppressive Agents

Identifiers

PMID15495098
OpenAlexW4244621157

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.