Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19581908›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Nephrology2009

Controversies in the treatment of idiopathic membranous nephropathy.

Meryl Waldman, Howard A Austin

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Nephrology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Mouse models of membranous nephropathy: the road less travelled by.American journal of clinical and experimental immunology · 2013
    Article
  20. Chapter 7: Idiopathic membranous nephropathy.Kidney international supplements · 2012
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Meryl WaldmanKidney Disease Section, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA. waldmanm@niddk.nih.gov
Howard A Austin

Funding

Sirolimus Therapy in Idiopathic and Lupus Membranous NephropathyZ01DK061500 · NIDDK · NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF DIABETES AND DIGESTIVE AND KIDNEY DISEASES · PI BALOW, JAMES · 2003 to 2008
$1.6M
Sirolimus Therapy in Idiopathic and Lupus Membranous NephropathyZIADK061500 · NIDDK · NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF DIABETES AND DIGESTIVE AND KIDNEY DISEASES · PI BALOW, JAMES · 2009 to 2014
$1.0M
Intramural NIH HHS ZIA DK061500
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Optimum treatment of idiopathic membranous nephropathy is both controversial and challenging. The most extensively studied and frequently used immunosuppressive regimens for this disease comprise alkylating agents plus corticosteroids or ciclosporin. All of these treatment options have inherent problems: they are not effective in all patients, partial-rather than complete-remissions are common, adverse effects are worrisome, and relapses after treatment cessation remain problematic. Alternative immunosuppressive agents have been tested in an effort to overcome these unresolved issues. This paper reviews the available evidence regarding both established and new agents for the treatment of patients with idiopathic membranous nephropathy, with an emphasis on the results of the most recent clinical trials.

Indexed as

Disease ProgressionGlomerulonephritis, MembranousHumansImmunosuppressive AgentsKidney Function TestsRecurrenceRemission InductionImmunosuppressive Agents

Identifiers

PMID19581908
PMCPMC2965515

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.