ReviewCurrent rheumatology reports2009
Biomarkers for renal disease in childhood.
Review in Current rheumatology reports, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Molecular mechanism of Hedyotis Diffusae Herba in the treatment of lupus nephritis based on network pharmacology.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Article
- Role of Shiga/Vero toxins in pathogenesis.Microbiology spectrum · 2014Review
- Label-free quantitative proteomics reveals differentially regulated proteins influencing urolithiasis.Molecular & cellular proteomics : MCP · 2011Article
- Markers of childhood lupus nephritis indicating disease activity.Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany) · 2011Article
- Identification of urinary metabolites that distinguish membranous lupus nephritis from proliferative lupus nephritis and focal segmental glomerulosclerosis.Arthritis research & therapy · 2011Article
- Urinary monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 correlates with disease activity in lupus nephritis.Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany) · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A kidney biopsy is currently required to diagnose lupus nephritis (LN). Invasiveness related to kidney biopsies, however, makes it a prohibitive approach in daily clinical practice for the assessment of LN-related activity and damage. The lack of accurate LN biomarkers inhibits effective testing of new, less toxic medications. Research in LN biomarkers involves two principal methods: 1) the candidate biomarker approach that tests molecules known to be involved in LN pathogenesis, and 2) broad-based biomarker-screening techniques. These methods suggest that the following may all be potent LN biomarkers: CCL2 (chemokine ligand 2; also known as MCP-1 ); CCL5 (chemokine ligand 5; also known as RANTES ); and CX3CL1 (chemokine ligand 1; also known as fractalkine); IP-10 (interferon-inducible protein 10; also known as chemokine ligand 10); neutrophil gelatinase associate lipocalin; hepcidin; adiponectin; transferrin; ceruloplasmin; lipocalin-like prostaglandin synthetase-D; and orosomucoid.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.