ReviewRheumatic diseases clinics of North America2014
Recent clinical trials in lupus nephritis.
Review in Rheumatic diseases clinics of North America, 2014. 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, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Insights into pediatric lupus nephritis: clinical features and short-term outcomes from a single center retrospective study.BMC nephrology · 2025Article
- High- and low-dose cyclophosphamide in Egyptian lupus nephritis patients: a multicenter retrospective analysis.Zeitschrift fur Rheumatologie · 2024Article
- Urinary soluble alpha chain of the interleukin-2 receptor as a biomarker of active lupus nephritis in Egyptian children with juvenile systemic lupus erythematosus.Archives of rheumatology · 2021Article
- Missed opportunities for timely diagnosis of pediatric lupus in South Africa: a qualitative study.Pediatric rheumatology online journal · 2017Article
- Article
- Overview of pathophysiology and treatment of human lupus nephritis.Current opinion in rheumatology · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Recent clinical trials have provided evidence for the efficacy of low-dose intravenous cyclophosphamide and mycophenolate mofetil as induction treatment for patients with proliferative lupus nephritis in comparative trials with standard-dose intravenous cyclophosphamide. Trials of maintenance treatments have had more variable results, but suggest that the efficacy of mycophenolate mofetil may be similar to that of quarterly standard-dose intravenous cyclophosphamide and somewhat more efficacious than azathioprine. Differential responses to mycophenolate mofetil based on ethnicity suggest that it may be more effective in black and Hispanic patients. Rituximab was not efficacious as an adjunct to induction treatment with mycophenolate mofetil.
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.