ArticleJournal of nephropathology2015
Resolution of C1q deposition but not of the clinical nephrotic syndrome after immunomodulating therapy in focal sclerosis.
Article in Journal of nephropathology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- A clinicopathological and prognostic study of 18 children with C1q nephropathy and focal segmental glomerulosclerosis: an 18-year experience from a single center.Journal of nephrology · 2023Article
- [Advances in clinical research on C1q nephropathy].Zhongguo dang dai er ke za zhi = Chinese journal of contemporary pediatrics · 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
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe natural evolution of C1q nephropathy (C1qNP) during immunosuppressive treatment is relatively little studied or understood. CASE PRESENTATION: A 30 year-old Caucasian female was referred to us for further management of biopsy-proven C1qNP and severe nephrotic syndrome. Serologic work-up remained negative, including complement C3 and C4 levels and repeated testing for antinuclear antibodies. A renal biopsy revealed minimal change nephropathy vs. focal sclerosis on light microscopy and C1qNP on immunopathology. She has failed trials of high-dose oral prednisone, mycophenolate mofetil 1,500 mg twice a day and a subsequent regimen of monthly IV cyclophosphamide 750 mg × 9 cycles. She also received the maximum tolerated angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and spironolactone therapy. Random urine protein-to-creatinine (UPC) ratio predicted proteinuria in the range between 5-35 gm/day, while serum creatinine rose progressively from 1.0 mg/dL to 1.4 mg/dL (to convert to μmol/L, multiply by 88.4). A decision was made to repeat renal biopsy to reassess the underlying histology. The biopsy revealed focal sclerosis but no C1q deposition.
conclusionsOur case illustrates at least two points: first, an established pathologic diagnosis does not obviate the need for repeated renal biopsy later on, should diagnostic uncertainty persist. Second, histological diagnoses may evolve over time, especially in a patient receiving active and powerful immune-modulating treatment. In our case, the clinical nephrosis did not change with immunosuppressive therapy while C1q deposition ceased, making this latter entity likely the immunologically mediated process.
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.