Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26122951›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Rheumatology2015

The evolution of drug discovery in systemic lupus erythematosus.

Daniel J Wallace

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Rheumatology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
5.4field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 52 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Fracture risk and bone mineral density levels in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2016
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Principles behind SLE treatment withImmunometabolism (Cobham, Surrey) · 2022
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Daniel J WallaceDivision of Rheumatology, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, 8737 Beverly Boulevard, Suite 302, West Hollywood, CA 90048, USA.
Cedars-Sinai Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Drug discovery in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) has lagged behind other rheumatic diseases, in large part because of difficulty in measuring change or improvement in a disorder that involves multiple organ systems to varying degrees at different times. The metrics currently used as primary endpoints are composite indices that rely mainly on disease assessment measures derived before the era of clinical trials of targeted therapies. Only one agent has been approved for the treatment of SLE since 1957. This monograph reviews the evolution of drug development for SLE, problems and pitfalls that have been encountered, and outlines the domains used to evaluate SLE in the clinic. Finally, several initiatives underway to improve clinical trial design are outlined.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicDrug DiscoveryHumansLupus Erythematosus, Systemic

Identifiers

PMID26122951
OpenAlexW2211480306

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.