Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27475791›Full record

Trial reportClinical rheumatology2016

Immunosuppressive treatment for pure membranous lupus nephropathy in a Hispanic population.

Juan Manuel Mejía-Vilet, Bertha M Córdova-Sánchez, Norma O Uribe-Uribe, Ricardo Correa-Rotter

Abstract readClinical Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Clinical rheumatology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Not So Benign: Revisiting Pure Membranous Lupus Nephritis.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Observational
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Steroids in Lupus: Enemies or Allies.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Observational
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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Juan Manuel Mejía-ViletDepartment of Nephrology and Mineral Metabolism, National Medical Sciences and Nutrition Institute Salvador Zubirán, Vasco de Quiroga No. 15, Belisario Domínguez Sección XVI, Tlalpan, Distrito Federal, Mexico, Mexico. jmmejia@hotmail.com.
Bertha M Córdova-SánchezDepartment of Nephrology and Mineral Metabolism, National Medical Sciences and Nutrition Institute Salvador Zubirán, Vasco de Quiroga No. 15, Belisario Domínguez Sección XVI, Tlalpan, Distrito Federal, Mexico, Mexico.
Norma O Uribe-UribeDepartment of Pathology, National Medical Sciences and Nutrition Institute Salvador Zubirán, Mexico, Mexico.
Ricardo Correa-RotterDepartment of Nephrology and Mineral Metabolism, National Medical Sciences and Nutrition Institute Salvador Zubirán, Vasco de Quiroga No. 15, Belisario Domínguez Sección XVI, Tlalpan, Distrito Federal, Mexico, Mexico.
Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Médicas y Nutrición Salvador Zubirán · MX

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Optimal treatment for pure membranous lupus nephritis (MLN) remains unknown. The aim of this study was to evaluate the response to immunosuppressive treatment of Hispanics with pure MLN. This was a retrospective cohort analysis from a tertiary care center. Pure MLN patients were segregated into three groups according to the received induction treatment. All patients received adjunctive steroids. Outcomes included complete remission (CR), partial remission (PR), flare incidence, adverse events, and renal and patient survival. All outcomes were analyzed by Cox regression analysis. A total of 60 patients diagnosed with pure MLN between 2004 and 2014 were segregated into mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) (n = 18), intravenous cyclophosphamide (IVC) (n = 16), or azathioprine (AZA) (n = 26) groups. Complete remission rates at 6, 12, and 24 months were 33.3, 52.9, and 76.4 %, respectively, for MMF; 26.9, 42.3, and 54.6 %, respectively, for AZA; and 6.2, 14.8, and 26.9 %, respectively, for IVC. Based on Cox-adjusted analysis, treatment with MMF was associated with higher CR rates (hazard ratio (HR) 4.43, 1.19-16.4, p = 0.026) compared to IVC. There were no differences in CR rates between MMF and AZA groups. Patients treated with adjunctive antimalarial drugs were more likely to achieve CR (HR 2.46, 1.08-5.64, p = 0.032) and had a non-significant trend to lower incidence of thrombotic events (odds ratio (OR) 0.10, 0.010-1.14, p = 0.064). There were no differences in adverse events, renal flares, and renal or patient survival between groups. MMF might be superior to IVC as induction treatment for pure MLN in Hispanics, while AZA might remain as a valid alternative for treatment. Adjunctive treatment with an antimalarial drug may enhance renal response to therapy.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAzathioprineCyclophosphamideDrug Therapy, CombinationFemaleGlomerulonephritis, MembranousHispanic or LatinoHumansImmunosuppressive AgentsLupus NephritisMaleMycophenolic AcidPrednisoneRemission InductionRetrospective StudiesAzathioprineCyclophosphamideImmunosuppressive AgentsMycophenolic AcidPrednisoneHispanicsImmunosuppressionLupus nephritisMembranous nephropathyMycophenolate mofetil

Identifiers

PMID27475791
OpenAlexW2481125963

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.