SynthesisZeitschrift fur Rheumatologie2019
Comparative efficacy and safety of low-dose and high-dose cyclophosphamide as induction therapy for lupus nephritis: a network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Zeitschrift fur Rheumatologie, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of low-dose versus high-dose intravenous cyclophosphamide in Lupus Nephritis: A systematic review and Meta-analysis.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Pooled it
- Low dosage use of cyclophosphamide improves the survival of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus.Clinical rheumatology · 2022Article
- Induction and Maintenance Treatment of Lupus Nephritis: A Comprehensive Review of Meta-Analyses.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
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
aimTo assess the relative efficacy and safety of low-dose cyclophosphamide (LCYC) and high-dose CYC (HCYC) as induction therapy for lupus nephritis.
methodsBayesian random-effects network meta-analysis was performed to combine direct and indirect evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining the efficacy and safety of LCYC, HCYC, and mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) for induction therapy in patients with lupus nephritis.
resultsEleven RCTs (1212 patients) were included. MMF and LCYC showed similar overall response rates (OR 1.02, 95% credible interval [CrI] 0.51-2.02), and MMF showed a higher efficacy than HCYC (OR 1.48, 95% CrI 0.99-2.44). Similarly, LCYC showed a higher overall response than HCYC (OR 1.46, 95% CrI 0.83-2.86). Ranking probability based on SUCRA (surface under the cumulative ranking curve) indicated that MMF had the highest probability of being the best treatment for achieving an overall response (SUCRA = 0.7461), followed by LCYC (SUCRA = 0.6978) and HCYC (SUCRA = 0.0561). LCYC showed the highest probability of decreasing the risk of serious infections (SUCRA = 0.8513), followed by MMF (SUCRA = 0.49387) and HCYC (SUCRA = 0.1548).
conclusionLCYC was an efficacious induction treatment for patients with lupus nephritis and had the highest probability of decreasing the risk of serious infections. Higher response rates and a more favorable safety profile suggest that LCYC is a good option for induction treatment in these patients.
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.