ReviewTranslational research : the journal of laboratory and clinical medicine2018
Precision medicine in lupus nephritis: can biomarkers get us there?
Review in Translational research : the journal of laboratory and clinical medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Observational
- Clinical and Immunological Biomarkers for Systemic Lupus Erythematosus.Biomolecules · 2021Review
- Lupus nephritis: challenges and progress.Current opinion in rheumatology · 2019Review
- CTLA-4 Expression Inversely Correlates with Kidney Function and Serum Immunoglobulin Concentration in Patients with Primary Glomerulonephritides.Archivum immunologiae et therapiae experimentalis · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Patients with systemic lupus erythematosus frequently develop lupus nephritis (LN), a condition that can lead to end-stage kidney disease. Multiple serum and urine biomarkers for LN have been proposed in recent years, yet none have become incorporated into clinical use. The majority of studies have been single center with significant variability in cohorts, assays, and sample storage, leading to inconclusive results. It has become clear that no single biomarker is likely to be sufficient to diagnose LN, identify flares, and define the response to therapy and prognosis. A more likely scenario is a panel of urine, serum, tissue, and genetic biomarkers. In this review, we summarize traditional and novel biomarkers and discuss how they may be utilized in order to bring precision medicine to clinical practice in LN.
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.