ArticleThe Journal of international medical research2018
Cyclophosphamide versus cyclosporine A therapy in steroid-resistant nephrotic syndrome: a retrospective study with a mean 5-year follow-up.
Article in The Journal of international medical research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and safety of cyclosporine a for patients with steroid-resistant nephrotic syndrome: a meta-analysis.BMC nephrology · 2019Pooled it
- Immune-Enhancement Effects of 6-Methoxykaempferol on Cyclophosphamide-Induced Immunosuppression via Improving Antioxidant Enzyme Expression, NF-κB and MAPK Signaling, and Modulating Gut Microbiome.Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Review
- Efficacy of Calcineurin Inhibition in Children With Steroid-Resistant Nephrotic Syndrome.Kidney international reports · 2025Article
- Understanding the podocyte immune responses in proteinuric kidney diseases: from pathogenesis to therapy.Frontiers in immunology · 2023Review
- Protective effects of rituximab on puromycin-induced apoptosis, loss of adhesion and cytoskeletal alterations in human podocytes.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Current understandings in treating children with steroid-resistant nephrotic syndrome.Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany) · 2021Review
- Immunosuppressive therapy in children with primary nephrotic syndrome: single center experience, Karachi, Pakistan.BMC nephrology · 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
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the clinical efficacy of cyclophosphamide (CTX) and cyclosporine A (CSA) in initial treatment of children with steroid-resistant nephrotic syndrome (SRNS).
methodsProspectively maintained databases were reviewed to retrospectively compare two cohorts with SRNS that received peroral administration of 2 to 2.5 mg/kg/d CTX for 3 to 6 months or 1 to 5 mg/kg/d CSA for 2 years until the primary analysis cut-off date during 2007 to 2011. The time to first on-study relapse of SRNS was the primary endpoint. The effective rate was the second endpoint.
resultsA total of 127 children with SRNS were included (CTX-treated cohort: n = 62; CSA-treated cohort: n = 65), with a mean 5-year follow-up. CTX-treated children showed a significantly delayed time to first on-study relapse of SRNS compared with CSA-treated children (hazard ratio 0.66, 95% confidence interval 0.32-1.75). The relapse rate (rate/year) in CTX-treated children (1.1 ± 0.1) at the 24-month follow-up was significantly higher than that with CSA (0.4 ± 0.2). This difference persisted until the final follow-up.
conclusionsCSA is associated with a significantly lower relapse rate and significantly higher effective rate compared with CTX, especially in children with minimal change disease.
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.