ArticleRheumatology (Oxford, England)2021
Mycophenolate mofetil for methotrexate-resistant juvenile localized scleroderma.
Article in Rheumatology (Oxford, England), 2021. 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, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Idiopathic Atrophoderma of Pasini and Pierini: Response to Mycophenolic Acid Treatment.Cureus · 2025Article
- Recent Advances in Treatment of Systemic Sclerosis and Morphea.American journal of clinical dermatology · 2024Review
- Morphea: The 2023 update.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Review
- Prior elicitation of the efficacy and tolerability of Methotrexate and Mycophenolate Mofetil in Juvenile Localised Scleroderma.AMRC open research · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate safety and efficacy of MMF in patients with severe or MTX-refractory juvenile localized scleroderma.
methodsConsecutive juvenile localized scleroderma patients undergoing systemic treatment were included in a retrospective longitudinal study. Patients treated with MMF because they were refractory or intolerant to MTX (MMF-group) were compared with responders to MTX (MTX-group). Disease activity was assessed by Localized Scleroderma Cutaneous Assessment Tool and thermography. Disease course was established on the number of relapses and treatment changes. Relapse-free survival was examined by Kaplan-Meier analysis.
resultsMMF and MTX groups included 22 and 47 patients, respectively. No significant difference in demographics, follow-up duration and treatment before diagnosis was observed between groups. The most represented clinical subtypes in the MMF-group were pansclerotic morphea and mixed subtype (P = 0.008 and P = 0.029, respectively), and linear scleroderma of the face in the MTX-group (P = 0.048). MMF was started because of MTX resistance (18 patients), relapse during MTX tapering/withdrawal (3 patients) and anaphylaxis to MTX (1 patient). After mean 9.4 years of follow-up, 90.9% of patients on MMF and 100% of those on MTX had inactive disease. No significant difference in relapse-free survival between the groups was found (P = 0.066, log-rank test), although MMF likely induced more persistent remission. MMF was well tolerated and combination of MMF and MTX did not increase its efficacy.
conclusionThe present study adds strong evidence on the efficacy and tolerance of MMF in severe and/or MTX-refractory juvenile localized scleroderma. Further controlled studies are needed to prove its efficacy as first line treatment.
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.