Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33590973›Full record

ArticleACR open rheumatology2021

Granulomatosis With Polyangiitis and Microscopic Polyangiitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Benefits and Harms of Common Treatments.

Jason M Springer, Mohamad A Kalot, Nedaa M Husainat, Kevin W Byram, Anisha B Dua, Karen E James, Yih Chang Lin, Marat Turgunbaev, Alexandra Villa-Forte, Andy Abril and 4 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in ACR open rheumatology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
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

14 authors at 11 institutions in 1 country.

Jason M SpringerVanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3903-6049
Mohamad A KalotState University of New York at Buffalo.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6581-4561
Nedaa M HusainatSt. Mary's Hospital, Saint Louis, Missouri.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9638-2992
Kevin W ByramVanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6441-1915
Anisha B DuaNorthwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois.
Karen E JamesUniversity of Utah Health, Salt Lake City.
Yih Chang LinUniversity of South Florida, Tampa.
Marat TurgunbaevAmerican College of Rheumatology, Atlanta, Georgi.
Alexandra Villa-ForteCleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio.
Andy AbrilMayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida.
Carol LangfordCleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio.
Mehrdad MazUniversity of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, Kansas.
Sharon A ChungUniversity of California, San Francisco Medical Center.
Reem A MustafaUniversity of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, Kansas.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2091-0875
Cleveland Clinic · USUniversity of Kansas Medical Center · USVanderbilt University Medical Center · USAmerican College of Rheumatology · USJacksonville College · USNorthwestern University · USSt. Mary's Hospital · USUniversity at Buffalo, State University of New York · USUniversity of California San Francisco Medical Center · USUniversity of South Florida · USUniversity of Utah · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe aim of this systemic review is to compare different treatments for patients with granulomatosis with polyangiitis (GPA) and microscopic polyangiitis (MPA) to inform evidence-based recommendations for the American College of Rheumatology (ACR)/Vasculitis Foundation (VF) Vasculitis Management Guidelines.

methodsA systemic review was conducted by searching articles in English using OVID Medline, PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. Articles were screened for suitability in addressing PICO questions, with studies presenting the highest level of evidence given preference.

resultsA total of 729 full-text articles addressing GPA and MPA PICO questions were reviewed. For remission induction, rituximab was shown to be noninferior to cyclophosphamide (CYC) (odds ratio [OR]: 1.55, moderate certainty of evidence). The addition of plasma exchange to induction therapy in severe disease did not improve the composite end point of death or end stage renal disease (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.86 [95% confidence interval CI: 0.65, 1.13], moderate certainty of evidence). In nonsevere disease, methotrexate was noninferior to CYC for induction of remission (remission at 6 months of 90% vs. 94%). For maintenance of remission, methotrexate and azathioprine showed no difference in the risk of relapse over a mean follow-up of 29 months (HR: 0.92, [95% CI: 0.52, 1.65]low certainty of evidence). As maintenance therapy, rituximab was superior to a tapering azathioprine strategy in major relapse-free survival at 28 months (HR: 6.61, [95% CI: 1.56, 27.96], moderate certainty of evidence). In two randomized trials, longer-term azathioprine maintenance therapy (>24 months) is associated with fewer relapses without an increase in adverse events.

conclusionThis comprehensive systematic review synthesizes and evaluates the benefits and toxicities of different treatment options for GPA and MPA.

Identifiers

PMID33590973
PMCPMC7966881
OpenAlexW3129554381

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.