ArticleBMC nephrology2021
Fetal and maternal outcome in patients with active lupus nephritis: comparison between new-onset and pre-existing lupus nephritis.
Article in BMC nephrology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dual BAFF/APRIL inhibition with telitacicept in systemic lupus erythematosus and IgA nephropathy: pharmacological rationale, clinical efficacy, and safety on female fertility preservation.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Pooled it
- Investigating the role of health information technology in the control and management of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE): a systematic review.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2022Pooled it
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to investigate fetal and maternal outcomes in women with active lupus nephritis (LN). Specifically, we compared women who had new-onset LN and those with pre-existing LN during pregnancy.
methodsPatients with active LN during pregnancy were divided into the new-onset group (LN first occurred during pregnancy) and the pre-existing group (a history of LN) on the basis of the onset time of LN. Data on clinical features, laboratory findings, and pregnancy outcome were collected and analyzed between the two groups. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to compare the effects of active LN on adverse pregnancy outcomes.
resultsWe studied 73 pregnancies in 69 women between 2010 and 2019. Of these, 38 pregnancies were in the pre-existing LN group and 35 were in the new-onset group. Patients with pre-existing LN had a higher risk of composite adverse fetal outcomes than those with new-onset LN [adjusted odds ratio (ORs), 44.59; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.21-1664.82; P = 0.039]. However, the two groups had similar adverse maternal outcomes (ORs, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.36-4.29). Serum albumin and proteinuria significantly improved after pregnancy (P < 0.001). Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that the long-term renal outcome was similar between the two groups.
conclusionsPregnant patients with pre-existing LN were associated with a higher risk of composite adverse fetal outcomes than those with new-onset LN. However, these two groups of patients had similar adverse maternal outcomes. The long-term renal outcomes were not different after pregnancy between these two groups.
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.