ArticleBMC medicine2023
A modified renal risk score for Chinese patients with antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody-associated vasculitis.
Article in BMC medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Representation of multimorbidity and frailty in the development and validation of kidney failure prognostic prediction models: a systematic review.BMC medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Anti-Neutrophil Cytoplasmic Antibody-Associated Vasculitis in China: Epidemiology, Management, Prognosis, and Outlook.Kidney diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- The correlation of interstitial change with renal prognosis in patients with myeloperoxidase-ANCA-associated glomerulonephritis: a single-center retrospective analysis.Clinical rheumatology · 2024Article
- Advances in the Assessment and Treatment of Anti-Neutrophil Cytoplasmic Antibody-Associated Glomerulonephritis.Journal of inflammation research · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe renal risk score (RRS) is a useful tool to predict end-stage renal disease (ESRD) in patients with antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitis (AAV). The current study aimed to validate the predictive performance of RRS and to further modify this model in Chinese AAV patients.
methodsTwo hundred and seventy-two patients diagnosed with AAV confirmed by renal biopsies were retrospectively enrolled from a single center. The RRS was calculated based on 3 categorical variables, i.e., the proportion of normal glomeruli, the proportion of interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy (IF/TA), and eGFR at biopsy, classifying these patients into low-, medium-, and high-risk groups. In addition, a modified model was developed based on the RRS and was further validated in another independent cohort of 117 AAV patients. The predictive performance of each model was evaluated according to discrimination and calibration.
resultsPatients were classified by the RRS into low- (26.5%), medium- (46.7%), and high-risk (26.8%) groups, with 120-month renal survival rates of 93.3%, 57.2%, and 18.4%, respectively (P < 0.001). The RRS showed good discrimination but less satisfactory calibration. Therefore, a modified model with improved discrimination and calibration was developed in Chinese AAV patients, with eGFR, proportion of normal glomeruli (both as continuous variables), and IF/TA (< 25%, 25-50%, > 50%) included. Internal and external validation of the modified model were performed. Finally, an online risk prediction tool was developed based on the modified model.
conclusionsThe RRS was an independent predictor of ESRD of AAV patients. The modified model could predict the probability of ESRD for AAV patients with improved performance in Chinese AAV patients.
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.