ArticleKidney research and clinical practice2024
Effect of immunosuppressive agents on clinical outcomes in idiopathic membranous nephropathy.
Article in Kidney research and clinical practice, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of immunosuppressive therapy in low-risk and intermediate- risk idiopathic membranous nephropathy patients : a 2-year follow-up study.BMC nephrology · 2026Article
- Retrospective analysis of serum NELL-1 and EXT1/2: no significant predictive value for treatment response in a cohort of membranous nephropathy patients.Renal failure · 2025Article
- Renal arteriolosclerosis impact on clinicopathological features and outcomes of idiopathic membranous nephropathy: a retrospective cohort analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFew comparative studies on the effects of immunosuppressants in patients with idiopathic membranous nephropathy have been conducted.
methodsData from 489 patients who received conservative treatment or immunosuppressants were retrospectively analyzed by propensity score matching. Primary outcomes were complete or partial remission (CR or PR) of proteinuria, and secondary outcomes were renal survival and infection.
resultsOf the 489 patients, 357 (73.0%) received immunosuppressants. Propensity score matching identified 82 patients from the conservative group and 82 patients in the immunosuppressant group. CR or PR at 12 months was significantly higher in the immunosuppressant group compared with the conservative group for the total population (p = 0.002) and the propensity score-matched population (p = 0.02). The use of immunosuppressants was significantly more effective with respect to achieving a CR or PR at 12 months in patients who were aged <65 years or female, or who had a proteinuria level of ≥4.0 g/g or an estimated glomerular filtration rate of ≥60 mL/min/1.73 m2 (p < 0.05). Renal survival was similar between patients receiving immunosuppressants and conservative treatment in both the total and matched populations. The immunosuppressant group (21.8%) had a significantly higher incidence of infections compared with the conservative group (13.6%) for the total population (p = 0.03), but statistical significance disappeared in the matched population (p > 0.99).
conclusionThe remission rate was significantly higher in the immunosuppressant group than in the conservative group, particularly in the subgroup of patients who were young or female, or those with heavy proteinuria loads or good renal function.
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.