ArticleHeliyon2024
Impact of dosing strategy on clinical outcomes of patients with lupus nephritis initially treated with lower-than-recommended-dose cyclophosphamide.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Influence of Puncture Devices on the Accuracy of Cyclophosphamide Dosing for Chemotherapy Administration.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: Cyclophosphamide is the mainstay treatment for patients with lupus nephritis (LN); it can be prescribed at lower doses than the recommended regimen to avoid side effects. We aimed to investigate the impact of cyclophosphamide dosing strategies on treatment outcomes of patients with LN initially treated with a lower-than-recommended dose. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed patients with proliferative LN (class III, IV, or mixed) initially treated with lower-than-recommended-dose cyclophosphamide. Patients who received a titrated dose of cyclophosphamide ≥0.5 g/m Results: Of the 78 patients included, 47 were assigned to the titrate group and 31 to the non-titrate group. The titrate group had a higher proportion of PRR achievement (23 of 47 patients [48.9 %] vs. 7 of 31 patients [22.6 %] in the non-titrate group). After adjusting for potential confounders, a baseline urinary protein-to-creatinine ratio ≥3 g/g (OR, 0.3; 95 % CI, 0.1-0.9; P = 0.030), and titrating the dose of cyclophosphamide to ≥0.5 g/m Conclusion: For patients with LN initially treated with lower-than-recommended-dose cyclophosphamide, titration of the cyclophosphamide dose ≥0.5 g/m
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.