ReviewHealth science reports2025
Systematic Review of Management Strategies for Alport Syndrome: Implications for Male Patients.
Review in Health science reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bibliometric analysis of Alport syndrome: genetic foundations, clinical implications, and the transition to precision medicine.International urology and nephrology · 2026Article
- Case Report: A novel TTN gene variant and a concurrent rare COL4A4 gene variant in a Chinese patient with dilated cardiomyopathy.Frontiers in cardiovascular 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Alport Syndrome (AS) is a rare genetic disorder characterized by progressive kidney disease, hearing loss, and ocular abnormalities, with an incidence of approximately 1 in 50,000 newborns. Due to the severity of the disease, particularly in males with X-linked inheritance, this systematic review consolidates current management strategies, highlighting advancements and existing gaps in treatment options. Methods: This systematic review followed a protocol registered on the OSF platform (osf. io/k86ms). A comprehensive search of PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Library, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the WHO ICTRP was completed by December 24, 2023. Studies eligible for inclusion were clinical trials or observational studies evaluating AS management. Four clinical trials from six publications and two observational studies met the inclusion criteria. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane ROB 2 tool for clinical trials and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for observational studies. Key interventions examined included bardoxolone methyl, ramipril, and losartan. Results: Bardoxolone methyl, ramipril, and losartan demonstrated potential benefits in slowing renal disease progression in AS. Observational studies indicated that early intervention might delay the need for dialysis and improve life expectancy. However, significant heterogeneity among studies precluded quantitative synthesis. Ongoing studies on AS management encompass 25 trials involving 52,135 participants, reflecting an active area of research. Conclusion: Bardoxolone methyl, ramipril, and losartan show promise in delaying renal failure in AS. Nonetheless, the findings highlight the critical need for larger, more diverse trials to validate these therapies and explore additional treatment strategies. Future research must aim to address these evidence gaps, improving treatment efficacy and patient quality of life, particularly for males disproportionately affected by the disease. Protocol Registration: The protocol for this systematic review is registered in the Open Science Framework (OSF): osf. io/k86ms.
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.