Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40927377›Full record

ArticleClinical kidney journal2025

Telitacicept versus mycophenolate mofetil in IgA nephropathy: a real-world comparative study of efficacy, renal outcomes and safety.

Yangyang He, Shasha Chen, Kaixiang Liu, Xintong Wu, Min Yu, Wei Wang, Kun Peng, Li Wang, Guisen Li, Xisheng Xie and 2 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical kidney journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Yangyang HeDepartment of Nephrology and Institute of Nephrology, Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0002-5901-0388
Shasha ChenDepartment of Nephrology and Institute of Nephrology, Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Kaixiang LiuDepartment of Nephrology and Institute of Nephrology, Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Xintong WuSchool of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Min YuDepartment of Nephrology and Institute of Nephrology, Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Wei WangDepartment of Nephrology and Institute of Nephrology, Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Kun PengDepartment of Nephrology and Institute of Nephrology, Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Li WangDepartment of Nephrology and Institute of Nephrology, Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Guisen LiDepartment of Nephrology and Institute of Nephrology, Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Xisheng XieDepartment of Nephrology, Second Clinical College of Nanchong North Sichuan Medical College, Nanchong Central Hospital, Nanchong, Sichuan, China.
Wei QinDivision of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4246-5431
Xiang ZhongDepartment of Nephrology and Institute of Nephrology, Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3585-4201

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of telitacicept versus mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) in high-risk progressive immunoglobulin A nephropathy (IgAN). Methods: This retrospective, multicentre cohort study included patients with high-risk progressive IgAN who received telitacicept or MMF therapy, both combined with low-dose steroids. Clinical data were collected from treatment initiation to 12 months. Results: A total of 104 patients were included, with 56 receiving MMF and 48 receiving telitacicept. The average age was 36.9 ± 11.8 years. Baseline characteristics were well balanced between groups, except for serum albumin, uric acid and tubular pathology based on the Oxford classification, which showed significant differences. At 12 months, telitacicept plus low-dose steroids demonstrated superior proteinuria reduction (-62.5% versus -52.9%, Conclusions: Telitacicept may offer better efficacy compared with MMF for proteinuria reduction in high-risk IgAN patients, while reducing combined glucocorticoid requirements and demonstrating a more favourable safety profile. These advantages position it as a promising therapeutic option, warranting further randomized validation.

Indexed as

eGFRIgA nephropathymycophenolate mofetilproteinuriatelitacicept

Identifiers

PMID40927377
PMCPMC12415519

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.