ArticleClinical kidney journal2026
Role of lupus nephritis classification systems in everyday clinical practice: a questionnaire-based survey of the Renal Pathology Society (RPS).
Article in Clinical kidney journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Kidney biopsy is the gold standard for lupus nephritis (LN) diagnosis, with the 2018 International Society of Nephrology (ISN)/Renal Pathology Society (RPS) histopathological classification widely used for prognosis and treatment decisions. A survey assessing the use of the 2018 ISN/RPS classification in daily practice was recently conducted on behalf of the RPS. Methods: An online survey was sent to active RPS members after a webinar that introduced RPS members to the topic. The survey contained multiple choice and open-ended questions and remained open 30 days for completion. Results were analysed anonymously. Results: Of 562 RPS members, 185 (32.9%) replied to the questionnaire; 180 (97.8%) were pathologists and 120 of these (64.8%) indicated they encounter >20 biopsies with LN per year. The 2018 ISN/RPS classification and the modified National Institutes of Health activity/chronicity indices are used by 92.4% and 88.1% of respondents, respectively. Respondents rated the utility of both systems with a median score of 8 (interquartile range 7-9) on a 1-10 scale. Suggested improvements to the current classification system include greater standardization and simplicity, clearer definitions for grey-zone entities and the introduction of guidelines for new parameters and biomarkers. Conclusions: This study shows that the 2018 ISN/RPS LN classification is widely used in everyday practice by pathologists. Our results highlight the need for ongoing refinement to facilitate targeted treatment decisions, particularly considering evolving phenotypes and therapeutic advancements in LN.
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.