ArticleInternational journal of general medicine2026
Therapeutic Effect Comparisons of Cyclophosphamide and Methotrexate in Immune-Mediated Necrotizing Myopathy.
Article in International journal of general medicine, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Immune-mediated necrotizing myopathy (IMNM) is a rapidly progressing autoimmune muscle disease that severely affects the proximal, respiratory, and cardiac muscles. There is no globally unified consensus on treatment. Here, we compare the effects of cyclophosphamide (CTX) and methotrexate (MTX) in IMNM to provide evidence for treatment strategies. Methods: This is a retrospective single-center study. Patients were assigned into a CTX group or an MTX group based on the type of immunosuppressant. Statistical analyses were compared using SPSS 23.0. Results: A total of 35 patients were included-19 in the CTX group, and 16 in the MTX group. Before treatment, the aspartic transaminase (AST) levels were significantly higher in the CTX group than in the MTX group (P < 0.05). All patients received high-dose glucocorticoids as basic therapy. After inductive treatments, the proportion of patients whose creatine kinase (CK) decreased by more than 50% was higher in the CTX group (18 cases, 94.7%) than in the MTX group (10 cases, 62.5%; P < 0.05). The descent degree of laboratory indicators were analyzed further. Reductions in CK (6919.1 U/L vs. 3245.3 U/L), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH, 964.0 U/L vs. 318.5 U/L), and AST (225 U/L vs. 52.5 U/L) were also greater in the CTX group than in the MTX group (P < 0.05). Conclusion: In this cohort of IMNM patients, CTX achieved greater improvements in CK, LDH, and AST levels compared to MTX. CTX may be more beneficial than MTX for disease inductive treatment in IMNM patients. This finding provides evidence for selecting clinical treatment schemes.
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.