ReviewACR open rheumatology2026
A Review and Future Perspective on Renal Outcome Definitions in Lupus Nephritis.
Review in ACR open rheumatology, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Lupus nephritis (LN) remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in systemic lupus erythematosus, yet the lack of standardized definitions for renal outcomes hinders effective diagnosis, prognosis, treatment personalization, comparisons across trials, and interpretable trial endpoints. Despite significant advances in biomarker discovery, treatment strategies, and histopathological classification, substantial challenges and controversies persist in defining and assessing renal response to therapy. Following a January 2025 roundtable discussion on the subject of LN outcome definitions, a workgroup was established to address these issues and provide an expert perspective on the future of outcome definitions based on current literature. Here, we examine the current limitations of renal outcome definitions and advocate for change toward improved interpretation and comparison of clinical study data. Key areas, such as limitations of traditional kidney function markers and the need for reliable endpoints reflecting improvements in renal inflammation in trials, are addressed. As an international workgroup of rheumatologists and nephrologists with experience in managing LN, we advocate for a unified approach considering standard per-protocol repeat biopsies for histologic response evaluation, estimated glomerular filtration rate slope, glucocorticoid minimization/withdrawal, and extended follow-up for the evaluation of sustained long-term outcomes. The importance of harmonizing clinical and histologic definitions and the potential of novel biomarkers are highlighted. Herein, we provide a perspective toward uniform definitions of response in LN trials, renal flare/relapse, and refractory disease with improved applicability, especially in the context of advanced immunosuppressives. Thereby, we aim to facilitate meaningful study and advanced treatment of LN, ultimately enhancing patient outcomes and future research.
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.