Observational studyLupus science & medicine2026
Role of repeat kidney biopsy after 6 months of treatment in proliferative lupus nephritis.
Observational study in Lupus science & 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
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo characterise histological response following induction therapy in a real-world cohort of patients with proliferative lupus nephritis (LN) undergoing per-protocol repeat kidney biopsy; to assess the concordance between clinical and histological response and to identify baseline factors associated with changes in activity and chronicity indices.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective observational study including 20 adult patients with systemic lupus erythematosus and biopsy-proven proliferative LN who underwent a protocolised repeat kidney biopsy at 6 months (±3 months) after induction therapy. Clinical, laboratory and histopathological data were collected at both biopsy time points. Associations between baseline parameters and histological outcomes were explored.
resultsAfter a median of 7.5 months, proteinuria significantly decreased while estimated glomerular filtration rate and complement levels significantly improved. The histological activity index (AI) decreased significantly, with improvement observed in 90% of patients. Chronicity index (CI) increased in 50% of patients, without reaching statistical significance. At 6 months, 55% of patients achieved primary efficacy renal response, whereas 45% achieved histological response. Notably, discordance between clinical and histological responses was frequent: 45% of clinical responders exhibited persistent histological activity and 33% of histological responders failed to meet clinical response criteria. Lower baseline proteinuria and better baseline renal function were observed among patients with AI improvement. Likewise, patients with an increase in CI had a lower baseline CI and tended to have a better baseline renal function. Histological outcomes did not differ according to the type of immunosuppressive therapy used during induction.
conclusionsIn this real-world cohort of proliferative LN, substantial discordance between clinical and histological response was observed following induction therapy. While histological activity improved in most patients, chronic damage progressed in half of the cohort despite favourable clinical evolution. These findings should be interpreted as exploratory and hypothesis-generating rather than as definitive associations and highlight the need for prospective studies to define its role in personalised LN management.
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.