ArticleClinical and experimental nephrology2026
Systematic review and network meta-analysis for the 2026 update of the evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for the management with immunosuppressive therapies and biologic agents of membranous nephropathy.
Article in Clinical and experimental nephrology, 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
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMultiple immunosuppressive therapies are used to induce remission in membranous nephropathy, but differences in study populations, treatment regimens, and outcome definitions complicate comparisons of their relative efficacy and safety. We aimed to synthesize randomized evidence comparing immunosuppressive therapies, including rituximab.
methodsWe conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials for adult patients with idiopathic membranous nephropathy. Outcomes included mortality, kidney failure, remission of nephrotic syndrome, decline in kidney function, infections, and adverse events. Random-effects network meta-analyses were performed, and the certainty of evidence for each comparison was assessed using the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis (CINeMA) framework.
resultsA total of 52 randomized controlled trials involving multiple immunosuppressive strategies were included. Several treatments, including adrenocorticotropic hormone, tacrolimus, intravenous cyclophosphamide, and oral cyclophosphamide, were associated with higher complete or partial remission rates compared with placebo, standard treatment, or no treatment. Oral cyclophosphamide was also associated with a lower risk of kidney failure in some comparisons, whereas azathioprine, cyclosporine, and glucocorticoids were associated with lower relapse rates. However, the certainty of evidence across most efficacy and safety outcomes was low to very low because of risk of bias, imprecision, heterogeneity, and incoherence. Infection outcomes were inconsistently reported and estimates were generally imprecise.
conclusionTreatment effects differed across interventions, but the overall certainty of the evidence was limited, highlighting the need for well-designed, adequately powered randomized trials with standardized methodologies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42762405What 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.