ArticleLupus science & medicine2026
Long-term outcomes and treatments for proliferative lupus nephritis with low-level proteinuria: a multicentre retrospective study in Japan.
Article 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe long-term prognosis of patients with proliferative lupus nephritis (class III/IV) and low-level proteinuria remains unclear. Moreover, as some clinical trials have excluded them, the efficacy of some immunosuppressants for this subset of patients has not been strictly confirmed. In this study, we aimed to investigate the renal and overall survival and treatments.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective study including 137 Japanese patients with biopsy-confirmed proliferative lupus nephritis from 11 hospitals. Based on previous reports, proteinuria of ≤1 g/gCr was defined as low-level proteinuria. The endpoints were kidney failure (KF) or death.
resultsCompared with the high-level proteinuria group (proteinuria >1 g/gCr), the low-level proteinuria group (62 cases (45.3%)) had better baseline renal functions and histology and included more patients initially treated with glucocorticoids (GCs) alone (26 (41.9%) vs 18 (24.0%), p=0.04). Maintenance therapy was similar between groups. After a median of 93 months, the low-level proteinuria group had a lower incidence of KF or death than the high-level proteinuria group (3 (4.8%) vs 22 (29.3%), p<0.001). Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed a significant difference in the incidence of these outcomes between groups. Similarly, patients with low-level proteinuria initially treated with GCs alone exhibited a better long-term prognosis than those with high-level proteinuria. Multivariate Cox regression analyses revealed that KF or death was associated with high levels of proteinuria but not with GCs alone for the initial treatment.
conclusionsPatients with low-level proteinuria have a favourable long-term prognosis and are treated with less initial immunosuppressant use, suggesting a distinct clinical subgroup of proliferative lupus nephritis. Renal biopsy in the early phase with low-level proteinuria may lead to early diagnosis and treatment. A treatment strategy tailored to patients with low-level proteinuria may be required.
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.