Renal Outcome in Patients with Lupus Nephritis Using a Steroid-free Regimen of Monthly Intravenous Cyclophosphamide: A Prospective Observational Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Intravenous cyclophosphamide (IV CYC) in combination with high doses of corticosteroids is considered the "gold standard" of therapy for lupus nephritis (LN). However, the optimal dose of corticosteroids needed has not been defined. We evaluated the efficacy of a monotherapy with IV CYC in patients with a first episode of LN (duration ≤ 6 months). METHODS: Forty patients with LN received IV CYC (12 pulses). Prednisone alone was administered and dose-adjusted to control extrarenal manifestations. Response after 24 months was defined as normalization of creatinine level, inactive urinary sediment, and proteinuria ≤ 0.2 g/day [complete response (CR)] or ≤ 0.5 g/day [partial response (PR)]. RESULTS: CR was achieved in 25 (62.5%) and PR in 8 (20%) patients. Mean starting dose of prednisone was 23.9 ± 23.8 mg/day. In a posthoc analysis, we separately analyzed patients initially treated with prednisone doses ≥ 20 mg/day (Group A, n = 19) or < 20 mg/day (Group B, n = 21). CR was achieved in 52.6% (Group A) versus 71.4% (Group B; p = 0.37); and PR in 26.3% versus 14.3%, respectively (p = 0.58). During longterm followup (10.4 ± 3.1 yrs), 37.8% experienced a renal flare. Thirty patients (81%) still have normal renal function. Renal outcome was irrespective of initial prednisone doses (p = 0.46, Pearson chi-square test of independence). CONCLUSION: Our rates of CR and PR and longterm outcomes were comparable with rates after treatment with a combination of IV CYC with high doses of corticosteroids. These data warrant randomized controlled trials evaluating different doses of corticosteroids in LN.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".