Evaluation of Tacrolimus Combined With Corticosteroids vs Modified Ponticelli Regimen as Treatments for Refractory Primary Membranous Nephropathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the immunosuppressive treatment response to modified Ponticelli regimen (MPR) and oral corticosteroid (OC) plus tacrolimus (TAC) in patients with primary membranous nephropathy (PMN). METHODS: Retrospective cohort analytical study. Adults patients (>18 years old) with diagnosis of refractory PMN (>50% increase in serum creatinine or a level >1.5mg/dl or proteinuria refractory to 6 months of supportive treatment), proved by renal biopsy and immunofluorescence between 2008 and 2016 from the Nephropathy Registry of Colombia (NEFRORED©) were included. Immunosuppressive treatment response was evaluated from baseline to 6 months after the start of therapy. RESULTS: 128 patients with PMN were included, of which 74 (57%) were female. The most frequent syndromic diagnosis was nephrotic syndrome 90 (70%), followed by asymptomatic urinary disorders 31 (25%). Chronic kidney disease manifested concomitantly in 7 (5%) patients. At the end of 6 months, 86 (67%) cases achieved some degree of remission: 23 (18%) complete response (CR) and 63 (49%) cases with partial response (PR), while 42 (33%) cases did not achieved remission. In the TAC+OC group, CR and PR were seen in 14 (20%) and 33 (47%) patients, respectively; and 9 (16%) and 30 (51%) patients in the MPR group, respectively. No statistically significant differences were found when comparing the immunosuppressive treatment response rate with both treatment groups (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In the PMN, both immunosuppressive treatments (TAC+OC vs MPR) are comparable. We suggest a clinical follow-up of the anti-PLA2R/THSD7A titres at 6/12 months to be correlated with renal function in subsequent studies.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".