The Efficacy and Safety of Reduced-Dose Oral Methylprednisolone in High-Risk Immunoglobulin A Nephropathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction The Therapeutic Effects of Steroids in IgA Nephropathy Global (TESTING) study reported that methylprednisolone reduces the risk of major kidney events in individuals with IgA nephropathy at high risk of disease progression compared to supportive care alone but is associated with increased serious adverse events (SAEs) primarily with full-dose therapy. The risk-benefit balance of the reduced-dose methylprednisolone regimen is examined in this pre-specified analysis of the reduced-dose cohort of the TESTING trial. Methods Between 2017-2019, patients with IgA nephropathy, proteinuria ≥1g/day despite 3 months of renin-angiotensin-system blockade and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) 30-120mL/min/1.73m 2 were randomised to reduced-dose methylprednisolone 0.4mg/kg/day or placebo. The primary outcome was a composite of a 40% eGFR decline, kidney failure or death due to kidney disease. Results 241 participants were randomised and followed-up for a median of 2.5 years (mean age 37 years, baseline eGFR 65mL/min/1.73m 2 , proteinuria 2.48g/day). Methylprednisolone was associated with fewer primary outcome events compared to placebo (7/121 vs 22/120, HR 0.24; 95% CI, 0.10-0.58, P = 0.002), lowered proteinuria and reduced eGFR rate of decline from baseline. The mean difference between methylprednisolone and placebo in proteinuria and eGFR from baseline was -1.15g/day and 7.9mL/min/1.73m 2 ( P <0.001) at 12 months respectively, but these benefits were lost over time. There were 7 vs 3 SAEs in the methylprednisolone vs placebo group (HR 1.97; 95% CI, 0.49-7.90) including 5 vs 2 infections. Conclusion Reduced-dose methylprednisolone is effective in improving kidney outcomes in high-risk IgA nephropathy, however, is associated with a modestly higher number of SAEs compared to placebo.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".