MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415196861 · doi:10.2215/cjn.0000000842

Challenging Clinical Practice Guideline Definitions in Childhood Nephrotic Syndrome

2025· article· en· W4415196861 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Cal Robinson, Nowrin Aman, Tonny Banh, Josefina Brooke, Vaneet Dhillon, Mackenzie Garner, Christoph Licht, Ashlene McKay, Rachel Pearl, Seetha Radhakrishnan, Keisha Rasool, Nithiakishna Selvathesan, Chia Wei Teoh, Jovanka Vasilevska‐Ristovska, Rulan S. Parekh

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal Diseases and Glomerulopathies
Canadian institutionsWilliam Osler Health SystemInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesUniversity of TorontoSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenWomen's College Hospital
FundersWomen's College Research InstituteCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHospital for Sick ChildrenPhysicians' Services Incorporated FoundationKidney Foundation of Canada
KeywordsNephrotic syndromeGuidelineImmunosuppressionNephrologyKidney diseaseMinimal change disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Key Points Three quarters of children with steroid-resistant nephrotic syndrome respond to other immunosuppression and have good kidney outcomes. Children classified as frequently relapsing by International Pediatric Nephrology Association versus Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes criteria have similar relapse rates and risk of CKD. These findings support defining treatment resistance by response to any immunosuppression and implementing the International Pediatric Nephrology Association criteria for frequent relapses. Background In childhood nephrotic syndrome, definitions of immunosuppression response, frequently relapsing nephrotic syndrome (FRNS), and long-term remission are conflicting and based on limited evidence. Our goal was to define treatment response, FRNS, and long-term remission on the basis of associated disease outcomes. Methods We included children (6 months–18 years) diagnosed with nephrotic syndrome between 1993 and 2023 in combined Canadian cohorts. We evaluated different definitions of ( 1 ) immunosuppressive treatment response, ( 2 ) FRNS, including Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) 2021 and International Pediatric Nephrology Association (IPNA) 2023 criteria, and ( 3 ) long-term remission. Outcomes were time to CKD, relapse count throughout follow-up, and time to relapse, analyzed by Cox proportional hazards and negative binomial regression. Results We included 1114 children with nephrotic syndrome (median age at diagnosis, 3.8 years; 63% male; median follow-up, 4.7 years). Among them, 1054 (95%) were steroid sensitive, 60 (5%) were steroid resistant (steroid-resistant nephrotic syndrome [SRNS]), and 73% with SRNS achieved complete remission with steroid-sparing immunosuppression. No child with treatment-responsive SRNS developed CKD. Within 1 year of diagnosis, 281 steroid-sensitive children (27%) were classified with FRNS by KDIGO and 383 (36%) by IPNA criteria. Children with FRNS by IPNA criteria (versus KDIGO) had a similar number of relapses (adjusted rate ratio, 0.95; 95% confidence interval, 0.81 to 1.12) and CKD risk (2% each) but less often received steroid-sparing immunosuppression (hazard ratio, 0.42; 95% confidence interval, 0.32 to 0.56). Ninety-eight percent of relapses occur within 3 years of the initial diagnosis or the last relapse event. Conclusions Children with SRNS who achieve remission have a similar CKD risk to steroid-sensitive children. Children with FRNS by IPNA 2023 and KDIGO 2021 criteria experience similar rates of relapse and CKD. This supports defining treatment resistance by response to any immunosuppressive medication, implementation of the IPNA FRNS criteria, and use of 3-year relapse-free survival as a surrogate for long-term remission.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.106
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.097
Threshold uncertainty score0.194

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.106
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.007
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0060.003
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.356 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Journal of the American Society of NephrologySame topicRenal Diseases and GlomerulopathiesFrench-language works237,207