Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18253993›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2008

Interventions for minimal change disease in adults with nephrotic syndrome.

S C Palmer, K Nand, G F Strippoli

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Interventions for minimal change disease in adults with nephrotic syndrome.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Chinese herbal medicine Huangqi type formulations for nephrotic syndrome.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Chapter 5: Minimal-change disease in adults.Kidney international supplements · 2012
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

S C PalmerUniversity of Otago, Department of Medicine, Christchurch School of Medicine and Health Sciences, PO Box 4345, Christchurch, New Zealand. suetoniapalmer@clear.net.nz
K Nand
G F Strippoli
Brigham and Women's Hospital · USChildren's Hospital at Westmead · AUNorth Shore Hospital · NZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSteroids have been used widely since the early 1970s for the treatment of adult-onset minimal change disease. The response rates to immunosuppressive agents in adult minimal change disease, especially steroids, are more variable than in children. The optimal agent, dose, and duration of treatment for the first episode of nephrotic syndrome, or for disease relapse(s) has not been determined.

objectivesTo determine the benefits and harms of interventions for the nephrotic syndrome in adults caused by minimal change disease. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, reference articles and abstracts from conference proceedings, without language restriction. Search date: January 2007. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs of any intervention for minimal change disease in adults over 18 years with the nephrotic syndrome were included. Studies comparing different routes, frequencies, and duration of immunosuppressive agents were selected. Studies comparing non-immunosuppressive agents were also assessed. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed study quality and extracted data. Statistical analyses were performed using the random effects model and results were expressed as a relative risk (RR) for dichotomous outcomes, or mean difference (WMD) for continuous data with 95% confidence intervals (CI). MAIN

resultsThree RCTs (68 participants) were identified. All treatment comparisons contained only one study. No significant difference was found between prednisone compared with placebo for complete (RR 1.44, CI 0.95 to 2.19) and partial remission (RR 1.00, CI 0.07 to 14.45) of the nephrotic syndrome due to minimal change disease. There was no difference between intravenous methylprednisolone plus oral prednisone compared with oral prednisone alone for complete remission (RR 0.74, CI 0.50 to 1.08). Prednisone, compared with short-course intravenous methylprednisolone, increased the number of subjects who achieved complete remission (RR 4.95, CI 1.15 to 21.26). The lack of statistical evidence of efficacy associated with prednisone therapy was based on data derived from a single study that compared 'alternate-day prednisone' to no immunosuppression' with only a small number of participants in each group. No RCTs were identified comparing regimens in adults with a steroid-dependent or relapsing disease course or comparing treatments comprising alkylating agents, cyclosporine, tacrolimus, levamisole, or mycophenolate mofetil. AUTHORS'

conclusionsFurther comparative studies are required to examine the efficacy of immunosuppressive agents for achievement of sustained remission of nephrotic syndrome caused by minimal change disease. Studies are also needed to evaluate treatments for adults with steroid-dependent or relapsing disease.

Indexed as

AdultAnti-Inflammatory AgentsHumansImmunosuppressive AgentsMethylprednisoloneNephrosis, LipoidNephrotic SyndromePrednisoneRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRemission InductionAnti-Inflammatory AgentsImmunosuppressive AgentsMethylprednisolonePrednisone

Identifiers

PMID18253993
PMCPMC7025787
OpenAlexW1697556097

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.