ReviewCurrent opinion in pulmonary medicine2026
Nonsteroid treatment options in (pulmonary) sarcoidosis. When to consider and why?
Review in Current opinion in pulmonary medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewSarcoidosis requires treatment in 30-50% of cases. According to current guidelines, corticosteroids (CS) are the initial drugs of choice, particularly for patients with major organ involvement or when rapid symptom relief is required. However, CS use is associated with substantial toxicity even at low dose. Here, we discuss the evidence that argues against the traditional CS-centred model of sarcoidosis treatment. RECENT
findingsA recent prospective trial of patients with pulmonary sarcoidosis showed that high-dose (40 mg) prednisolone was not superior to a lower dose (20 mg) in improving outcomes or health-related quality of life and was associated with similar adverse effects. In addition, in patients with pulmonary sarcoidosis, initial treatment with methotrexate has been shown to be noninferior to prednisone with regard to the change from baseline to week 24 in the percentage of the predicted forced vital capacity (FVC). SUMMARY: The appreciation of CS adverse effects coupled with the observation that methotrexate is as effective as prednisone as initial treatment in pulmonary sarcoidosis supports a paradigm shift in the treatment of pulmonary sarcoidosis that moves away from CS. Differences in the side-effect profile between methotrexate and prednisone may inform shared decision making by providers and patients about the appropriate treatment approach.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.