Pulse cyclophosphamide vs continuous cyclophosphamide: Serious infections
It is very uncertain whether pulse cyclophosphamide changes serious infections compared with continuous cyclophosphamide (very low certainty).
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Pulse cyclophosphamide vs continuous cyclophosphamide Serious infections · patients with renal vasculitis for remission induction It is very uncertain whether pulse cyclophosphamide changes serious infections compared with continuous cyclophosphamide (very low certainty). Interventions for renal vasculitis in adults (2015) · Cochrane Headline outcomes onlyearlier version CD003232.PUB3, superseded | RR 0.71 [0.38, 1.33] | 4 studies · 278 participants | Very low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Interventions for renal vasculitis in adults 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.