Pulse cyclophosphamide vs continuous cyclophosphamide
Pulse cyclophosphamide showed no clear difference in serious infections compared with continuous cyclophosphamide (low certainty).
- RR 0.71 [0.38, 1.33]4 studies · 278 participantsLow
Pulse cyclophosphamide showed no clear difference in serious infections compared with continuous cyclophosphamide (low certainty).
Pulse cyclophosphamide showed no clear difference in death at final compared with continuous cyclophosphamide (low certainty).
Oral cyclophosphamide showed no clear difference in complete remission: all renal pathologies compared with prednisone or placebo (low certainty).
Oral cyclophosphamide showed no clear difference in complete remission: FSGS compared with prednisone or placebo (low certainty).
Oral cyclophosphamide showed no clear difference in complete or partial remission compared with prednisone or placebo (low certainty).
Oral cyclophosphamide showed no clear difference in complete or partial remission: FSGS compared with prednisone or placebo (low certainty).
Oral cyclophosphamide showed no clear difference in treatment failure compared with prednisone or placebo (low certainty).
Oral cyclophosphamide showed no clear difference in adverse events: death (all causes) compared with prednisone or placebo (low certainty).
It is very uncertain whether oral cyclophosphamide changes adverse events: hypertension with seizures compared with prednisone or placebo (very low certainty).
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
Glucocorticoid with cyclophosphamide plus usual care may leads to lower all‐cause mortality at final compared with usual care (with or without placebo) (low certainty).
It is very uncertain whether glucocorticoid with cyclophosphamide plus usual care changes new infection within 1 week after initiation of treatment Assessed… compared with usual care (with or without placebo) (very low certainty).