Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

Refine by population, intervention, comparison or outcome
More filters
Evidence found and GRADE certainty

29 questions · 29 findings · 3 reviews · Kidney and Transplant

No studies found 2 · 6.9%GRADE not reported 0 · 0%Very low 3 · 10.3%Low 24 · 82.8%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

IV cyclophosphamide vs IV dexamethasone and oral cyclophosphamide

Complete remission (no further aphthous episodes to 6 months) · idiopathic steroid‐resistant nephrotic syndrome in children

IV cyclophosphamide showed no clear difference in treatment response at 6 months: complete remission compared with oral cyclophosphamide plus IV dexamethasone (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

IV cyclophosphamide vs IV dexamethasone and oral cyclophosphamide

Treatment response at 6 months: partial remission · idiopathic steroid‐resistant nephrotic syndrome in children

IV cyclophosphamide showed no clear difference in treatment response at 6 months: partial remission compared with oral cyclophosphamide plus IV dexamethasone (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

IV cyclophosphamide vs IV dexamethasone and oral cyclophosphamide

Complete or partial remission · idiopathic steroid‐resistant nephrotic syndrome in children

IV cyclophosphamide showed no clear difference in treatment response at 6 months: complete or partial remission compared with oral cyclophosphamide plus IV dexamethasone (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

IV cyclophosphamide vs IV dexamethasone and oral cyclophosphamide

Treatment response at 18 months ‐ Sustained remission/steroid sensitive relapses Clinical assessment · idiopathic steroid‐resistant nephrotic syndrome in children

IV cyclophosphamide showed no clear difference in treatment response at 18 months: sustained… compared with oral cyclophosphamide plus IV dexamethasone (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

IV cyclophosphamide vs IV dexamethasone and oral cyclophosphamide

Treatment response at 18 months ‐ CKD clinical assessment · idiopathic steroid‐resistant nephrotic syndrome in children

IV cyclophosphamide showed no clear difference in treatment response at 18 months: CKD compared with oral cyclophosphamide plus IV dexamethasone (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

IV cyclophosphamide vs IV dexamethasone and oral cyclophosphamide

Adverse effects ‐ Bacterial infection clinical assessment · idiopathic steroid‐resistant nephrotic syndrome in children

IV cyclophosphamide showed no clear difference in adverse events: bacterial infections compared with oral cyclophosphamide plus IV dexamethasone (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Pulse cyclophosphamide vs continuous cyclophosphamide

Recurrence of hyperthyroidism (relapse) [measured by serum thyroid hormone levels above the normal range after withdrawal of methimazole or end of radioiodine treatment] · adults with renal vasculitis

Pulse cyclophosphamide may leads to higher relapse at the end of compared with continuous cyclophosphamide (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review