Pulse cyclophosphamide vs continuous cyclophosphamide
Pulse cyclophosphamide showed no clear difference in remission at 6 months compared with continuous cyclophosphamide (low certainty).
- RR 1.03 [0.93, 1.13]2 studies · 176 participantsLow
Pulse cyclophosphamide showed no clear difference in remission at 6 months compared with continuous cyclophosphamide (low certainty).
IV cyclophosphamide showed no clear difference in treatment response at 6 months: partial remission compared with oral cyclophosphamide plus IV dexamethasone (low certainty).
IV cyclophosphamide showed no clear difference in treatment response at 6 months: complete remission compared with oral cyclophosphamide plus IV dexamethasone (low certainty).
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).
IV cyclophosphamide showed no clear difference in treatment response at 18 months: sustained… compared with oral cyclophosphamide plus IV dexamethasone (low certainty).
Rituximab showed no clear difference in remission at 6 months compared with cyclophosphamide (moderate certainty).
Mycophenolate mofetil probably leads to higher remission at 6 months compared with cyclophosphamide (moderate certainty).
It is very uncertain whether calcineurin inhibitor changes treatment response at 3 to 6 months: partial remission compared with IV cyclophosphamide (very low certainty).
Calcineurin inhibitor may leads to higher treatment response at 3 to 6 months: complete remission compared with IV cyclophosphamide (low certainty).
Calcineurin inhibitor may leads to higher treatment response at 3 to 6 months: complete or partial remission compared with IV cyclophosphamide (low certainty).