Cyclophosphamide may leads to lower adverse effects: thrombocytopenia compared with chlorambucil (low certainty).
It is very uncertain whether cyclophosphamide changes adverse effects: severe infection compared with chlorambucil (very low certainty).
It is very uncertain whether cyclophosphamide changes adverse effects: hair loss compared with chlorambucil (very 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).
It is very uncertain whether closed‐system transfer device plus safe handling changes cyclophosphamide alone compared with safe handling alone (very low certainty).
It is very uncertain whether closed‐system transfer device plus safe handling changes cyclophosphamide‡ compared with safe handling alone (very low certainty).
It is very uncertain whether closed‐system transfer device plus safe handling changes cyclophosphamide or ifosfamide compared with safe handling alone (very low certainty).
Autologous non‐myeloablative selective HSCT showed no clear difference in overall mortality compared with cyclophosphamide (moderate certainty).
Autologous myeloablative selective HSCT may leads to higher functional ability – HAQ‐DIb Scale 0–3 with 0 representing no/mild… compared with cyclophosphamide (low certainty).
Autologous myeloablative selective HSCT probably leads to higher skin thickness – mRSS Scale 0–51 in which a higher number is worse… compared with cyclophosphamide (moderate certainty).