Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,078

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 27 of the 27 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Mycophenolate mofetil versus oral cyclophosphamide in scleroderma-related interstitial lung disease (SLS II): a randomised controlled, double-blind, parallel group trial

Open access
Tashkin, Donald P, Roth, Michael D, Clements, Philip J, Furst, Daniel E, Khanna, Dinesh, Kleerup, Eric C, Goldin, Jonathan, Arriola, Edgar, Volkmann, Elizabeth R, Kafaja, Suzanne, Silver, Richard, Steen, Virginia, Strange, Charlie, Wise, Robert, Wigley, Fredrick, Mayes, Maureen, Riley, David J, Hussain, Sabiha, Assassi, Shervin, Hsu, Vivien M, Patel, Bela, Phillips, Kristine, Martinez, Fernando, Golden, Jeffrey, Connolly, M Kari, Varga, John, Dematte, Jane, Hinchcliff, Monique E, Fischer, Aryeh, Swigris, Jeffrey, Meehan, Richard, Theodore, Arthur, Simms, Robert, Volkov, Suncica, Schraufnagel, Dean E, Scholand, Mary Beth, Frech, Tracy, Molitor, Jerry A, Highland, Kristin, Read, Charles A, Fritzler, Marvin J, Kim, Grace Hyun J, Tseng, Chi-Hong, Elashoff, Robert M·2016·The Lancet Respiratory Medicine

Abstract

Summary BACKGROUND Twelve months of oral cyclophosphamide (CYC) has been shown to alter the progression of scleroderma-related interstitial lung disease (SSc-ILD) when compared to placebo. However, toxicity was a concern and without continued treatment the efficacy disappeared by 24 months. We hypothesized that a two-year course of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) would be safer, better tolerated and produce longer lasting improvements than CYC. METHODS Patients with SSc-ILD meeting defined dyspnea, pulmonary function and high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) criteria were randomized in a double-blind, two-arm trial at 14 medical centers. MMF (target dose 1500 mg twice daily) was administered for 24 months in one arm and oral CYC (target dose 2·0 mg/kg/day) administered for 12 months followed by placebo for 12 months in the other arm. The primary endpoint, change in forced vital capacity as a percent of the predicted normal value (FVC %) over the course of 24 months, was assessed in a modified intention-to-treat analysis using an inferential joint model combining a mixed effects model for longitudinal outcomes and a survival model to handle non-ignorable missing data. The study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00883129, and is closed. RESULTS Between November, 2009, and January, 2013, 142 patients were randomized. 126 patients (63 MMF; 63 CYC) with acceptable baseline HRCT studies and at least one outcome measure were included in the analysis. The adjusted FVC % (primary endpoint) improved from baseline to 24 months by 2.17 in the MMF arm (95% CI, 0.53–3.84) and 2·86 in the CYC arm (95% confidence interval 1·19–4·58) with no significant between-treatment difference (p=0·24), indicating that the trial was negative for the primary endpoint. However, in a post-hoc analysis of the primary endpoint, within-treatment improvements from baseline to 24 months were noted in both the CYC and MMF arms. A greater number of patients on CYC than on MMF prematurely withdrew from study drug (32 vs 20) and failed treatment (2 vs 0), and the time to stopping treatment was significantly shorter in the CYC arm (p=0·019). Sixteen deaths occurred (11 CYC; 5 MMF) with most due to progressive ILD. Leukopenia (30 vs 4 patients) and thrombocytopenia (4 vs 0 patients) occurred more often in patients treated with CYC. In post-hoc analyses, within- (but not between-) treatment improvements were also noted in defined secondary outcomes including skin score, dyspnea and whole-lung HRCT scores. INTERPRETATION Treatment of SSc-ILD with MMF for two years or CYC for one year both resulted in significant improvements in pre-specified measures of lung function, dyspnea, lung imaging, and skin disease over the 2-year course of the study. While MMF was better tolerated and associated with less toxicity, the hypothesis that it would have greater efficacy at 24 months than CYC was not confirmed. These findings support the potential clinical impact of both CYC and MMF for progressive SSc-ILD, as well as the current preference for MMF due to its better tolerability and toxicity profile. FUNDING National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute/National Institutes of Health with drug supply provided by Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s2213-2600(16)30152-7

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 27 references

Cited by

See all 1,078

Metadata

Authors
Tashkin, D. P., Roth, M. D., Clements, P. J., Furst, D. E., Khanna, D., Kleerup, E. C., Goldin, J., Arriola, E., Volkmann, E. R., Kafaja, S., Silver, R., Steen, V., Strange, C., Wise, R., Wigley, F., Mayes, M., Riley, D. J., Hussain, S., Assassi, S., Hsu, V. M., Patel, B., Phillips, K., Martinez, F., Golden, J., Connolly, M. K., Varga, J., Dematte, J., Hinchcliff, M. E., Fischer, A., Swigris, J., Meehan, R., Theodore, A., Simms, R., Volkov, S., Schraufnagel, D. E., Scholand, M. B., Frech, T., Molitor, J. A., Highland, K., Read, C. A., Fritzler, M. J., Kim, G. H. J., Tseng, C.-H., & Elashoff, R. M.
Venue
The Lancet Respiratory Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-09
Volume
4
Issue
9
Pages
708-719
ISSN
2213-2600 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2498506084
Cited by
1,078
References
27
FWCI
66.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Mycophenolate mofetil versus oral cyclophosphamide in scleroderma-related interstitial lung disease (SLS II): a randomised controlled, double-blind, parallel group trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s2213-2600(16)30152-7
The paper
Tashkin, D. P., Roth, M. D., Clements, P. J., Furst, D. E., Khanna, D., Kleerup, E. C., Goldin, J., Arriola, E., Volkmann, E. R., Kafaja, S., Silver, R., Steen, V., Strange, C., Wise, R., Wigley, F., Mayes, M., Riley, D. J., Hussain, S., Assassi, S., . . . Elashoff, R. M. (2016). Mycophenolate mofetil versus oral cyclophosphamide in scleroderma-related interstitial lung disease (SLS II): a randomised controlled, double-blind, parallel group trial. The Lancet Respiratory Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2213-2600(16)30152-7

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.