Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 818

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Sequential Therapies for Proliferative Lupus Nephritis

Contreras, Gabriel, Pardo, Victoriano, Leclercq, Baudouin, Lenz, Oliver, Tozman, Elaine, O'Nan, Patricia, Roth, David·2004·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Long-term therapy with cyclophosphamide enhances renal survival in patients with proliferative lupus nephritis; however, the beneficial effect of cyclophosphamide must be weighed against its considerable toxic effects. METHODS: Fifty-nine patients with lupus nephritis (12 in World Health Organization class III, 46 in class IV, and 1 in class Vb) received induction therapy consisting of a maximum of seven monthly boluses of intravenous cyclophosphamide (0.5 to 1.0 g per square meter of body-surface area) plus corticosteroids. Subsequently, the patients were randomly assigned to one of three maintenance therapies: quarterly intravenous injections of cyclophosphamide, oral azathioprine (1 to 3 mg per kilogram of body weight per day), or oral mycophenolate mofetil (500 to 3000 mg per day) for one to three years. The base-line characteristics of the three groups were similar, with the exception that the chronicity index was 1.9 points lower in the cyclophosphamide group than in the mycophenolate mofetil group (P=0.009). RESULTS: During maintenance therapy, five patients died (four in the cyclophosphamide group and one in the mycophenolate mofetil group), and chronic renal failure developed in five (three in the cyclophosphamide group and one each in the azathioprine and mycophenolate mofetil groups). The 72-month event-free survival rate for the composite end point of death or chronic renal failure was higher in the mycophenolate mofetil and azathioprine groups than in the cyclophosphamide group (P=0.05 and P=0.009, respectively). The rate of relapse-free survival was higher in the mycophenolate mofetil group than in the cyclophosphamide group (P=0.02). The incidence of hospitalization, amenorrhea, infections, nausea, and vomiting was significantly lower in the mycophenolate mofetil and azathioprine groups than in the cyclophosphamide group. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with proliferative lupus nephritis, short-term therapy with intravenous cyclophosphamide followed by maintenance therapy with mycophenolate mofetil or azathioprine appears to be more efficacious and safer than long-term therapy with intravenous cyclophosphamide.

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 · 10.1056/nejmoa031855

Cites

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

Cited by

See all 818

Metadata

Authors
Contreras, G., Pardo, V., Leclercq, B., Lenz, O., Tozman, E., O'Nan, P., & Roth, D.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2004-03-04
Volume
350
Issue
10
Pages
971-980
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2094074845
Cited by
818
References
0
FWCI
43.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Sequential Therapies for Proliferative Lupus Nephritis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejmoa031855
The paper
Contreras, G., Pardo, V., Leclercq, B., Lenz, O., Tozman, E., O'Nan, P., & Roth, D. (2004). Sequential Therapies for Proliferative Lupus Nephritis. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa031855

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.