Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 642

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Mycophenolate versus Azathioprine as Maintenance Therapy for Lupus Nephritis

Open access
Dooley, Mary Anne, Jayne, David, Ginzler, Ellen M., Isenberg, David, Olsen, Nancy J., Wofsy, David, Eitner, Frank, Appel, Gerald B., Contreras, Gabriel, Lisk, Laura, Solomons, Neil·2011·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Maintenance therapy, often with azathioprine or mycophenolate mofetil, is required to consolidate remission and prevent relapse after the initial control of lupus nephritis. METHODS: We carried out a 36-month, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, phase 3 study comparing oral mycophenolate mofetil (2 g per day) and oral azathioprine (2 mg per kilogram of body weight per day), plus placebo in each group, in patients who met response criteria during a 6-month induction trial. The study group underwent repeat randomization in a 1:1 ratio. Up to 10 mg of prednisone per day or its equivalent was permitted. The primary efficacy end point was the time to treatment failure, which was defined as death, end-stage renal disease, doubling of the serum creatinine level, renal flare, or rescue therapy for lupus nephritis. Secondary assessments included the time to the individual components of treatment failure and adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 227 patients were randomly assigned to maintenance treatment (116 to mycophenolate mofetil and 111 to azathioprine). Mycophenolate mofetil was superior to azathioprine with respect to the primary end point, time to treatment failure (hazard ratio, 0.44; 95% confidence interval, 0.25 to 0.77; P = 0.003), and with respect to time to renal flare and time to rescue therapy (hazard ratio, <1.00; P < 0.05). Observed rates of treatment failure were 16.4% (19 of 116 patients) in the mycophenolate mofetil group and 32.4% (36 of 111) in the azathioprine group. Adverse events, most commonly minor infections and gastrointestinal disorders, occurred in more than 95% of the patients in both groups (P = 0.68). Serious adverse events occurred in 33.3% of patients in the azathioprine group and in 23.5% of those in the mycophenolate mofetil group (P = 0.11), and the rate of withdrawal due to adverse events was higher with azathioprine than with mycophenolate mofetil (39.6% vs. 25.2%, P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Mycophenolate mofetil was superior to azathioprine in maintaining a renal response to treatment and in preventing relapse in patients with lupus nephritis who had a response to induction therapy. (Funded by Vifor Pharma [formerly Aspreva]; ALMS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00377637.).

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/nejmoa1014460

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 642

Metadata

Authors
Dooley, M. A., Jayne, D., Ginzler, E. M., Isenberg, D., Olsen, N. J., Wofsy, D., Eitner, F., Appel, G. B., Contreras, G., Lisk, L., & Solomons, N.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2011-11-17
Volume
365
Issue
20
Pages
1886-1895
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2157239580
Cited by
642
References
0
FWCI
38.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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 versus Azathioprine as Maintenance Therapy for Lupus Nephritis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejmoa1014460
The paper
Dooley, M. A., Jayne, D., Ginzler, E. M., Isenberg, D., Olsen, N. J., Wofsy, D., Eitner, F., Appel, G. B., Contreras, G., Lisk, L., & Solomons, N. (2011). Mycophenolate versus Azathioprine as Maintenance Therapy for Lupus Nephritis. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa1014460

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.