Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23205339›Full record

ArticleDermatology and therapy2012

Rituximab in the treatment of pemphigus vulgaris.

Labib R Zakka, Shawn S Shetty, A Razzaque Ahmed

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Dermatology and therapy, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 67 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Emerging treatment options for the management of pemphigus vulgaris.Therapeutics and clinical risk management · 2018
    Review
  11. Rituximab: A Magic Bullet for Pemphigus.Journal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR · 2017
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Management of pemphigus vulgaris: challenges and solutions.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology · 2015
    Review
  14. Biologics in dermatology: an integrated review.Indian journal of dermatology · 2014
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Labib R ZakkaCenter for Blistering Diseases, 697 Cambridge Street 302, Boston, MA 02135 USA.
Shawn S Shetty
A Razzaque Ahmed
National Center for Infectious Diseases · USBoston University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionRituximab is increasingly used in patients with pemphigus vulgaris (PV) who are nonresponders to conventional therapy.

methodsA PubMed search was conducted using the words pemphigus vulgaris and rituximab therapy from papers published between 2000 and 2012. Two protocols were used. In the lymphoma protocol, patients received four weekly infusions of rituximab (dose 375 mg/m(2)). The rheumatoid arthritis (RA) protocol consisted of two infusions of 1,000 mg each 15 days apart. The variables recorded from each study included clinical remission off or on therapy, relapse rate, incidence of serious adverse events, concomitant therapies, duration of follow-up, and when available, levels of B cells and autoantibodies.

resultsForty-two studies were found, which reported 272 patients; 180 were treated by the lymphoma protocol and 92 by the RA protocol. Both protocols were effective in treating recalcitrant PV. The lymphoma protocol had a lower response rate, relapse rate and serious infections, but higher mortality, and there were nonresponders. The RA protocol produced a higher response rate, relapse rate, number of infections, but lower mortality rate, and lacked nonresponders. The cumulative follow-up for patients treated with the lymphoma protocol was 15.44 months (range 1-41) and 21.04 months (range 8.35-29) for the RA protocol. A major concern in both protocols was the high infection rates, some of which were fatal. A different protocol using a combination of rituximab with intravenous immunoglobulin in a defined manner with a definitive endpoint, used in a limited cohort of patients, showed promising results.

conclusionNeither protocol produced a sustained clinical remission and both required continued systemic therapy. Before initiation of treatment, physicians should have a specific goal and endpoint and be aware of its potential side effects and lack of information on its long-term effects. Patients should be carefully monitored during and after therapy.

Identifiers

PMID23205339
PMCPMC3510419
OpenAlexW1998175920

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.