ReviewNephron2017
Rituximab in Membranous Nephropathy: Not All Studies Are Created Equal.
Review in Nephron, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Rituximab for the management of idiopathic membranous nephropathy: a meta-analysis.International urology and nephrology · 2021Pooled it
- Clinical efficacy and safety of rituximab with membranous nephropathy: a meta-analysis.Archives of medical science : AMS · 2023Review
- Treatment of rituximab in patients with idiopathic membranous nephropathy: a case series and literature review.The Korean journal of internal medicine · 2022Review
- Rituximab in Membranous Nephropathy.Kidney international reports · 2021Review
- Membranous Nephropathy and Anti-Podocytes Antibodies: Implications for the Diagnostic Workup and Disease Management.BioMed research international · 2018Review
- Acute demyelinating neuropathy associated with rituximab treatment in a patient with relapsing nephrotic syndrome.CEN case reports · 2017Article
- Treatment of membranous nephropathy: time for a paradigm shift.Nature reviews. Nephrology · 2017Review
- Immune complexes and complexity: investigating mechanisms of renal disease.International urology and nephrology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Many prospective studies and a recent randomized controlled trial have shown that the B-cell-depleting monoclonal antibody, rituximab, safely promotes the remission of nephrotic syndrome in approximately 65% of patients with membranous nephropathy (MN). Mechanistic studies have indicated that rituximab-induced proteinuria reduction is associated with clearance of anti-podocyte antigens phospholipase 2 receptor autoantibodies and subepithelial immune complexes, the hallmarks of the disease. A recently published study reported results which, at first sight, looked less favorable and implied that, due to a publication bias against negative results, the efficacy of rituximab in MN might be overestimated. Since patients received only one or 2 rituximab administrations, the authors suggest that when rituximab is used, higher doses and longer treatments should be considered. In this study, we highlight limitations of the study and warn against an oversimplified interpretation of the data. Though information on the optimal dose of rituximab to use in MN is still limited, available data from studies with predefined rituximab administration protocols collectively support the concept of titrating rituximab to the number of circulating B-cells that are invariably depleted after the first or second administration. Additional doses may increase the risk of adverse effects and related costs without augmenting efficacy. Importantly, underpowered studies with inconclusive results should not be confused with negative studies formally proving a neutral effect of a treatment. Until data from ad hoc designed clinical trials are available, the B-cell-driven protocol should be the preferred regimen, since it is similarly effective, but safer and more cost effective than other protocols employing multiple rituximab administrations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.