Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33141217›Full record

ArticleRheumatology (Oxford, England)2021

Long-term maintenance rituximab for ANCA-associated vasculitis: relapse and infection prediction models.

Mark E McClure, Yajing Zhu, Rona M Smith, Seerapani Gopaluni, Joanna Tieu, Tasneem Pope, Karl Emil Kristensen, David R W Jayne, Jessica Barrett, Rachel B Jones

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Rheumatology (Oxford, England), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Challenges in the diagnosis of systemic lupus erythematosus.Clinical medicine (London, England) · 2025
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Mark E McClureVasculitis and Lupus Clinic, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals, Cambridge, UK.
Yajing ZhuMRC Biostatistics Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Rona M SmithVasculitis and Lupus Clinic, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals, Cambridge, UK.
Seerapani GopaluniVasculitis and Lupus Clinic, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals, Cambridge, UK.
Joanna TieuVasculitis and Lupus Clinic, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals, Cambridge, UK.
Tasneem PopeDepartment of Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Karl Emil KristensenVasculitis and Lupus Clinic, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals, Cambridge, UK.
David R W JayneVasculitis and Lupus Clinic, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals, Cambridge, UK.
Jessica BarrettMRC Biostatistics Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Rachel B JonesVasculitis and Lupus Clinic, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals, Cambridge, UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_UU_00002/5Medical Research Council MR/R502145/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesFollowing a maintenance course of rituximab (RTX) for ANCA-associated vasculitis (AAV), relapses occur on cessation of therapy, and further dosing is considered. This study aimed to develop relapse and infection risk prediction models to help guide decision making regarding extended RTX maintenance therapy.

methodsPatients with a diagnosis of AAV who received 4-8 grams of RTX as maintenance treatment between 2002 and 2018 were included. Both induction and maintenance doses were included; most patients received standard departmental protocol consisting of 2× 1000 mg 2 weeks apart, followed by 1000 mg every 6 months for 2 years. Patients who continued on repeat RTX dosing long-term were excluded. Separate risk prediction models were derived for the outcomes of relapse and infection.

resultsA total of 147 patients were included in this study with a median follow-up of 63 months [interquartile range (IQR): 34-93]. Relapse: At time of last RTX, the model comprised seven predictors, with a corresponding C-index of 0.54. Discrimination between individuals using this model was not possible; however, discrimination could be achieved by grouping patients into low- and high-risk groups. When the model was applied 12 months post last RTX, the ability to discriminate relapse risk between individuals improved (C-index 0.65), and once again, clear discrimination was observed between patients from low- and high-risk groups. Infection: At time of last RTX, five predictors were retained in the model. The C-index was 0.64 allowing discrimination between low and high risk of infection groups. At 12 months post RTX, the C-index for the model was 0.63. Again, clear separation of patients from two risk groups was observed.

conclusionWhile our models had insufficient power to discriminate risk between individual patients they were able to assign patients into risk groups for both relapse and infection. The ability to identify risk groups may help in decisions regarding the potential benefit of ongoing RTX treatment. However, we caution the use of these prediction models until prospective multi-centre validation studies have been performed.

Indexed as

AgedAnti-Neutrophil Cytoplasmic Antibody-Associated VasculitisAntirheumatic AgentsFemaleHumansInfectionsMaleMiddle AgedModels, StatisticalRecurrenceRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsRituximabTime FactorsAntirheumatic AgentsRituximabANCAinfectionpredictionrelapserituximabvasculitis

Identifiers

PMID33141217
PMCPMC7937025

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.