ArticleRheumatology (Oxford, England)2022
Long-term persistence of rituximab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: an evaluation of the UCL cohort from 1998 to 2020.
Article in Rheumatology (Oxford, England), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Revisiting B-cell targeted therapies in rheumatoid arthritis: from paradoxical biology to deep immune reset.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Current and future treatment of rheumatoid arthritis.Journal of rheumatic diseases · 2026Review
- Effectiveness and patient-reported impact of on-flare retreatment in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: insights from retrospective long-term real-world data.BMC rheumatology · 2025Article
- From Conventional to Advanced Therapies: A National Health Registry Report (2016-2022) on DMARDs in Rheumatoid Arthritis Treatment in Turkey.Biologics : targets & therapy · 2025Article
- Subsequent biologic and targeted synthetic disease modifying anti rheumatic drugs after fulfilling difficult-to-treat rheumatoid arthritis criteria: a survival analysis.Clinical rheumatology · 2024Article
- Disrupting B and T-cell collaboration in autoimmune disease: T-cell engagers versus CAR T-cell therapy?Clinical and experimental immunology · 2024Review
- Early predictive factors in routine clinical practice for rituximab therapy response in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.Reumatologia · 2024Article
- To flare or not to flare: patients' and rheumatologists' perceptions on the on-flare retreatment strategy of rituximab in rheumatoid arthritis.Therapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease · 2024Article
- When Autoantibodies Are Missing: The Challenge of Seronegative Rheumatoid Arthritis.Antibodies (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Long-term drug effectiveness and survival for reference rituximab in rheumatoid arthritis patients in an ordinary outpatient clinic.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Factors Determining Retreatment Time Interval of Rituximab in Korean Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis.Frontiers in medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesB cell depletion therapy based on rituximab in patients with RA was pioneered at University College London Hospitals/University College London in 1998. The objective of this study was to evaluate long-term persistence of rituximab and identify factors associated with discontinuation of treatment.
methodsRetrospective review of medical records from all rituximab-treated RA patients followed up in a dedicated clinic (1998-2020). Data collected included gender, disease duration, previous DMARDs, autoantibody status, age and concomitant therapy at first cycle, length of follow-up, and number of cycles. Drug survival and factors associated with drug discontinuation were analysed using Kaplan-Meier survival curves, log-rank test and Cox regression analysis.
resultsA total of 404 patients were included. Median disease duration and age at time of first rituximab cycle were 10 and 57 years, respectively. Median total follow-up was 55 months and median number of cycles five. 93.1% of patients were seropositive. Overall, 31.2% of patients stopped rituximab, with the largest reason for discontinuing being primary inefficacy (42.1%). Comparison of Kaplan-Meier curves showed that rituximab drug survival was lower in seronegative patients and in patients who had previously failed at least one biologic DMARD (bDMARD). Cox regression analysis revealed that rituximab discontinuation was associated with a greater number of previous bDMARDs.
conclusionMany patients with RA achieve good control of their disease with repeated cycles of rituximab treatment. The most common reasons for treatment discontinuation were either primary or secondary inefficacy. Patients who were seronegative and who had previously failed other bDMARDs were more at risk of drug discontinuation.
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.