ReviewPatient preference and adherence2022
Role of Rituximab in the Treatment of Pemphigus Vulgaris: Patient Selection and Acceptability.
Review in Patient preference and adherence, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Longitudinal Anti-HBs Monitoring and Seroprotection Patterns in Rituximab-Treated Patients with Pemphigus Vulgaris: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Bridging Decades in Cutaneous Immunology-Past Lessons, Present Insights, Future Directions.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Is It Time to Reconsider Rituximab Dosing Regimens for Pemphigus Vulgaris?Antibodies (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody rituximab is an approved adjuvant treatment, in combination with oral corticosteroids, for patients with pemphigus vulgaris, a severe and potentially life-threatening autoimmune blistering skin disorder. Updated approaches to the management of pemphigus vulgaris support rituximab as a first-line adjuvant treatment to induce remission early in the course of disease; however, its feasibility in the clinical setting is often reduced by a series of limitations, including high cost of this biological drug, physician and patient concern for the risk of adverse reactions, and uncertainty regarding the optimum dosing and schedule of administration. The standard approved rituximab dosages, which are derived from lymphoma protocols, have been recognized to exceed the effective dose required for inducing B cell depletion, since the B cell burden in pemphigus vulgaris is much lower than in lymphoproliferative disorders. To overcome these limitations, recent research has investigated alternative regimens of rituximab, using lower doses of the drug. Moreover, differences in patient and disease characteristics that are highlighted in the literature strongly suggest that therapy should be tailored individually on a case-by-case basis: personalized treatment schedules may be necessary to optimize response to treatment and tolerability in different subjects, with the possibility of repeated infusions for severe forms and in case of relapse. Finally, low-dose regimens of rituximab were suggested to be favorable during the COVID-19 pandemic by providing a lesser degree of immune cell depletion while retaining a sufficient response. In conclusion, the current literature suggests that lower-dose regimens of rituximab are not only tolerable and cost-effective but may also be associated with a positive response in pemphigus vulgaris, comparable to that achieved with higher doses especially in early disease. Further evidence from rigorous clinical trials will be required to optimize lower-dose regimens of RTX and establish their position within the treatment scenario of pemphigus vulgaris.
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.