ArticleFrontiers in immunology2022
Low dose versus standard dose rituximab for the treatment of antiphospholipid syndrome: A pilot study from a tertiary medical center.
Article in Frontiers in immunology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Cytomegalovirus infection in patients with rheumatic disorders under rituximab treatment: a scoping review.Advances in rheumatology (London, England) · 2026Article
- Primary antiphospholipid syndrome complicated by recurrent acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a case report.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Article
- An update on the biologics for the treatment of antiphospholipid syndrome.Frontiers in immunology · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: To investigate the therapeutic effects and safety of low-dose and standard-dose rituximab (RTX) in the treatment of antiphospholipid syndrome (APS). Methods: In this real-world study, we included 22 consecutive patients with APS who received RTX. Standard dose (SD) was defined as an overall dosage of RTX ≥ 1000mg in the induction period, and low dose (LD) was defined as an overall dosage of RTX <1000mg. Results: Of included patients, 1 patients died, 2 patients withdrew and 19 patients completed 6-month follow-up. Nine patients received SD-RTX and 13 patients received LD-RTX, and elder patients [LD-RTX vs. SD-RTX: (49.1 ± 15.5) vs. (35.8 ± 12.3) years, Conclusion: RTX might be a safe and effective option for patients with APS, and low dose confers equal efficacy as standard dose. Further cohort studies are needed to confirm our findings.
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.