ArticleArchives of dermatological research2024
Frequency of infections during rituximab treatment of autoimmune blistering diseases.
Article in Archives of dermatological research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study investigates the frequency of infections in autoimmune blistering disease (AIBD) patients treated with rituximab and evaluates the difference in infectious complications in patients on concomitant antibiotic and/or antiviral prophylaxis. The study retrospectively reviewed 43 AIBD patients who received rituximab over a five-year interval. The patients were categorized based on prophylaxis type (antibiotic, antiviral, or both) and concomitant immunosuppression status, which we defined as treatment with an immunosuppressive medication during the time frame they were given Rituximab. Our findings suggest that concomitant immunosuppression alongside rituximab did not significantly increase the risk of developing infectious complications compared to rituximab monotherapy. Results revealed that 34.4% of patients with concomitant immunosuppression had a secondary bacterial infection, defined as bacterial complications requiring hospitalization, consistent with prior studies. Moreover, antibiotic prophylaxis did not significantly reduce infection risk in patients on rituximab, with 45.1% of these patients experiencing bacterial complications. There was an absence of pneumocystis pneumonia in the study population. Despite the small sample size and limited timeline, this study suggests that antibiotic prophylaxis may not significantly mitigate the risk of infections in AIBD patients receiving rituximab, and the risk of infection with concomitant immunosuppression with rituximab requires additional investigation for definitive causal risk.
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.