ArticleClinical rheumatology2024
Effectiveness and safety of rituximab in severely relapsed antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody-associated vasculitis: a retrospective analysis of a Japanese multicentre cohort from the J-CANVAS.
Article in Clinical rheumatology, 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.
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
37 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We aimed to clarify the long-term safety and efficacy of rituximab (RTX) as a remission induction therapy following severe relapse in patients with antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitis (AAV). We retrospectively collected the data of patients with severely relapsed AAV from a Japanese multicentre cohort. The primary exposure was RTX use; the primary outcome was complete remission (CR) proportions at week 24. Baseline characteristics were compared between the RTX and non-RTX groups. We performed multivariate logistic regression analysis and one-to-one propensity score matching analysis as a sensitivity analysis. Totally, 100 patients were enrolled: 52 in the RTX group and 48 in the non-RTX group. Baseline characteristics were comparable between the two groups, except for age, AAV subtype and ANCA serotype. The median age was 71 vs. 75 years, and the PR3-ANCA positivity rate was 44.2% vs. 18.8% in the RTX and non-RTX groups, respectively. No significant difference was observed in CR proportions at week 24 between the two groups (79.2% vs. 68.1%, p = 0.321), with an adjusted odds ratio of 1.27 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.47-3.51). At week 48, CR proportions were significantly higher in the RTX group (91.7% vs. 64.9%, p = 0.005), with an adjusted odds ratio of 2.95 (95% CI 0.97-9.91). Serious infection rates were lower in the RTX group than in the non-RTX group, with no statistically significant difference. RTX was not superior to conventional immunosuppressive therapies at week 24 but showed significantly favourable results at week 48 for severely relapsed AAV.
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.