ArticleBMJ open2025
Telitacicept for systemic lupus erythematosus: protocol of a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
introductionSystemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a chronic and complex multisystem autoimmune disease with high mortality. Telitacicept is a new strategy for the treatment of SLE, inhibiting the maturity, proliferation and differentiation of B cells, and thus, reduces disease activity. However, the effectiveness and safety of telitacicept in patients with SLE are not yet established. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Five English databases (Pubmed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature) and four Chinese databases (China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Data, China Science and Technology Journal Database and Sinomed) will be searched from database inception to 1 June 2025. Two investigators will independently conduct study selection, data extraction and quality assessment. Outcomes include disease activity, incidence of flares, organ damage, several immune-related laboratory parameters and adverse events. Risk ratio with 95% CI and mean difference or standardised mean difference will be used as measures of effect sizes, in order to pool the data using either a random-effect model or fixed-effect model according to the heterogeneity of studies. Subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis will be performed to explore the source of heterogeneity and evaluate the robustness of the results. We will use the Risk of Bias 2 tool and Risk of Bias In Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions tools to assess the quality of the included studies, and use the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) system to assess the certainty of evidence. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No ethical approval is required since this review is based on previously published studies. The findings of this study will be presented at international conferences or published in a peer-reviewed journal. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42024558180.
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.