ArticleJournal of neurology2025
Rituximab in pathologically confirmed sarcoidosis affecting the central nervous system: a multi-center retrospective study.
Article in Journal of neurology, 2025. 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.
- Sarcoidosis: A Clinical Trials Perspective.Pulmonary therapy · 2026Review
- Lymphocyte signal transduction defects in cutaneous sarcoidosis and implications for treatment.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Neurosarcoidosis in Critical Care, Internal, and Pulmonary Medicine: A Practical Approach.Seminars in respiratory and critical care medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRituximab, a monoclonal antibody that depletes B cells by targeting CD20, has been suggested as a treatment option for neurosarcoidosis, but evidence to support its use is limited.
methodsPatients from four US medical centers with CNS sarcoidosis treated with rituximab were retrospectively studied. After 8 weeks of treatment, rituximab failure was defined as a similar inflammatory burden on MRI with persistent symptoms, worsening inflammatory burden on MRI with relevant symptoms, or inability to taper prednisone to less than 10 mg daily 6 months after initial infusion.
resultsNineteen patients were included. At rituximab initiation, duration of neurosarcoidosis was 27.0 months (± 32.1), mRS was 2.0 (± 1.0), number of preceding attacks was 2 (± 1.8), and treatments previously tried were 1.0 (± 1 0.7). Patients received a median 4 g (± 2.8) over 19.0 months (± 16.8). Rituximab, alone (8/19, 42.1%) or in combination with other immunosuppressants (11/19, 57.9%), was used first or second line in 12/19 (63.2%). Failure occurred in 14/19 (73.7%): relapse or disease progression in 12/14 (85.7%) and failure to spare steroids in 2/14 (14.3%). Median time to first relapse was 7.0 months (± 13.5), occurring at a median 4.0 months (± 2.6) since the last dose. Among the five responsive patients, rituximab was used as third line or later in 4/5 (80.0%), and most (4/5, 80.0%) exhibited multiple cranial neuropathies.
conclusionsWhile rituximab failed in most patients with neurosarcoidosis, a small subset may benefit, particularly those with multiple cranial neuropathies, even after failure of other medications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40681720What 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.