ArticleLupus science & medicine2025
Comparison of obinutuzumab and rituximab for treating neuropsychiatric lupus: a retrospective case-control study.
Article in Lupus science & medicine, 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.
- Personalizing mycophenolate therapy: genetic determinants and practical limited sampling strategy for pediatric lupus nephritis.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2026Observational
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesNeuropsychiatric SLE (NPSLE) lacks evidence-based treatment strategies. This study compared the effectiveness and safety profiles of obinutuzumab (OBZ) and rituximab (RTX) in patients with NPSLE.
methodsPatients with new-onset NPSLE meeting British Isles Lupus Assessment Group grade A criteria who received either OBZ or RTX between 2018 and 2024 at Renji Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine (with ≥12 months follow-up) were included. Propensity score matching (1:2 ratio) based on age, sex and SLE Disease Activity Index (SLEDAI) was performed. The primary outcome was complete or partial response at 12 months. Kaplan-Meier curves compared therapeutic effectiveness. Safety profiles of OBZ and RTX were recorded.
results27 patients with new-onset NPSLE were included in this retrospective study, with 9 patients receiving OBZ and 18 patients receiving RTX. At 12 months, the primary outcome was achieved in 8 of 9 patients in the OBZ group and 13 of 18 patients in the RTX group (88.9% vs 72.2%; OR: 3.08, 95% CI 0.30 to 31.33; p=0.34). Compared with the RTX group, the OBZ group demonstrated higher lupus low disease activity state attainment (74.1% vs 52.3%; p=0.049), lower SLEDAI-2000 Scores (median (IQR): 2 (1-2) vs 4 (2-4.25); p=0.04) and a trend towards higher B cell depletion rates at 12 months (57.1% vs 20.0%; p=0.08). OBZ treatment significantly shortened hospitalisation by 7 days (14.7±5.4 vs 21.9±11.9 days; p=0.04) and achieved a deeper B cell depletion at 6 months (median CD19+B cells: 0.4 (0-1.4) vs 3.5 (2-19.3) cells/µL; p=0.01), compared with the RTX group. Safety profiles were comparable between groups, with both treatments well tolerated. No deaths occurred.
conclusionThese findings suggest OBZ may induce superior clinical responses in NPSLE through enhanced B cell depletion, with acceptable safety at 12 months, calling for further exploration.
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.