SynthesisBMC nephrology2026
Comparative efficacy and safety of rituximab versus cyclophosphamide with steroids in primary membranous nephropathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC nephrology, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPrimary membranous nephropathy (PMN) is a leading cause of nephrotic syndrome in adults. In some patients, PMN can be severe or continue to worsen even after 6 months of supportive treatment. Rituximab and cyclophosphamide with steroids are used to treat moderate-risk or high-risk PMN patients, but the comparative efficacy and safety of rituximab and cyclophosphamide with steroids in patients with PMN remains debated.
methodsWe searched PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library for the time period through November 2025 to identify randomized controlled trials and cohort studies that evaluated rituximab compared with cyclophosphamide for the treatment of PMN. The primary outcomes were complete remission (CR), partial remission (PR), and total remission (TR = PR+CR). The secondary outcomes included the relapse rate, adverse events (AEs), and serious adverse events (SAEs). The random effects model (DerSimonian-Laird method) was used to estimate relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
resultsEleven studies (N = 1068) were eligible for final inclusion. Rituximab showed similar efficacy to cyclophosphamide with steroids in inducing complete or partial remission at 6 months (RR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.60-1.10; p = 0.19; I
conclusionsThe current limited evidence suggests that RTX treatment has comparable efficacy and safety to cyclophosphamide with steroids in PMN patients at moderate risk or high risk. Further large-scale, longer follow-up, well-designed RCTs on head-to-head comparisons of the safety and efficacy of rituximab versus cyclophosphamide with steroids are urgently needed.
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.