ArticleBMC nephrology2026
Obinutuzumab versus rituximab in refractory membranous nephropathy: a single-center retrospective cohort study.
Article in BMC nephrology, 2026. 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
backgroundRefractory membranous nephropathy (MN) remains challenging. We aim to compare the efficacy and safety of obinutuzumab versus rituximab in adults with refractory or relapsing MN, using a retrospective, single-center study design.
methodsThis retrospective, single-center cohort study was conducted at the Fifth Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University from January 2022 to January 2025. Eleven patients received obinutuzumab, and twenty-two matched controls received rituximab after propensity score matching (1:2). Inclusion criteria were biopsy-confirmed primary MN, age between 18 and 80 years, and a diagnosis of refractory disease. The primary endpoints were a composite measure of treatment response (including partial remission [PR] and complete remission [CR]); secondary endpoints included immunological remission and safety. Kaplan-Meier analyses were used to estimate time to response and time to CR; log-rank tests compared groups. Multivariate Cox regression identified factors associated with response.
resultsBaseline characteristics were balanced. Obinutuzumab achieved higher overall response and CR rates (log-rank p = 0.0074 and p = 0.012, respectively). At 18 months, CR was 54.6% with obinutuzumab versus 9.1% with rituximab (p = 0.024). Obinutuzumab induced prolonged B cell depletion and faster attainment of immunological remission (anti-PLA2R < 14 RU/mL). Improvements in serum albumin and 24-hour proteinuria favored obinutuzumab at 6-12 months (p < 0.05). Safety was comparable between groups; adverse events were mostly infusion-related and manageable. Multivariate analysis showed that obinutuzumab independently predicted a better response (adjusted HR (95%CI) 2.86 (1.08 ~ 7.62); p < 0.05).
conclusionsIn this preliminary retrospective analysis, obinutuzumab was associated with higher response rates than rituximab in refractory membranous nephropathy, with comparable safety.Nevertheless, given the small sample size and retrospective design, these findings should be interpreted as hypothesis-generating. Prospective randomized controlled trials are required to confirm these observations.
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.