ArticlePediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany)2026
Evaluation of the comparative efficacy and safety of obinutuzumab and other follow-up strategies after rituximab failure in refractory nephrotic syndrome.
Article in Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany), 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.
- Which patients should switch from rituximab to obinutuzumab in refractory nephrotic syndrome?Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRefractory nephrotic syndrome (RNS) in children remains difficult to manage, particularly in patients who fail to maintain sustained remission after rituximab (RTX). Optimal follow-up treatment strategies after RTX failure remain unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of different follow-up treatment strategies after RTX failure.
methodsThis retrospective study included children with RNS who failed to maintain sustained remission after a single course of RTX. According to subsequent treatment, patients were divided into three groups: anti-CD20-free maintenance therapy (ACF), RTX retreatment (RTX-R), and obinutuzumab treatment (OBZ). Patients in the ACF group received corticosteroids and/or other immunosuppressants without additional anti-CD20 biologics, whereas those in the RTX-R and OBZ groups received RTX or OBZ therapy respectively.
resultsTwenty-eight children were included: 10 in the ACF group, 8 in the RTX-R group, and 10 in the OBZ group. At 6 months, the OBZ group demonstrated significantly higher relapse-free survival compared to both the RTX-R group (100% vs. 37.5%, P < 0.01) and the ACF group (100% vs. 30%, P < 0.01), with no difference between the RTX and ACF groups. At 52 weeks, relapse-free survival remained highest in the OBZ group (80.0%), compared with 25.0% in the RTX-R group and 30.0% in the ACF group. OBZ induced sustained peripheral B-cell depletion, with B cells remaining undetectable throughout the scheduled 6-month follow-up. No serious adverse effects were observed in three groups.
conclusionObinutuzumab may be an effective and safe follow-up option for children with RNS who fail to maintain sustained remission after RTX.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42418000What 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.