SynthesisFrontiers in immunology2026
Efficacy and safety of obinutuzumab in refractory membranous nephropathy: a single-arm meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in immunology, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Membranous nephropathy (MN) constitutes an autoimmune glomerular disorder and represents the most frequent etiology of primary nephrotic syndrome in adults. Although obinutuzumab exhibits favorable efficacy in managing refractory MN, outcomes diverge across individual investigations. Consequently, the present meta-analysis is undertaken to systematically evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of obinutuzumab in individuals with refractory MN. Methods: A systematic search was conducted across the Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, and PubMed to determine relevant clinical investigations published up to November 12, 2025. Treatment effects were quantified employing the pooled proportion rate with 95% confidence interval (CI), mean difference (MD, 95% CI), and standardized mean difference (SMD, 95% CI). Heterogeneity was examined via the I² statistic. Subgroup analyses were implemented based on the geographic distribution of the study population and duration of follow-up. All extracted data were subjected to statistical analysis using R (v4.5.2). Results: The present meta-analysis ultimately incorporated 12 articles (222 individuals) after applying the eligibility criteria. Concerning remission rates, the overall clinical remission rate reached 86% (95% CI: 80% to 90%), the complete clinical remission rate stood at 31% (25% to 37%), the partial clinical remission rate was 55% (49% to 63%), and the immunologic remission rate achieved 88% (81% to 92%). Obinutuzumab reduced proteinuria (SMD = -1.2, 95%CI -1.37 to -1.03) and raised serum albumin (MD = 12.5, 95%CI 9.91-15.08), while eGFR showed no significant change (MD = 3.23, 95%CI -3.76-10.21). The pooled adverse event rate was 29% (95%CI 15%-48%), with two fatal pneumonia-related events: severe COVID-19 pneumonia and pneumonia-induced respiratory failure. Conclusion: Obinutuzumab demonstrates marked efficacy in treating refractory MN, with an overall clinical remission rate of 86% and a low incidence of severe adverse events. This profile signifies a potential therapeutic role for this condition. However, all raw data included in this meta-analysis were derived from uncontrolled retrospective single-arm trials and case series. Given factors such as selection bias, the remission rate may be overestimated. Large-scale, multicenter randomized controlled trials are necessary for verification in future investigations. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD420251231344.
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.