Efficacy and Safety of Rituximab Treatment in Patients with Antineutrophil Cytoplasmic Antibody-associated Vasculitides: Results from a German Registry (GRAID)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Rituximab (RTX) therapy is a treatment option in patients with refractory antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitis (AAV). We investigated the tolerability and clinical efficacy of RTX in a cohort of patients with refractory AAV. METHODS: Clinical and safety data of patients with AAV treated with RTX were retrospectively assessed from the data of a German national registry. RESULTS: In total, 58 patients were included in this analysis (50/58 with granulomatosis with polyangiitis; 8/58 with microscopic polyangiitis who received at least 1 cycle, 17 patients who received 2 cycles, and 3 patients who received 3 cycles of RTX). Response was classified as complete and partial in 22 (40%) and in 29 cases (52.7%), respectively. Four patients (7.3%) were classified as nonresponders. CONCLUSION: RTX was well tolerated with good clinical efficacy in patients with refractory AAV.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".