Phase <scp>IIa</scp> Global Study Evaluating Rituximab for the Treatment of Pediatric Patients With Granulomatosis With Polyangiitis or Microscopic Polyangiitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and efficacy of rituximab (RTX) in pediatric patients with granulomatosis with polyangiitis (GPA) or microscopic polyangiitis (MPA). METHODS: body surface area) and glucocorticoids once per week for 4 weeks. During the follow-up period, patients could receive further treatment, including RTX, for GPA or MPA. The safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and exploratory efficacy outcomes with RTX were evaluated. RESULTS: Twenty-five pediatric patients with new-onset or relapsing disease were enrolled at 11 centers (19 with GPA [76%] and 6 with MPA [24%]). The median age was 14 years (range 6-17 years). All patients completed the remission-induction phase. During the overall study period (≤4.5 years), patients received between 4 and 28 infusions of RTX. All patients experienced ≥1 adverse event (AE), mostly grade 1 or grade 2 primarily infusion-related reactions. Seven patients experienced 10 serious AEs, and 17 patients experienced 31 infection-related AEs. No deaths were reported. RTX clearance correlated with body surface area. The body surface area-adjusted RTX dosing regimen resulted in similar exposure in both pediatric and adult patients with GPA or MPA. Remission, according to the Pediatric Vasculitis Activity Score, was achieved in 56%, 92%, and 100% of patients by months 6, 12, and 18, respectively. CONCLUSION: In pediatric patients with GPA or MPA, RTX is well tolerated and effective, with an overall safety profile comparable to that observed in adult patients with GPA or MPA who receive treatment with RTX. RTX is associated with a positive risk/benefit profile in pediatric patients with active GPA or MPA.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".