Rituximab as Maintenance Therapy in Type 1 Autoimmune Pancreatitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Rituximab (RTX) has been proposed for the induction of remission and maintenance therapy in relapsing type 1 autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP). The aim of the study was to describe the use of RTX as maintenance therapy for patients with type 1 AIP. METHODS: Patients with type 1 AIP based on the International Consensus Diagnostic Criteria and treated with RTX were selected from our database. Two doses of RTX (1000 mg each) were administered 15 days apart and repeated after 6 months. RESULTS: Eighteen patients were treated with RTX as maintenance therapy. Of these, the involvement of other organs was observed in 16 patients (89%). Eight of the 18 patients (44%) relapsed during follow-up. Median time to relapse after the last infusion was 30 months (range, 12-35 months). No disease relapse was observed in the first year after the last infusion. Probability of disease relapse was 80% between 1 and 3 years from initial treatment. No adverse effects were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Rituximab seems be safe and effective for maintenance therapy of type 1 AIP during the first year after completing RTX infusion. However, the probability of disease relapse is high within 1 and 3 years from the last infusion.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".