MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Rituximab Therapy for Adult Refractory Systemic Lupus Erythematosus with Neurological and/or Psychiatric Presentations: A PRISMACompliant Meta-Analysis

2024· review· en· W4401544003 on OpenAlexaff
Mehran Asad Ayoubi, Maryam Moghaddassi, Mehdi Aloosh

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Rheumatology Reviews · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSystemic Lupus Erythematosus Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRituximabInternal medicineRefractory (planetary science)Systemic lupus erythematosusMeta-analysisClinical trialDiseaseLymphoma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Rituximab (RTX) is used off-label for refractory cases of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) with extrarenal activity, including neurological and/or psychiatric (N/P) presentations. However, evidence from randomized controlled trials is limited. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to conduct a pooled analysis of the effectiveness and safety of RTX therapy for adult refractory SLE with N/P manifestations. METHODS: Electronic searches in PubMed, Epistemonikos, and ICTRP databases and statistical analysis were conducted in May 2023. RESULTS: Electronic searches identified 20 studies (25 reports). A total of 59 patients (53 females; 90%) were included, with a mean age of 33.5±10.6 years and a median disease duration of 3.5 years (range, 0.08 to 25.0) who were followed up post-RTX therapy for a median time of 12 months (range, 3.0 to 46.2). The rate of clinical response (partial or major) was 90% (95% CI, 83 to 96) (n = 57 patients). A third of responders relapsed after a median time of 9.5 months (range, 3.0 to 33.0). Pooled pre-RTX/post-RTX scores for Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index (SLEDAI) (n = 13) were 19±15/7±5 and for neurological British Isles Lupus Assessment Group (BILAG) (n = 29) were A/D (13), A/C (5), B/D (7), B/C (2), and A/A (2). Patients without mood disorder had a higher chance of clinical response (relative risk (RR) 1.4 (1.03 to 1.48)). Patients who benefited the most from RTX therapy were those with psychosis (a higher chance of major clinical response; RR 1.9 (1.02 to 2.34)), without acute confusional state (a lower chance of relapse; RR 0.08 (0.006 to 0.791)), and with disease duration <3 years (a lower chance of relapse; RR 0.18 (0.014 to 0.992)). Infection rate during treatment was 33% (7/21). CONCLUSION: RTX therapy had good effectiveness. The pooled evidence for safety outcomes was limited and of low certainty.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.088

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0160.047
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.218
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.227 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Rheumatology ReviewsSame topicSystemic Lupus Erythematosus ResearchFrench-language works237,207