MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4417308142 · doi:10.7759/cureus.99214

Effectiveness of Rituximab, Belimumab, and Thrombopoietin Receptor Agonists in Refractory Immune Thrombocytopenia Associated With Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2025· review· en· W4417308142 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ryuichi Ohta, Yoshinori Ryu, Kunihiro Ichinose

Bibliographic record

VenueCureus · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPlatelet Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBelimumabRituximabRefractory (planetary science)Immune thrombocytopeniaEltrombopagRomiplostimThrombopoietin receptorThrombopoietinRetrospective cohort study

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Thrombocytopenia is a frequent and clinically significant hematologic manifestation of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). A subset of patients develops refractory immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) despite standard therapy, creating a major therapeutic challenge. Targeted agents, including rituximab, belimumab, and thrombopoietin receptor agonists (TPO-RAs), have been used in small studies, but their overall effectiveness in SLE-associated refractory ITP has not been comprehensively evaluated. To systematically review and synthesize evidence on the effectiveness of rituximab, belimumab, and TPO-RAs for refractory ITP in adults with SLE, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies following a prespecified protocol. Eligible studies included adults with confirmed SLE and refractory ITP treated with rituximab, belimumab, or TPO-RAs. Data were extracted on clinical outcomes, including complete response, partial response, and overall response rate (ORR). A meta-analysis of proportions using fixed-effects models was performed for each treatment category. Methodological quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Eleven studies involving 11 cohorts met the inclusion criteria. Six cohorts (192 patients; pooled ORR 88.5% [170/192]) evaluated rituximab, two cohorts (14 patients; pooled ORR 92.9% [13/14]) evaluated belimumab, and three cohorts (31 patients; pooled ORR 96.8% [30/31]) evaluated TPO-RAs. Rituximab demonstrated a consistently high ORR of 88.5% (170/192) across studies. Belimumab showed an ORR of 92.9% (13/14), although small sample sizes limited evidence. TPO-RAs demonstrated the highest ORR of 96.8% (30/31), with rapid platelet recovery in most patients. Overall study quality was moderate, with larger rituximab cohorts providing the most substantial evidence, whereas belimumab and TPO-RA data were derived from small retrospective studies. Definitions of treatment response varied across studies. Rituximab, belimumab, and TPO-RAs appear to be effective therapeutic options for refractory SLE-associated ITP, with consistently high response rates across available studies. Evidence is strongest for rituximab, while belimumab and TPO-RAs show promising results that require confirmation in larger, well-designed prospective studies. Standardization of response criteria and improved safety reporting are needed to optimize treatment strategies for this challenging clinical condition.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0210.040
Bibliometrics0.0080.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.292 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCureus→Same topicPlatelet Disorders and Treatments→French-language works237,207→