ArticleKidney international reports2026
Systematic Review of Efficacy and Safety of Avacopan in Real-World Clinical Practice.
Article in Kidney international reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Real-world long-term outcomes and safety of avacopan for antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody-associated vasculitis with advanced renal dysfunction: a multicenter cohort study (4U-AAV Study).Clinical and experimental nephrology · 2026Article
- Real-world outcomes of avacopan beyond the first year in antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody-associated vasculitis: a retrospective cohort study.BMC rheumatology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Avacopan, a complement 5a receptor (C5aR) antagonist, is a therapeutic option for patients with antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitis (AAV), and is used as a steroid-sparing agent. The efficacy and safety of avacopan were established in the pivotal phase III ADVOCATE trial. However, there remains a paucity of real-world evidence to confirm these findings across diverse clinical settings and populations. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of 16 real-world studies evaluating the clinical outcomes of avacopan in patients with AAV. Using a meta-analytic approach, we compared efficacy and safety outcomes reported in these studies with those of the main trial. Key end points included clinical remission and incidence of adverse events. Results: The aggregated real-world data demonstrated that the time from diagnosis of AAV or relapse and initiation of avacopan was 24 days (range: 6-54 days). The clinical remission rates at 6 months as assessed in 215 patients were 89% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.84-0.93), whereas the rates of serious infection were 14% (95% CI: 0.10-0.18). We observed a heterogeneity between populations when hepatotoxicity was assessed in real-world cohorts, with this signal being particularly pronounced in Japanese populations. Conclusion: Avacopan has been found to demonstrate both safety and high efficacy in the treatment of AAV in real-world settings, with remission rates exceeding and serious infection rates comparable to those observed in clinical trial data. However, the higher incidence of hepatotoxicity in certain populations underscores the need for careful monitoring and pharmacovigilance studies to clarify risk factors and guide patient selection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.