ArticleClinical rheumatology2026
Comparison of telitacicept and belimumab in systemic lupus erythematosus: a real-word retrospective study.
Article in Clinical rheumatology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTelitacicept and belimumab are two biological agents approved for treating systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) in China. This study mainly discusses the therapeutic efficacy of these two biological agents in SLE.
methodsSLE patients who received telitacicept or belimumab at Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital from March 2021 to March 2023 were included. Clinical characteristics were compared, and 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) was performed. Statistical analyses included normality tests, t tests, Mann‒Whitney U tests, and chi‒square tests.
resultsBoth telitacicept and belimumab demonstrated robust clinical efficacy. Pre-matching, SLE responder index-4 (SRI-4) response rates were 42.4% (telitacicept) and 49% (belimumab), with median SLEDAI reductions of 2 and 1.5 points, respectively. Serum albumin, complement component 3 (C3), and complement component 4 (C4) levels increased significantly after treatment in both groups. Post-matching, clinically meaningful SRI-4 rates persisted (40.0% vs. 52.0%, P = 0.570), alongside median SLEDAI reductions (10 to 8 vs. 12 to 8). After PSM, although overall bias was reduced, baseline imbalances persisted for key laboratory parameters, notably serum C4 (standardized mean difference [SMD] > 0.2), necessitating cautious interpretation of between-group comparisons. Although the median absolute C4 increase was numerically higher with telitacicept (0.07 [IQR 0.01-0.11]) than belimumab (0.03 [IQR 0.01-0.10]), effect size quantification revealed a small magnitude (Hedges' g = 0.243, 95% CI: - 0.319 to 0.804) with limited precision. Exploratory analysis of the lupus nephritis subgroup revealed a more pronounced reduction in IgG levels with telitacicept versus belimumab (nominal P = 0.019; Hedges' g = - 0.242, 95% CI: - 0.755 to 0.272), though findings remain hypothesis-generating given the limited sample size and unadjusted multiple comparisons.
conclusionBoth telitacicept and belimumab reduced disease activity in SLE. While telitacicept exhibited a numerical trend toward greater C4 elevation in SLE and a potential signal of greater IgG reduction in LN, these findings require validation in adequately powered prospective trials. Key points • This study compared the efficacy of telitacicept and belimumab treatment in SLE, presenting important reference function for clinical medication.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42706475What 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.