ArticleSage open chronic disease
A meta-analysis on the efficacy and safety of obinuzumab for membranous nephropathy.
Article in Sage open chronic disease. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The management of idiopathic membranous nephropathy (IMN) continues to be a significant challenge to date. A limited number of observational studies have compared Obinutuzumab's (OBZ) therapeutic potential, with OBZ appearing to be more effective than rituximab (RTX) in achieving clinical remission. Objective: This study was designed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety profile of OBZ for IMN treatment. Design: Clinical studies regarding the application of OBZ for IMN were included, and the effector sizes were pooled by meta-analysis. Sensitivity analysis and subgroup analysis were adopted to evaluate the robustness and reliability of the findings. Data sources and methods: Several electronic databases were systematically searched for relevant studies. Effectors, including the rates of total remission (TR) and complete remission (CR), reported in these studies were extracted and pooled as non-comparative binary variables. The rates of immunologic remission, B-cell depletion, and adverse events (AEs) were recorded. Results: Among the studies retrieved in the initial search, 9 eligible studies with 344 participants were included in this meta-analysis. OBZ therapy increased the TR rates at 6 months (0.78 (0.71, 0.85)) and 12 months (0.88 (0.82, 0.93)) and improved the CR rates at 6 months (0.13 (0.03, 0.23)) and 12 months (0.27 (0.16, 0.39)) compared to RTX. No evident heterogeneity or publication bias was observed. The results persisted in the subgroup analysis in terms of OBZ, as the initial treatment for membranous nephropathy (MN), for refractory MN, or for RTX-refractory MN. Interestingly, OBZ treatment was linked to a greater probability of achieving TR than RTX treatment (At 6 months, odds ratio was 4.07 (1.94, 8.53)) and (At 12 months, odds ratio was 10.79 (3.38, 34.39)). OBZ therapy consistently led to a relatively high rate of immunological remission and effective B-cell clearance and did not increase the incidence of AEs or severe AEs. Conclusion: OBZ therapy is associated with improved clinical remission and might be an attractive option for patients with IMN, especially those with refractory or RTX-refractory IMN. High-quality clinical studies are, however, warranted to validate these results further. Trial registration: This study was registered as a meta-analysis in PROSPERO (Number: CRD42025635162).
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.