Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,409

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Efficacy and safety of rituximab in moderately‐to‐severely active systemic lupus erythematosus: The randomized, double‐blind, phase ii/iii systemic lupus erythematosus evaluation of rituximab trial

Open access
Merrill, Joan T., Neuwelt, C. Michael, Wallace, Daniel J., Shanahan, Joseph C., Latinis, Kevin M., Oates, James C., Utset, Tammy O., Gordon, Caroline, Isenberg, David A., Hsieh, Hsin‐Ju, Zhang, David, Brunetta, Paul G.·2010·Arthritis & Rheumatism

Abstract

Objective: B cells are likely to contribute to the pathogenesis of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), and rituximab induces depletion of B cells. The Exploratory Phase II/III SLE Evaluation of Rituximab (EXPLORER) trial tested the efficacy and safety of rituximab versus placebo in patients with moderately‐to‐severely active extrarenal SLE. Methods: Patients entered with ≥1 British Isles Lupus Assessment Group (BILAG) A score or ≥2 BILAG B scores despite background immunosuppressant therapy, which was continued during the trial. Prednisone was added and subsequently tapered. Patients were randomized at a ratio of 2:1 to receive rituximab (1,000 mg) or placebo on days 1, 15, 168, and 182. Results: In the intent‐to‐treat analysis of 257 patients, background treatment was evenly distributed among azathioprine, mycophenolate mofetil, and methotrexate. Fifty‐three percent of the patients had ≥1 BILAG A score at entry, and 57% of the patients were categorized as being steroid dependent. No differences were observed between placebo and rituximab in the primary and secondary efficacy end points, including the BILAG‐defined response, in terms of both area under the curve and landmark analyses. A beneficial effect of rituximab on the primary end point was observed in the African American and Hispanic subgroups. Safety and tolerability were similar in patients receiving placebo and those receiving rituximab. Conclusion: The EXPLORER trial enrolled patients with moderately‐to‐severely active SLE and used aggressive background treatment and sensitive cutoffs for nonresponse. No differences were noted between placebo and rituximab in the primary and secondary end points. Further evaluation of patient subsets, biomarkers, and exploratory outcome models may improve the design of future SLE clinical trials.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/art.27233

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 1,409

Metadata

Authors
Merrill, J. T., Neuwelt, C. M., Wallace, D. J., Shanahan, J. C., Latinis, K. M., Oates, J. C., Utset, T. O., Gordon, C., Isenberg, D. A., Hsieh, H., Zhang, D., & Brunetta, P. G.
Venue
Arthritis & Rheumatism
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2009-12-28
Volume
62
Issue
1
Pages
222-233
ISSN
  • 0004-3591 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-0131
OpenAlex
W2046330020
Cited by
1,409
References
2
FWCI
50.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Efficacy and safety of rituximab in moderately‐to‐severely active systemic lupus erythematosus: The randomized, double‐blind, phase ii/iii systemic lupus erythematosus evaluation of rituximab trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/art.27233
The paper
Merrill, J. T., Neuwelt, C. M., Wallace, D. J., Shanahan, J. C., Latinis, K. M., Oates, J. C., Utset, T. O., Gordon, C., Isenberg, D. A., Hsieh, H., Zhang, D., & Brunetta, P. G. (2010). Efficacy and safety of rituximab in moderately‐to‐severely active systemic lupus erythematosus: The randomized, double‐blind, phase ii/iii systemic lupus erythematosus evaluation of rituximab trial. Arthritis & Rheumatism. https://doi.org/10.1002/art.27233

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.