The findings showed that nephritis, cutaneous, and arthritis manifestations were the patients' most common reasons for RTX administration, respectively. An improvement was reported in arthritis symptoms according to the number of swollen joints, patient and physician’s VAS score (57.1%), and cutaneous manifestation based on the DLE size or skin vasculitis remission (44.4%). A total number of eight deaths were recorded. Seven patients died at the beginning of RTX therapy due to severe emergency presentations, and one patient died after stopping the treatment in follow-up. A reduction in the creatinine level was observed in SLE patients with nephritis after RTX injection. However, there was no significant difference in the 24-hour urine protein collection rate in lupus patients with nephritis, platelet counts in patients with thrombocytopenia, and anti-DNA and C3 levels in patients with arthritis and cutaneous manifestation before and after RTX therapy. Anti-DNA was decreased in SLE patients after RTX injection, whereas C3 and C4 levels were not changed.
The management of SLE is very complicated due to unpredictable and variable organ system involvement, as well as clinical and serological presentations in various patients and within the same patient over time. Multiple parts of the body may be affected by SLE, and renal involvement is one of the most severe complications of the condition (
13). A literature review showed that musculoskeletal (arthritis), renal, and hematological manifestations are SLE's most common refractory manifestations (
5,
14). Similar findings were found in one study conducted on the Iranian population (
15). In the present research, nephritis was the common reason for administering rituximab in SLE patients. Some degree of renal involvement has been reported in almost all patients with SLE, and between 40% and 70% of the patients develop clinically diagnosed lupus nephritis accordingly (
10,
16). Five-year survival in lupus patients with renal involvement is low (
17,
18). Therefore, assessing new treatment methods is crucial in controlling these side effects and their dangerous consequences. In this study, the therapeutic effects of RTX were evaluated in treating resistant SLE with various refractory manifestations.
Based on the results obtained, serum creatinine levels decreased in lupus nephritis patients after RTX injection; however, no significant difference was observed in these patients' 24-hour urine protein collection level. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses conducted on 588 patients showed that RTX increased rates of total and complete renal remission compared to the control group without increasing adverse events (
14). Similarly, they reported a decrease in serum creatinine levels after RTX injection. Moreover, the researchers showed that RTX injection did not change the proteinuria level (
19).
There are contradictory results regarding the effect of RTX injection on proteinuria levels. While some data emphasized the decreasing proteinuria levels in patients with lupus nephritis after RTX injection (
20-
22), other findings do not show a change in the amount of proteinuria after RTX treatment (
14,
19). The discrepancies may be rooted in differences in drug dosage, treatment duration, patient condition, or other intervening variables. Further studies are recommended in this regard.
In another study, no significant changes were observed in creatinine clearance and urine protein parameters of patients with nephritis despite improvement in most patients and reduction of disease activity after RTX therapy (
23). In a recent study by Rovin, RTX has decreased CD19+ B cells in patients with lupus nephritis, depleting peripheral CD19+ B cells in 71 of 72 patients. RTX patients reported A significant remission rate in anti-dsDNA, C4, and C3 levels. However, no significant difference was observed in total and complete renal remission rates between patients with lupus nephritis treated with RTX and the control group (
18). Similarly, a decrease was reported in anti-DNA in SLE patients after RTX injection, but C4 and C3 levels had not changed (
20). This may be related to the disease's severity or the patients' individual characteristics. The management of SLE is very complicated due to the unpredictability of the disease's clinical and serological presentations in various patients and within the same patient over time.
These contradictory results indicated that more intervening factors should probably be considered in measuring creatinine and urine protein levels in patients with lupus nephritis, and further studies are needed to reject or accept the present findings.
Moreover, no significant increase in the platelet count was reported in SLE patients with thrombocytopenia manifestation in the present study. Based on Ilizaliturri-Guerra et al., using low-dose RTX was influential in managing treatment-resistant severe thrombocytopenia in SLE patients (
24). However, Cobo-Ibáñez et al. indicated that RTX had a short-term effect on thrombocytopenia in this group of patients (
25). Another study showed that half of the thrombocytopenia patients who received rituximab were treated entirely with platelet counts of ≥ 150,000 /mL in the fifth week after the last injection of RTX. However, the mentioned study was conducted on patients with refractory autoimmune thrombocytopenia associated or not with SLE (
26). Other studies confirmed the effect of a low dose of RTX in treating thrombocytopenia in treatment-resistant SLE patients in China. In one study, patients achieved complete responses (CRs, platelet count >100 × 10
9/l) after four courses of low-dose rituximab infusion (two infusions of 200 mg every two weeks) (
27). In another, a remarkable increase in platelet counts (66.53 × 10
9/mL) was reported after one month (
28).
Like other investigations, this study indicated that individuals with SLE experienced remission in their cutaneous manifestations and arthritis; nevertheless, there was a notable alteration in the dsDNA level following treatment, but not in the C3 or C4 levels. Although B-cell depletion therapy is an effective treatment option for rheumatoid arthritis, it often does not result in complete B-cell depletion. Half of the patients who initially show a complete B-cell depletion and clinical response after RTX treatment eventually lose their response with further injections. However, this is not a stable situation, and around three-quarters of patients respond to treatment in the following treatment cycle (
29). These findings were confirmed in other studies (
25,
30). Risselada and Kallenberg showed that intravenous rituximab therapy (1000 mg) along with methylprednisolone (100 mg) at a time interval of two weeks led to a significant and continuous improvement of cutaneous manifestations (
31). Another study investigated the decreasing response of B cells due to the use of rituximab in cutaneous lupus and confirmed a complete clinical response of cutaneous manifestations of the systemic disease to rituximab in most patients with cutaneous lupus (
32).
According to the present study, using rituximab to treat SLE complications can play an essential role in treating these patients and improve their quality of life by reducing the recurrence periods of this disease. However, studies that have focused on the effectiveness of RTX on different manifestations of SLE are lacking. Future clinical trial studies with a larger sample size and control group focusing on the effects of various doses of RTX on lupus complications and relapse periods with the control of intervening factors are recommended.
The inconsistent results regarding the effects of RTX injection on lupus patients may be rooted in entering the patients at different stages of organ involvement in the disease, which makes it difficult to compare studies. Moreover, the medication received before the start of RTX can also affect the response to RTX with a delayed effect. The number of drug administrations and definition of resistant manifestations of the disease (refractory organ involvement) is not the same in different studies. In addition, since the patients treated with RTX are commonly end-stage or resistant to the treatment, the possibility of patients’ death and their withdrawal from the final analysis is high. On the other hand, anti-rituximab antibodies predict infusion-related reactions among lupus patients. Although RTX is commonly well tolerated, infusion-related reactions have been introduced as one of the main adverse effects of the agent. The incidence of infusion-related reactions is higher among lupus patients compared to those with rheumatoid arthritis due to the higher formation of anti-drug antibodies, but its frequency has been estimated to be between 3.5% and 19 % (
33-
35). When interpreting the rituximab assessment, these issues should be considered since they can affect the treatment's results.
5.1. Strengths and Limitations
This was the first study in Iran focusing on the effectiveness of RTX biosimilar Zytax on different refractory manifestations of SLE patients. The results obtained can provide proper information on the effects of RTX (Zytax) on SLE in the Iranian population. However, the present study has limitations due to its small sample size. Moreover, the study's retrospective nature prevents us from generalizing the results to other populations.
5.2. Conclusions
The results showed that nephritis and arthritis were the most common complications of lupus, making the studied patient a candidate for rituximab. RTX could be suggested as a proper treatment in SLE patients with nephritis, arthritis, and cutaneous manifestations resistant to first-line treatment.
The findings showed that nephritis, cutaneous, and arthritis manifestations were the most common reasons for RTX administration. An improvement in arthritis symptoms and cutaneous manifestation has been reported in 57.1% and 44.4% of patients, respectively. A reduction in the creatinine level was observed in SLE patients with nephritis after RTX injection. However, there was no significant difference in the rate of 24-hour urine protein collection in lupus patients with nephritis; platelet count in patients with thrombocytopenia, and anti-DNA, C3, and C3 levels in lupus patients with arthritis and cutaneous manifestation before and after RTX therapy. Eventually, anti-DNA decreased in SLE patients after RTX injection; C3 and C4 levels did not change.
Future research should focus on several key areas to enhance the understanding and optimize using rituximab in SLE treatment. Firstly, large-scale clinical trials with rigorous study designs and diverse patient populations are essential to evaluate the efficacy and safety of rituximab compared to standard therapies. Secondly, studies exploring the optimal dosing regimens and treatment durations of rituximab in SLE are warranted to determine the most effective therapeutic approach. Additionally, investigating biomarkers that predict response to rituximab and identifying potential mechanisms of resistance or relapse after treatment cessation could provide valuable insights into personalized treatment strategies. Furthermore, long-term observational studies are needed to assess the durability of rituximab-induced remissions and its impact on disease progression and patient outcomes. Improving the management and quality of life for individuals with this difficult autoimmune disorder can be achieved by tackling these research goals and advancing the area of SLE medicines.