Dataset Information

Comparison of IVIg and PLEX in patients with myasthenia gravis.

ABSTRACT: Both IV immunoglobulin (IVIg) and plasma exchange (PLEX) are immunomodulatory treatments used to treat patients with myasthenia gravis (MG), but the choice of which treatment to administer to patients is limited due to lack of evidence from adequately powered, masked, randomized, standardized trials.We randomized 84 patients with moderate to severe MG defined as a Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis Score for disease severity (QMGS) of >10.5 and worsening weakness to IVIg (Gamunex®, Talecris Biotherapeutics) 1 g/kg/day for 2 consecutive days or PLEX (Caridian Spectra) 1.0 plasma volume exchanges for 5 exchanges. The patients were evaluated at day 14 after treatment for the primary efficacy parameter of change in QMGS and secondary clinical and electrophysiologic parameters and were followed for a total of 60 days.Both IVIg and PLEX reduced the QMGS, and IVIg was comparable to PLEX in efficacy. The dropout rate was the same for both treatment arms and both treatments were well-tolerated. The presence of acetylcholine receptor antibodies and greater baseline disease severity predicted a better response to therapy. The postintervention status revealed that the same proportion of patients improved with treatment: 69% on IVIg and 65% on PLEX. The duration of improvement was similar with both treatments.IVIg has comparable efficacy to PLEX in the treatment of patients with moderate to severe MG. Both treatments are well-tolerated, and the duration of effect is comparable. Either treatment may be offered to patients depending on availability of resources.This study provides Class I evidence that IVIg and PLEX have comparable efficacy and are equally tolerated in adult patients with moderate to severe MG within 2 weeks of treatment.

SUBMITTER: Barth D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3109880 | biostudies-literature | 2011 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparison of IVIg and PLEX in patients with myasthenia gravis.

Barth D D Nabavi Nouri M M Ng E E Nwe P P Bril V V

Neurology 20110511 23

<h4>Objective</h4>Both IV immunoglobulin (IVIg) and plasma exchange (PLEX) are immunomodulatory treatments used to treat patients with myasthenia gravis (MG), but the choice of which treatment to administer to patients is limited due to lack of evidence from adequately powered, masked, randomized, standardized trials.<h4>Methods</h4>We randomized 84 patients with moderate to severe MG defined as a Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis Score for disease severity (QMGS) of >10.5 and worsening weakness to ...[more]

PMID: 21562253

Similar Datasets

Project description:Myasthenia gravis (MG) is an autoimmune disease affecting the neuromuscular junction, whose clinical hallmark is muscle weakness and early fatigability. Azathioprine (AZA) is commonly used in Myasthenia Gravis therapy. AZA is a purine antagonist, which inhibits the cell cycle in the resting and DNA synthesis phases. It is usually used as an immunosuppressant to block T- and B-cell proliferation. AZA, bioconverted to 6-mercaptopurine by glutathione S-transferase (GST), can be metabolized either through the hypoxanthine phosphoribosyl transferase pathway to active 6-thioguanine nucleotides (6-TGN) or through the thiopurine S-methyltransferase (TPMT) pathway to inactive methyl-thiopurine metabolites. The incorporation of active 6-TGNs into DNA, causing breaks in DNA strands resulting in interference with RNA production and thereby protein synthesis, is responsible for the drug effect. The response to AZA is determined by which metabolic pathway is being favored. While balanced use of both HPRT and TPMT pathways results in responsiveness to AZA, hyperactivity of TPMT skews the balance towards the TPMT pathway and results in unresponsiveness to AZA with no pharmacological effect. In contrast, low TPMT activity skews the balance towards the HPRT pathway, resulting in increasing side-effects due to the accumulation of 6-TGNs. Current treatments for MG therapy are often inadequate because less than 40% of patients achieve complete remission with available drugs. This reflects the lack of drugs acting on target sites for which there is strong evidence of pathogenicity and the inability to identify responder patients. No criteria for responsiveness are available, exposing patients to unpredictable failures and unpredictable side effects. These individuals are at particular risk for adverse drug reaction (ADRs) or therapeutic failure. Genetic profiling with the Affymetrix drug metabolizing enzymes and transports genotyping array offers the ability to determine 1,931 variants and 225 genes involved in drug metabolism and disposition. Accordingly, the study of well-known drug-metabolizing genes can be involved in the specific metabolic pathway of a drug, which is more likely to define genotype-phenotype association and thereby genotype profiles relevant to drug response that can be applied as predictive biomarkers for pharmacological treatment.

Project description:ImportanceUse of biologic agents in generalized myasthenia gravis is generally limited to therapy-refractory cases; benefit in new-onset disease is unknown.ObjectiveTo assess rituximab in refractory and new-onset generalized myasthenia gravis and rituximab vs conventional immunotherapy in new-onset disease.Design, setting, and participantsA retrospective cohort study with prospectively collected data was conducted on a county-based community sample at Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden. Participants included 72 patients with myasthenia gravis, excluding those displaying muscle-specific tyrosine kinase antibodies, initiating rituximab treatment from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2018, and patients with new-onset disease initiating conventional immunotherapy from January 1, 2003, to December 31, 2012, with 12 months or more of observation time. The present study was conducted from March 1, 2019, to January 31, 2020.ExposuresTreatment with low-dose rituximab (most often 500 mg every 6 months) or conventional immunosuppressants.Main outcomes and measuresTime to remission (main outcome) as well as use of rescue therapies or additional immunotherapies and time in remission (secondary outcomes).ResultsOf the 72 patients included, 31 patients (43%) were women; mean (SD) age at treatment start was 60 (18) years. Twenty-four patients had received rituximab within 12 months of disease onset and 48 received rituximab at a later time, 34 of whom had therapy-refractory disease. A total of 26 patients (3 [12%] women; mean [SD] age, 68 [11] years at treatment start) received conventional immunosuppressant therapy. Median time to remission was shorter for new-onset vs refractory disease (7 vs 16 months: hazard ratio [HR], 2.53; 95% CI, 1.26-5.07; P = .009 after adjustment for age, sex, and disease severity) and for rituximab vs conventional immunosuppressant therapies (7 vs 11 months: HR, 2.97; 95% CI, 1.43-6.18; P = .004 after adjustment). In addition, fewer rescue therapy episodes during the first 24 months were required (mean [SD], 0.38 [1.10] vs 1.31 [1.59] times; mean difference, -1.26; 95% CI, -1.97 to -0.56; P < .001 after adjustment), and a larger proportion of patients had minimal or no need of additional immunotherapies (70% vs 35%; OR, 5.47; 95% CI, 1.40-21.43; P = .02 after adjustment). Rates of treatment discontinuation due to adverse events were lower with rituximab compared with conventional therapies (3% vs 46%; P < .001 after adjustment).Conclusions and relevanceClinical outcomes with rituximab appeared to be more favorable in new-onset generalized myasthenia gravis, and rituximab also appeared to perform better than conventional immunosuppressant therapy. These findings suggest a relatively greater benefit of rituximab earlier in the disease course. A placebo-controlled randomized trial to corroborate these findings is warranted.

Dataset Information

Comparison of IVIg and PLEX in patients with myasthenia gravis.

Publications

Comparison of IVIg and PLEX in patients with myasthenia gravis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets