Dataset Information

Increased risk for clinical onset of myasthenia gravis during the postpartum period.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To study the risk of clinical onset of myasthenia gravis (MG) in pregnancy and during the first 6 months postpartum because an association between pregnancy or the postpartum period and the onset of autoimmune MG is widely assumed but not proven.

Methods

The design was a cross-sectional population-based cohort study of 2 MG cohorts (Norway and the Netherlands) with 1,038 healthy controls from Norway. Data were obtained on 246 women with MG (age at onset 15-45 years). Data on pregnancy, hormonal factors, and clinical symptoms were collected by a previously validated environmental MG questionnaire. Relative risk of MG onset before, during, and after pregnancy was calculated by multinomial logistic regression for Norwegian women reaching 45 years of age, adjusted for the observed distribution of person-years in the corresponding control group.

Results

Of the included women with MG, 13 (11.5%) of the Dutch and 24 (18.0%) of the Norwegian patients had their first myasthenia symptoms during the pregnancy or postpartum period. The postpartum period was confirmed to be significantly associated with the onset of symptoms of MG in Norwegian women with MG (relative risk 5.5, 95% confidence interval 2.6-11.6). The risk was highest after the first childbirth.

Conclusions

Women have a high-risk period for the onset of clinical symptoms of MG in the postpartum period, in particular after the first childbirth. Future studies should aim at elucidating the role of the hormonal-immunological-genetic interaction in the pathogenesis of MG.

SUBMITTER: Boldingh MI

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5109939 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

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.

Project description:ImportanceRituximab is a third-line option for refractory generalized myasthenia gravis (MG) based on empirical evidence, but its effect in new-onset disease is unknown.ObjectiveTo investigate the efficacy and safety of rituximab compared with placebo as an add-on to standard of care for MG.Design, setting, and participantsThis randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study took place throughout 48 weeks at 7 regional clinics in Sweden. Key inclusion criteria were age older than 18 years, onset of generalized symptoms within 12 months or less, and a Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis (QMG) score of 6 or more. Patients were screened from October 20, 2016, to March 2, 2020. Key exclusion criteria included pure ocular MG, suspected thymoma, previous thymectomy, and prior noncorticosteroid immunosuppressants or high doses of corticosteroids.InterventionsParticipants were randomized 1:1 without stratification to a single intravenous infusion of 500 mg of rituximab or matching placebo.Main outcomes and measuresMinimal disease manifestations at 16 weeks defined as a QMG score of 4 or less with prednisolone, 10 mg or less daily, and no rescue treatment.ResultsOf 87 potentially eligible patients, 25 were randomized to rituximab (mean [SD] age, 67.4 [13.4] years; 7 [28%] female) and 22 to placebo (mean [SD] age, 58 [18.6] years; 7 [32%] female). Compared with placebo, a greater proportion with rituximab met the primary end point; 71% (17 of 24) in the rituximab group vs 29% (6 of 21) in the placebo group (Fisher exact test P = .007; probability ratio, 2.48 [95% CI, 1.20-5.11]). Secondary end points, comparing changes in Myasthenia Gravis Activities of Daily Living and Myasthenia Gravis Quality of Life at 16 weeks with QMG at 24 weeks did not differ between groups with censoring for rescue treatment (per-protocol analysis) but were in favor of active treatment when rescue treatment was taken into account by worst rank imputation (post hoc analysis). Rescue treatments were also more frequent in the placebo arm (rituximab: 1 [4%]; placebo, 8 [36%]). One patient in the placebo arm had a myocardial infarction with cardiac arrest and 1 patient in the active arm experienced a fatal cardiac event.Conclusions and relevanceA single dose of 500 mg of rituximab was associated with greater probability of minimal MG manifestations and reduced need of rescue medications compared with placebo. Further studies are needed to address long-term benefit-risk balance with this treatment.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02950155.