Dataset Information

Frequency and clinical features of treatment-refractory myasthenia gravis.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:To investigate the frequency and characterize the clinical features of treatment-refractory myasthenia gravis in an Austrian cohort. METHODS:Patient charts of 126 patients with generalized myasthenia gravis and onset between 2000 and 2016 were analyzed retrospectively. Patients were classified as treatment-refractory according to strict, predefined criteria. These mandated patients being at least moderately symptomatic (i.e., MGFA class III) or needing either maintenance immunoglobulins or plasma exchange therapy for at least 1 year in spite of two adequately dosed immunosuppressive drugs. Clinical features and outcome at last follow-up were compared to treatment-responsive patients. RESULTS:14 out of 126 patients (11.1%) met these criteria of treatment-refractory myasthenia gravis. Treatment-refractory patients had more frequent clinical exacerbations and more often received rescue treatments or a further escalation of immunosuppressive therapies. They also remained more severely affected at last follow-up. An early onset of myasthenia gravis was associated with a higher risk for a refractory course. CONCLUSION:A small subgroup of patients with generalized myasthenia gravis do not respond sufficiently to standard therapies. Refractory disease has considerable implications for both patients and health care providers and highlights an unmet need for new treatment options.

SUBMITTER: Rath J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7109164 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Frequency and clinical features of treatment-refractory myasthenia gravis.

Rath Jakob J Brunner Ines I Tomschik Matthias M Zulehner Gudrun G Hilger Eva E Krenn Martin M Paul Anna A Cetin Hakan H Zimprich Fritz F

Journal of neurology 20191211 4

<h4>Background</h4>To investigate the frequency and characterize the clinical features of treatment-refractory myasthenia gravis in an Austrian cohort.<h4>Methods</h4>Patient charts of 126 patients with generalized myasthenia gravis and onset between 2000 and 2016 were analyzed retrospectively. Patients were classified as treatment-refractory according to strict, predefined criteria. These mandated patients being at least moderately symptomatic (i.e., MGFA class III) or needing either maintenanc ...[more]

PMID: 31828474

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.

Dataset Information

Frequency and clinical features of treatment-refractory myasthenia gravis.

Publications

Frequency and clinical features of treatment-refractory myasthenia gravis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets