Efficacy and Safety of Immunotherapies in Refractory Myasthenia Gravis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Early prediction of refractory myasthenia gravis based on response to treatment within the first year of diagnosis

BACKGROUND

The long lead time required to diagnose refractory myasthenia gravis (MG) can prevent early attempts at new treatments. Herein, we aimed to predict refractory MG by comparing treatment responses during the early stages between patients with refractory and non-refractory MG.

METHODS

We retrospectively investigated the medical records of patients with acetylcholine receptor antibody-positive generalized MG. Refractory MG was defined as (1) inability to lower prednisolone below 20 mg/day, (2) requiring regular intravenous immunoglobulin or plasmapheresis, or (3) Myasthenia Gravis Activities of Daily Living score ≥ 6 after treatment with corticosteroids and ≥ 1 oral immunosuppressant for ≥ 12 months.

RESULTS

Of 133 patients, 29 (21.8%) and 104 (78.2%) had refractory and non-refractory MG, respectively. The median duration from the diagnosis of MG to that of refractory MG was 31 months. During the first year following diagnosis, the proportion of patients who achieved a lowest effective prednisolone dose of ≤ 20 mg was lower in the refractory group than in the non-refractory group (69.0% vs. 92.0%). Conversely, the proportions of patients who initiated oral immunosuppressive therapy (58.6% vs. 22.5%), required rescue interventions (48.3% vs. 22.1%), or experienced a myasthenic crisis (34.5% vs. 14.4%) were significantly higher in the refractory group. The risk of refractory MG was 18.7-fold higher in patients who failed to achieve lowest effective prednisolone dose under 20 mg/day and started oral immunosuppressant during the first year than those with neither of these conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

The refractory group displayed distinct clinical features during the early disease stages, including frequent crises and higher levels of immunosuppressive treatment. These features can be used for early prediction of refractory MG.

Efficacy and safety of different dosages of rituximab for myasthenia gravis: a single-arm meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Rituximab (RTX) is one of the treatment options for refractory myasthenia gravis (MG), yet the optimal dosing schedule remains undetermined. Our study aims to explore this issue and offer a valuable reference for clinical dosing.

METHODS

This is a single-arm meta-analysis. Studies in adults with myasthenia gravis published before 31 December 2023 were searched in PubMed, Web of Science, and other databases. Two primary effectiveness outcomes were analyzed: (1) Proportion of patients achieving minimal manifestation status (MMS) or better, (2) Change in Quantitative MG Score (QMGs) after RTX treatment. Safety outcomes included the incidence and description of serious adverse events (SAEs) and adverse events (AEs). Forest plots were generated to provide an overview and detailed combined effects. Publication bias was evaluated using funnel plots and the Egger test. Conventional dose refers to an RTX regimen similar to that used for the treatment of B-cell lymphoma: 375 mg/m2 per week for 4 weeks or 1000 mg for Weeks 1 and 3. Dosing regimens below the conventional dose in a treatment cycle are defined as low dose.

RESULTS

A total of 1037 MG patients received RTX treatment. Overall, 59.0% (95% CI: 48.2-69.8%, n = 599) of patients achieved MMS or better, with a mean decrease in QMGs of 6.81 (95% CI, -9.27 to -4.35, n = 222). The low-dose group showed a higher proportion of patients achieving MMS or better (76.6% vs 51.6%) and a more significant decrease in QMGs from baseline (-9.04 vs -3.62) compared to the conventional dose group (P < 0.01). Differences in the incidence of SAEs and AEs between the two groups were not significant (P > 0.05). Univariate meta-regression analyses showed that the dose administered was significantly associated with the proportion of MMS or better and the change in QMGs, whereas the proportion of Musk patients was not significantly associated with any of the outcomes. Stepwise logistic regression analyses showed that non-refractory MG, mild disease severity (MGFA classification), and low-dose were significant predictors for achieving an MMS or better prognosis, whereas for achieving improvement or better, only low dose was an independent predictor.

CONCLUSION

RTX can improve clinical symptoms, reduce QMGs in MG patients and the use of oral glucocorticoids and other immunosuppressants. The efficacy of low-dose RTX in treating MG patients is more effective than conventional-dose RTX and demonstrates a better safety profile. Mild disease severity, non-refractory MG, low dose, and MuSK-MG over AChR-MG predict better efficacy. Large randomized controlled trials are necessary to evaluate the efficacy and safety of RTX in MG patients and its various subtypes.

Patterns and predictors of therapeutic response to efgartigimod in acetylcholine receptor-antibody generalized myasthenia gravis subtypes

Background

Efgartigimod is an approved biologic for generalized myasthenia gravis (gMG), which is an autoimmune disease and can potentially be life-threatening. However, the therapeutic response to efgartigimod among the acetylcholine receptor gMG (AChR-gMG) subtypes remains inconclusive.

Objective

To explore the patterns and predictors for the therapeutic response to efgartigimod among AChR-gMG subtypes.

Design

This prospective, observational study included AChR-gMG patients treated with efgartigimod at 15 centers in China with a follow-up for at least 20 weeks.

Methods

The primary outcome was the proportion of minimal symptom expression (MSE) responders, denoted by a Myasthenia Gravis Activities of Daily Living (MG-ADL) score of 0 or 1 within 4 weeks and maintained for ⩾4 weeks. AChR antibody-positive MG (AChR-MG) subtypes were classified into early onset myasthenia gravis (EOMG), late-onset myasthenia gravis (LOMG), and thymoma-associated myasthenia gravis (TAMG). The predictive factors for MSE responders were identified by univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis.

Results

One hundred sixteen patients were included with a median follow-up duration of 238 days (172.5-306.3). There were 50 (43.1%) patients with EOMG, 28 (24.1%) with LOMG and 38 (32.8%) with TAMG. After efgartigimod initiation, 35 (30.2%) patients were MSE responders, and the proportion of MSE responders was highest in the LOMG group (42.9%). The MG-ADL score reduction in the LOMG group was more significant than in the EOMG group by weeks 16 and 20 (both p = 0.022). Response patterns to efgartigimod among the AChR-MG subtypes differed as measured by the proportion of improved patients and MSE. LOMG presented sustained symptom control, while EOMG and TAMG showed more fluctuations. Eight TAMG patients (21.1%) switched to another biologic (p = 0.005). Baseline MG-ADL was an independent predictor for therapeutic response to efgartigimod (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

Our findings revealed patterns of treatment responses among AChR-gMG subtypes, with LOMG patients potentially presenting a more sustained response. These findings likely provide preliminary data for precision therapy in MG in the era of biologics.

Trial registration

NCT04535843.

Clinical and laboratory remission with rituximab in anti-MuSK-positive myasthenia gravis

BACKGROUND

Increasing data are available on the use and efficacy of rituximab (RTX) in patients with anti-muscle-specific tyrosine kinase (MuSK)-positive myasthenia gravis (MG), especially those steroid-dependent or unresponsive to traditional immunotherapies.

AIMS

We aimed to evaluate the clinical characteristics and treatment responses of adult patients with generalized anti-MuSK-positive MG treated with RTX.

METHODS

We retrospectively recruited 16 patients who were on RTX, between January 2010 and September 2023. RTX was given 1000 mg/day intravenously twice, two weeks apart. Maintenance treatment was administered at intervals of 3-6 months based on clinical evaluation. The outcome was assessed by Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America (MGFA) and Myasthenia Gravis Status and Treatment Intensity (MGSTI) scores. Additionally, anti-MuSK antibody levels were retested after treatment in all patients except one.

RESULTS

Twelve patients were female. The mean age at disease onset was 35.3 ± 17.3 years. The median duration between disease onset and RTX administration was 2.4 years (min-max: 0.5-36.5 years). The worst MGFA class before RTX was between IIIb-V. After RTX treatment, 81.3% of patients achieved MGFA minimal manifestations or better and MGSTI level 1 or better. Anti-MuSK antibodies became negative in 12 patients, while they remained positive in three. The changes in antibody levels seemed associated with clinical outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

RTX is an effective treatment in anti-MuSK-positive MG. Furthermore, our results support the inhibition of antibody production by RTX and we recommend monitoring anti-MuSK antibody titers to follow disease progression and treatment response.

Eculizumab in myasthenia gravis: A review

Eculizumab, a monoclonal antibody against complement C5, is a novel therapy to treat refractory myasthenia gravis (MG). The present review was undertaken to study the role of eculizumab in MG. This includes the drug's mechanism, pharmacokinetics, clinical trial findings, tolerability, side effects, safety, dosage, administration, and cost. An English-language search for relevant items was undertaken using Embase and PubMed from 1946 to present. Clinical trial registries/databases and websites were also searched for relevant data. Keywords were eculizumab and MG. The present review found 103 articles after initial screening. Current data support eculizumab as an effective, safe, and tolerable drug in cases of refractory MG. However, its cost can prevent it from being widely accessible to a majority of the general population.

Rituximab treatment in myasthenia gravis

Myasthenia gravis (MG) is a chronic autoimmune disease mediated by antibodies against post-synaptic proteins of the neuromuscular junction. Up to 10%-30% of patients are refractory to conventional treatments. For these patients, rituximab has been used off-label in the recent decades. Rituximab is a monoclonal antibody against the CD20 protein that leads to B cell depletion and to the synthesis of new antibody-secreting plasma cells. Although rituximab was created to treat B-cell lymphoma, its use has widely increased to treat autoimmune diseases. In MG, the benefit of rituximab treatment in MuSK-positive patients seems clear, but a high variability in the results of observational studies and even clinical trials has been reported for AChR-positive patients. Moreover, few evidence has been reported in seronegative MG and juvenile MG and some questions about regimen of administration or monitoring strategies, remains open. In this review, we intend to revise the available literature on this topic and resume the current evidence of effectiveness of Rituximab in MG, with special attention to results on every MG subtype, as well as the administration protocols, monitoring strategies and safety profile of the drug.

Inflammation and autoimmune myasthenia gravis

Myasthenia gravis (MG) is a neuromuscular autoimmune disorder characterized by chronic but intermittent fatigue of the eye- and general body muscles. Muscle weakness is caused primarily by the binding of an autoantibody to the acetylcholine receptors, resulting in blockage of normal neuromuscular signal transmission. Studies revealed substantial contributions of different proinflammatory or inflammatory mediators in the pathogenesis of MG. Despite these findings, compared to therapeutic approaches that target autoantibody and complements, only a few therapeutics against key inflammatory molecules have been designed or tested in MG clinical trials. Recent research focuses largely on identifying unknown molecular pathways and novel targets involved in inflammation associated with MG. A well-designed combination or adjunct treatment utilizing one or more selective and validated promising biomarkers of inflammation as a component of targeted therapy may yield better treatment outcomes. This review briefly discusses some preclinical and clinical findings of inflammation associated with MG and current therapy approaches and suggest the potential of targeting important inflammatory marker(s) along with current monoclonal antibody or antibody fragment based targeted therapies directed to a variety of cell surface receptors.

Practical Management for Use of Eculizumab in the Treatment of Severe, Refractory, Non-Thymomatous, AChR + Generalized Myasthenia Gravis: A Systematic Review

Myasthenia gravis (MG) is a rare autoimmune disorder caused by specific autoantibodies at the neuromuscular junction. MG is classified by the antigen specificity of these antibodies. Acetylcholine receptor (AChR) antibodies are the most common type (74–88%), followed by anti-muscle specific kinase (MuSK) and other antibodies. While all these antibodies lead to neuromuscular transmission failure, the immuno-pathogenic mechanisms are distinct. Complement activation is a primary driver of AChR antibody-positive MG (AChR+ MG) pathogenesis. This leads to the formation of the membrane attack complex and destruction of AChR receptors and the postsynaptic membrane resulting in impaired neurotransmission and muscle weakness characteristic of MG. Broad-based immune-suppressants like corticosteroids are effective in controlling MG; however, their long-term use can be associated with significant adverse effects. Advances in translational research have led to the development of more directed therapeutic agents that are likely to alter the future of MG treatment. Eculizumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody that inhibits the cleavage of complement protein C5 and is approved for use in generalized MG. In this review, we discuss the pathophysiology of MG; the therapeutic efficacy and tolerability of eculizumab, as well as the practical guidelines for its use in MG; future studies exploring the role of eculizumab in different stages and subtypes of MG subtypes; the optimal duration of therapy and its discontinuation; the characterization of non-responder patients; and the use of biomarkers for monitoring therapy are highlighted. Based on the pathophysiologic mechanisms, emerging therapies and new therapeutic targets are also reviewed.