SynthesisFrontiers in immunology2023
Efficacy and safety of the innovative monoclonal antibodies in adults with generalized myasthenia gravis: a Bayesian network analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in immunology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Network connectivity, between-study heterogeneity and timepoint challenges in generalized myasthenia gravis: a feasibility assessment of indirect treatment comparisons.Journal of comparative effectiveness research · 2025Pooled it
- Efficacy and safety of immunosuppressants and monoclonal antibodies in adults with myasthenia gravis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Journal of translational medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Initiation response, maximized therapeutic efficacy, and post-treatment effects of biological targeted therapies in myasthenia gravis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Pooled it
- Comparative Efficacy of Rozanolixizumab with Efgartigimod or Intravenous Immunoglobulin in Generalized Myasthenia Gravis Using Matching Adjusted Indirect Comparisons.Neurology and therapy · 2026Article
- Regimen-stratified Bayesian model-based meta-analysis of targeted biologics in generalised myasthenia gravis: efficacy comparison, mechanism-level class contrast, and endpoint sensitivity with model-informed trial design.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Article
- Indirect Comparison of Nipocalimab Versus Efgartigimod and Rozanolixizumab in the Treatment of Generalized Myasthenia Gravis.Advances in therapy · 2026Article
- Pharmacological and speech-language pathology management of dysphagia in patients with myasthenia gravis.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Review
- Research Progress in Pharmacological Targeted Therapy for Myasthenia Gravis.Journal of inflammation research · 2026Review
- New and Emerging Biological Therapies for Myasthenia Gravis: A Focussed Review for Clinical Decision-Making.BioDrugs : clinical immunotherapeutics, biopharmaceuticals and gene therapy · 2025Review
- The efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics of telitacicept following efgartigimod in generalized myasthenia gravis: protocol of a randomized controlled trial.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Article
- Commentary: Efficacy and safety of the innovative monoclonal antibodies in adults with generalized myasthenia gravis: a Bayesian network analysis.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: A series of clinical trials support the effectiveness of monoclonal antibodies for generalized myasthenia gravis (MG) compared to the placebo, but the priority among drugs remains unclear. Therefore, we conduct a frequentist network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare the relative effects of different drugs for generalized MG. Methods: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and clinicaltrials.gov were systematically searched for eligible studies up to 1 June 2023. The primary outcome was efficacy (Myasthenia Gravis Activities of Daily Living [MG-ADL] score and Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis [QMG] score) and safety (adverse events [AEs]). Mean difference (MD) and risk ratio (RR) with their 95% credible intervals (95%CrIs) were used to show the effect size of continuous and categorical variables, respectively. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Results: Thirteen studies involving 1167 individuals were identified for NMA. For efficacy outcomes, belimumab, efgartigimod, mezagitamab 600mg, and nipocalimab 60mg/kg were inferior to rozanolixzumab 7mg/kg (MD ranged from 2 to 3.69) and rozanolixzumab 10mg/kg (MD ranged from 2.04 to 3.72) in MG-ADL score, and rozanolixzumab had the highest rank probability (83%) according to the subjective surface under the curve ranking area (SUCRA). For QMG score, batoclimab 340mg (MD ranged from 4.32 to 8.52) and batoclimab 680mg (MD ranged from 4.11 to 9.31) were more effective than placebo and other monoclonal antibodies except for rozanolixzumab, with the highest SUCRA value (93% and 97% respectively). For safety outcomes, belimumab achieved the highest SUCRA value (89.8%) with significant statistical difference compared to rozanolixzumab 7mg/kg (RR 0.08, 95%CrI 0.01 to 0.94) and rozanolixzumab 10mg/kg (RR 0.08, 95%CrI 0.01 to 0.86). Conclusion: While all monoclonal antibodies were superior to the placebo, rozanolixzumab and batoclimab might be the most effective for generalized MG. However, rozanolixzumab was associated with higher incidence of AEs. Given the limitations inherent in indirect comparisons, further head-to-head and extensive observational studies are necessary to confirm our findings. Systematic review registration: https://inplasy.com/?s=202370112, identifier 202370112.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.