ArticleJournal of neuromuscular diseases
Disease burden, healthcare resource utilisation, and treatment patterns in patients with newly diagnosed myasthenia gravis in England: A retrospective cohort study.
Article in Journal of neuromuscular diseases. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Longitudinal treatment patterns in myasthenia gravis: An analysis from the prospective Dutch-Belgian patient registry.Journal of neuromuscular diseases · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMyasthenia gravis (MG), a chronic and unpredictable autoimmune disease, is associated with multiple comorbidities and high disease burden.
objectiveTo assess the disease burden, healthcare resource utilisation (HCRU), and treatment patterns of patients with newly diagnosed MG in England.
methodsData from Clinical Practice Research Datalink GP practices linked to the Hospital Episode Statistics database were used. Eligible patients had ≥1 diagnostic code for MG, with the first MG diagnostic code recorded between 01 January 2010 and 31 December 2019. Non-MG controls were selected if they had no recorded MG diagnosis and ≥12 months of data. Controls were matched for age, sex and GP practice in a maximum ratio of 5:1.
resultsMean follow-up duration was 2.8 and 3.1 years for the MG and non-MG cohorts, respectively. In the MG cohort, 56% of patients were male, with a mean age of 67 years at baseline. Incidence rates of all comorbidities assessed during follow-up were higher in the MG cohort than in controls. Almost two-thirds of MG patients experienced ≥1 myasthenic exacerbation during follow-up; incidence rates (95% confidence interval) of MG exacerbations and crises were 50.0 (44.7-55.9) and 1.3 (0.8-2.0) per 100 person-years, respectively. Visits to non-neurology specialists and outpatient clinics were the most common instances of HCRU overall, each being more frequent in the MG cohort than for controls. In the first year of follow-up, acetylcholinesterase inhibitors (AChEIs) and corticosteroids were used by 56.0% and 50.2% of MG patients, respectively; the use of AChEIs declined thereafter.
conclusionsDespite treatment, there is a high disease burden for patients with newly diagnosed MG in England, with high rates of MG exacerbation and HCRU use. Thus, there is a need for targeted treatments with sustained efficacy and improved safety to adequately manage MG symptoms and reduce MG-related disease burden.
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.