ArticleNeurology and therapy2025
High-Dose Steroids, Treatment Escalation, and Healthcare Burden in Myasthenia Gravis: A US Claims-Based Cohort Study.
Article in Neurology and therapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Treatment Characteristics and Healthcare Resource Utilization Among Patients with Myasthenia Gravis Initiating Rozanolixizumab: A US Claims Database Analysis.Neurology and therapy · 2026Article
- Disease changes and cost analysis of myasthenia gravis: a 10 years retrospective study from a reference center in Italy.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026Article
- Hsa_circ_0000313/miR-1224-3p/MKNK2 Axis Modulates CD4Mediators of inflammation · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMyasthenia gravis (MG) is a rare neuromuscular autoimmune disease, characterized by chronic, fluctuating muscle weakness and fatigability. Despite established therapies, many patients have inadequately controlled MG. We describe treatment escalation patterns and outcomes for patients with MG between 2010 and 2018.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of medical and pharmacy claims data. Patients aged ≥ 18 years at MG diagnosis were included from two US Merative™ MarketScan
resultsThe cohort included 4925 adults with newly diagnosed MG (1102 aged 18-49 and 3823 aged ≥ 50 at first MG diagnosis) from January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2018. Median follow-up was 30.0 months (18-49 group) and 27.5 months (≥ 50 group). Overall, 71.5% (3521/4925) of patients had ≥ 1 MG treatment escalation; escalation with high-dose corticosteroids was the most common type (64.8% [18-49 group] and 58.5% [≥ 50 group]). In the first year post-diagnosis, median (range) maximal daily prednisolone-equivalent corticosteroid dose was 40.0 (20.0-75.0) mg/day (18-49 group) and 40.0 (20.0-70.0) mg/day (≥ 50 group). Treatment breaks and de-escalation led to rescue treatment or treatment re-escalation in most patients. Exacerbations occurred in 26.3% (n = 290; 18-49 group) and 21.6% (n = 825; ≥ 50 group). Healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and costs were highest in Year 1, with mean MG-related costs per patient between $24,982 (≥ 50 group) and $33,023 (18-49 group).
conclusionThe study findings highlight that MG is inadequately controlled in a substantial proportion of patients despite conventional treatment and high reliance on corticosteroids. Earlier treatment with targeted therapies and improved safety profiles may reduce patient burden, HCRU, and costs.
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.