ArticlePloS one2025
Comparative study of Japanese nationwide epidemiological studies of myasthenia gravis using datasets of 2006 and 2018.
Article in PloS one, 2025. 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.
- Treatment Patterns in Patients with Late-Onset Myasthenia Gravis in Japan: An Insurance Claims Database Study.Drugs - real world outcomes · 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to identify changes in the clinical presentation and treatment patterns of myasthenia gravis (MG) in Japan by comparing data from nationwide epidemiological surveys conducted in 2006 and 2018.
methodsWe analyzed data from nationwide epidemiological surveys of MG performed across Japan in 2006 (n = 729) and 2018 (n = 1,357). Both surveys adhered to the Survey Manual of Study on Continuous Epidemiological Data Collection of Intractable Diseases established by the Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare. We compared the following variables between the two-time points: age of onset, gender distribution, initial symptoms, anti-acetylcholine receptor antibody (AChRAb) status, physiological test results (repetitive nerve stimulation test, edrophonium test), Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America (MGFA) Clinical Classification, Myasthenia Gravis Activities of Daily Living Profile (MG-ADL) score, and treatment modalities.
resultsOur analysis revealed a significantly older age of onset in the 2018 cohort compared to 2006. The MGFA Clinical Classification was higher in 2018, and bulbar weakness was more frequently reported as an initial symptom. Conversely, the occurrence of myasthenic crisis and current MG-ADL scores were lower in 2018. Regarding treatment, the utilization of tacrolimus, plasma exchange (PE), and intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) significantly increased between 2006 and 2018. In contrast, the rates of thymectomy and both maximum and current oral steroid dosages decreased during this period.
conclusionThese findings underscore notable shifts in the clinical characteristics and, particularly, the treatment strategies for MG in Japan over the twelve-year interval. This information is crucial for informing future patient care protocols and healthcare policy development in the management of MG. We emphasize the importance of conducting regular nationwide epidemiological surveys to monitor the evolving landscape of MG and its treatment continuously.
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.