SynthesisEuropean journal of neurology2026
Age and Treatment Efficacy in Myasthenia Gravis: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Meta-Regression.
Synthesis in European journal of neurology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
backgroundMyasthenia gravis (MG) is increasingly concentrated in older adults, and age may shift the balance of benefit and risk for MG therapies. This study seeks to evaluate the effect of age on treatment efficacy in clinical trials of MG.
methodsPubMed and Cochrane Library were searched and clinical trials enrolling adults with MG that reported the quantitative myasthenia gravis (QMG) score and the myasthenia gravis activities of daily living (MG-ADL) scale were included. Of 2214 records identified, 18 trials met inclusion criteria. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool treatment effects, and random-effects meta-regression evaluated trial-level mean baseline age as a modifier of treatment efficacy.
resultsEighteen trials published from 2017 to 2025 included 1823 participants (982 assigned to treatment and 841 to control). Pooled effects favored treatment over control for the QMG (MD -2.402; 95% CI, -3.099 to -1.706;
conclusionsIn this meta-analysis, older trial populations showed smaller treatment-related improvements in the QMG but not in the MG-ADL score. These findings suggest that age may contribute to differences in treatment effects across MG trials.
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.