ArticleNeurology and therapy2026
Real-world Treatment Patterns Among Patients with Generalized Myasthenia Gravis in the United States.
Article in Neurology and therapy, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionConventional treatments for generalized myasthenia gravis (gMG) include acetylcholinesterase inhibitors (AChEi), systemic corticosteroids, and non-steroidal immunosuppressants; standard of care for exacerbation or myasthenic crisis includes immunoglobulin and plasmapheresis; newer advanced treatments include B-cell depleting agents, complement-5 inhibitors (C5i), and neonatal Fc receptor (FcRn) blockers. This study described real-world treatment patterns with currently available therapies and prevalence of myasthenia gravis (MG)-related clinical events (exacerbations or crises) among patients with gMG in the US.
methodsAdults with gMG were identified from Komodo Research Data (January 1, 2017-February 28, 2025). Index date was the first MG diagnosis by a neurologist. Patients were followed for ≥ 12 months post-index. Treatment sequencing was characterized by individual classes and broader treatment types (conventional treatments, advanced immunotherapies, immunoglobulin). A treatment episode was defined based on treatment changes (discontinuation, switch, augmentation/add-on, or drop), with any remaining or newly initiated/added treatment marking a new episode. Prevalence of MG-related clinical events was also described.
resultsA total of 8759 patients were included (mean age: 61.5 years; 48.7% female; mean follow-up: 36.5 months). From the first (n = 7986) to fifth (n = 3340) treatment episode, AChEi use declined (80.3→57.6%), systemic corticosteroid use was consistent (49.0→63.0%), and use increased for non-steroidal immunosuppressants (12.7→40.2%), immunoglobulin (6.1→14.5%), rituximab (0.3→2.1%), C5i (0.3→3.4%), and FcRn blockers (0.3→3.8%). Conventional treatments were most frequently used in all episodes; advanced treatment use increased progressively from the first to fifth episodes, with initiation averaging 13.6-19.0 months post-diagnosis. Overall, 48.6% of patients experienced MG-related clinical events during follow-up, usually within the first year following gMG diagnosis (39.9%).
conclusionConventional treatments were the predominant initial strategy for gMG, while immunoglobulin and advanced treatments became more common over successive treatment episodes. The high prevalence of MG-related clinical events within the first year post-gMG diagnosis, despite treatment with conventional therapies, suggests the need for more effective and earlier interventions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42839213What 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.