ReviewJournal of neuromuscular diseases2026
On the road to blood biomarkers in myasthenia gravis (MG): Beyond clinical scales.
Review in Journal of neuromuscular diseases, 2026. 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.
- Complement C3 inhibition restores myasthenia gravis AChR antibody-mediated muscle pathophysiology.EBioMedicine · 2026Article
- Inflammatory imbalance and activation deficits in T cells of myasthenia gravis patients revealed by proteomic profiling.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Article
- Disease-specific divergence of inflammatory and metabolic biomarkers in neurocritical neuromuscular disorders.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Myasthenia Gravis (MG) is a heterogeneous neuromuscular autoimmune disorder characterized by fluctuating skeletal muscle weakness and a highly variable disease course. MG subgroups are defined by antibody type, age at onset, clinical phenotype, and thymus pathology. Given the unpredictable disease course, disease-specific objective biomarkers are needed to enable personalized treatment strategies and improve clinical trial outcomes beyond conventional clinical scales. Biomarkers are measurable indicators of physiological processes, disease states, and therapy responses. Despite significant advances in MG diagnostics and therapeutics, predictive biomarkers for personalized treatment remain underdeveloped. This review explores the progress and challenges in identifying blood-based biomarkers for MG, highlighting their potential applications in diagnosis and disease monitoring. Established diagnostic blood biomarkers include autoantibodies against acetylcholine receptors (AChR) and muscle-specific tyrosine kinase (MuSK), which confirm MG diagnosis and guide initial treatment decisions. Prognostic biomarkers, such as microRNAs (miR-150-5p and miR-30e-5p), show promise in predicting disease progression. Pharmacodynamic biomarkers, including CD20+ B cell counts, may enhance treatment precision for therapies like Rituximab. Furthermore, emerging research on metabolites, T and B-cell markers, complement factors, and proteomics offer new avenues to refine MG subtyping and identify molecular signatures predictive of treatment response to novel immunosuppressants. While the journey toward clinically useful blood biomarkers in MG remains complex, ongoing collaborative efforts within the MG research community hold the potential to revolutionize disease management. Future studies integrating multi-omics approaches, large-scale longitudinal cohorts, and disease controls will be critical to translating these biomarkers from research into routine clinical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.