Observational studyJournal of neurology2026
Early versus late add-on therapy in generalized myasthenia gravis: a multicenter real-world cohort study.
Observational study in Journal of neurology, 2026. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
27 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study examined whether the timing of targeted add-on therapy initiation influences clinical outcomes in acetylcholine receptor (AChR) antibody-positive generalized myasthenia gravis (gMG), based on the hypothesis that earlier escalation may improve treatment response by intervening before structural or immunological consolidation occurs.
methodsIn this multicenter, retrospective real-world cohort study, 153 patients with AChR antibody-positive gMG were included from eight German tertiary centers. All received either complement C5 inhibitors (eculizumab, ravulizumab) or the FcRn antagonist efgartigimod as add-on therapy. Patients were grouped by treatment initiation within 24 months of diagnosis (Early Intensified Treatment; EIT) or later (Late Intensified Treatment; LIT). MG-ADL, QMG, and MG-QoL15 scores, as well as daily corticosteroid and pyridostigmine doses, were assessed at baseline and at 1, 3, and 6 months.
resultsThe EIT group (n = 36) showed more pronounced and consistent clinical improvement. Significant differences emerged in maximum MG-ADL (p = 0.013) and QMG (p = 0.002) reductions. Patient-acceptable symptom states (MG-ADL ≤ 2, QMG ≤ 7) were more often reached with EIT (p = 0.038, p = 0.006). QMG worsening occurred only in the LIT group (n = 117) (p = 0.021). Prednisone declined more steeply in EIT patients (p = 0.001).
conclusionInitiating add-on therapy within two years of diagnosis was associated with stronger and more consistent clinical responses, fewer deteriorations, and a steeper reduction of treatment burden. These findings support timely escalation as a strategy to enhance both efficacy and tolerability in gMG care.
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.