Evidence mapPaperPMID 42111069Full record

ReviewFrontiers in neurology2026

Myasthenia gravis complicated with autoimmune encephalitis: a review.

Nils Erik Gilhus

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Nils Erik GilhusDepartment of Clinical Medicine, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: This review aims to provide updated information about myasthenia gravis (MG) complicated with autoimmune encephalitis. Background: MG and autoimmune encephalitis are both antibody-mediated disorders with a need for active and individually adapted immunosuppressive treatment. The two disorders can co-exist. This represents therapeutic and diagnostic challenges but may help in elucidating disease mechanisms and risk factors. Methods: A literature search combined the words "myasthenia gravis," "autoimmune encephalitis," and further combined each specific antibody associated with autoimmune encephalitis and "myasthenia gravis." Results: Epidemiological data and multiple single case reports illustrate the increased risk for autoimmune encephalitis in MG. The target antigens for the antibodies in both MG and autoimmune encephalitis vary among patients. Clinical manifestations, choice of therapy, and prognosis depend on antibody pattern. MG should be treated actively with immunosuppression according to updated and generally accepted guidelines. For treatment of autoimmune encephalitis, high corticosteroid doses, intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg), plasma exchange, and rituximab should be considered. FcRn-blockers represent an additional option. Conclusion: MG and autoimmune encephalitis have overlapping pathogenesis and similar preferred drug therapies. This comorbidity represents a therapeutic challenge, and often with the need of high-dose immunosuppressive combination therapy. New and targeted therapies are applied in some MG patients, and such therapies have relevance also for autoimmune encephalitis.

Indexed as

autoantibodiesautoimmune diseaseautoimmune encephalitiscomorbidityFcRn-blockersintravenous immunoglobulinmyasthenia gravis

Identifiers

PMID42111069
PMCPMC13152757

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.