| Literature DB >> 33193063 |
Zhirong Fan1, Zunbo Li2, Faxiu Shen1, Xueping Zhang1, Lin Lei1, Shengyao Su1, Yan Lu1, Li Di1, Min Wang1, Min Xu1, Yuwei Da1.
Abstract
Background and Purpose: Tacrolimus (TAC) has been proven to be a rapid-acting, steroid-sparing agent for myasthenia gravis (MG) therapy. However, evidence related to the effectiveness of TAC alone is rare. Therefore, this study was performed to investigate the effect of TAC monotherapy in MG patients.Entities:
Keywords: adverse events; clinical effectiveness; monotherapy; myasthenia gravis; tacrolimus
Year: 2020 PMID: 33193063 PMCID: PMC7652845 DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2020.594152
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Neurol ISSN: 1664-2295 Impact factor: 4.003
Figure 1Flowchart of the participants included in the current study. n, number of patients; QMG, quantitative myasthenia gravis score; MG-ADL, myasthenia gravis activities of daily living; IVIG, intravenous immunoglobulin; AEs, adverse events.
Demographic features of 44 MG patients with tacrolimus monotherapy.
| Age at onset (years) (mean ± SD) | 54.1 ± 17.2 |
| Early-onset MG | 13/31 |
| Sex(male/female) ( | 28/16 |
| I | 17 |
| II | 20 |
| III-IV | 7 |
| Anti-AchR | 38 |
| Anti-MuSK | 1 |
| Dual seronegative | 5 |
| Thymoma | 3 |
| Thymic hyperplasia | 4 |
| Thymic cyst | 2 |
| Disease course (month) (median [IQR]) | 10.0 (3.2–20.8) |
| Tacrolimus dose (mg/day) (Mean ± SD) | 2.70 ± 0.62 |
| Tacrolimus trough concentration (ng/ml) (Mean ± SD) | 6.21 ± 2.59 |
Onset age was younger than 50 years old.
SD, standard deviation; IQR, interquartile range; n, number of patients; MG, myasthenia gravis; MGFA classification, Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America clinical classification; AChR, acetylcholine receptor; MuSK, muscle-specific tyrosine kinase.
Scores of MG-ADL and QMG during follow-up periods.
| Overall | 6 (4–7.75) | 4 (2.75–6) | 3 (1–4) | 2 (0–3.25) | 1 (0–2) |
| In OMG | 5 (3–6) | 3(2–5) | 2.5 (1–3.75) | 1.5 (0–3) | 1 (0–3) |
| In GMG | 7 (5–10) | 5(4–7) | 3 (1–4) | 2 (0–4) | 0.5 (0–2) |
| Overall | 7 (6–10) | - | - | 3 (1–6) | 3(1–3) |
| In OMG | 6 (4–6) | - | - | 1 (0.5–3.5) | 1(0–3.75) |
| In GMG | 10 (7–11.5) | - | - | 5.5 (1–6.25) | 3(1–3) |
IQR, interquartile range; MG-ADL, myasthenia gravis-specific activities of daily living scale; QMG, quantitative myasthenia gravis score; MG-ADL, myasthenia gravis activities of daily living; OMG, ocular myasthenia gravis; GMG, generalized myasthenia gravis.
Figure 2Therapeutic effects of tacrolimus monotherapy. (A,B) Therapeutic effects in all patients were evaluated by changes in MG-ADL scores (A) and by changes in QMG scores (B). (C,D) Therapeutic effects in subgroups of OMG and GMG were evaluated by changes in MG-ADL (C) and by changes in QMG scores (D). The effect was the mean difference of MG-ADL or QMG scores during the follow-up periods. Statistical analysis was performed by linear mixed model for repeated measurements with Bonferroni correction. QMG, quantitative myasthenia gravis score; MG-ADL, myasthenia gravis activities of daily living; OMG, ocular myasthenia gravis; GMG, generalized myasthenia gravis.
Figure 3Kaplan-Meier curves for the cumulative probability of achieving “MM or better”. (A) Cumulative probability of achieving “MM or better” in all patients. The cumulative probability of achieving “MM or better” was 4.5, 39.3, and 62.1% at 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months, respectively. Finally, it rose to 73.2% at 12 months. (B) Cumulative probability of achieving “MM or better” in subgroups of OMG and GMG. A log-rank test was used for the comparison of treatment outcome between subgroups of OMG and GMG. Crossing marks indicated censoring time; “MM or better” included MGFA post-intervention status of minimal manifestations, pharmacological remission and complete stable remission. aNumber of patients who were still in the study and did not achieve “MM or better” at the end of specified time. OMG, ocular myasthenia gravis; GMG, generalized myasthenia gravis.
MG-ADL subscores for MG symptoms during the follow-up periods.
| Ptosis (39) | 3 (2–3) | 2 (1–3) | 1 (0–2) | 0 (0–2) | 0 (0–1) |
| Diplopia (30) | 2 (1–3) | 1 (1–2.5) | 1 (0–2.5) | 1 (0–2) | 0 (0–1.5) |
| Talking (15) | 1 (1–2) | 1 (1–1) | 0 (0–1) | 0 (0–1) | 0 (0–0.5) |
| Chewing (20) | 1 (1–2) | 1 (0–1) | 1 (0–1) | 0 (0–1) | 0 (0–0) |
| Swallowing (18) | 1 (1–2) | 1 (0–1.25) | 0 (0–1) | 0 (0–0) | 0 (0–0) |
| Breathing (8) | 1 (1–1.75) | 1 (0.25–1) | 1 (0–2) | 1 (0–1) | 0 (0–0.5) |
| Limbs | 2 (2–4) | 2 (1–4) | 1.5 (0–2.25) | 1.5 (0–2.25) | 0 (0–1.25) |
Limbs included upper and lower limbs.
MG-ADL, myasthenia gravis-specific activities of daily living scale; n, number of patients with the symptom at baseline.
Figure 4Differential sensitivity of tacrolimus monotherapy for MG symptoms. The effect was the mean difference of MG-ADL subscores in each symptom during the follow-up periods. Statistical analysis was performed by linear mixed model for repeated measurements with Bonferroni correction. aLimbs included upper and lower limbs. MG-ADL, myasthenia gravis-specific activities of daily living scale; n, number of patients with the symptom at baseline.