Corticosteroid Treatment-Resistance in Myasthenia Gravis

Healthcare resource utilization, costs and treatment associated with myasthenia gravis exacerbations among patients with myasthenia gravis in the USA: a retrospective analysis of claims data

Aim: There are limited data on the clinical and economic burden of exacerbations in patients with myasthenia gravis (MG). We assessed patient clinical characteristics, treatments and healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) associated with MG exacerbation. Patients & methods: This was a retrospective analysis of adult patients with MG identified by commercial, Medicare or Medicaid insurance claims from the IBM® MarketScan® database. Eligible patients had two or more MG diagnosis codes, without evidence of exacerbation or crisis in the baseline period (12 months prior to index [first eligible MG diagnosis]). Clinical characteristics were evaluated at baseline and 12 weeks before each exacerbation. Number of exacerbations, MG treatments and HCRU costs associated with exacerbation were described during a 2-year follow-up period. Results: Among 9352 prevalent MG patients, 34.4% (n = 3218) experienced ≥1 exacerbation after index: commercial, 53.0% (n = 1706); Medicare, 39.4% (n = 1269); and Medicaid, 7.6% (n = 243). During follow-up, the mean (standard deviation) number of exacerbations per commercial and Medicare patient was 3.7 (7.0) and 2.7 (4.1), respectively. At least two exacerbations were experienced by approximately half of commercial and Medicare patients with ≥1 exacerbation. Mean total MG-related healthcare costs per exacerbation ranged from $26,078 to $51,120, and from $19,903 to $49,967 for commercial and Medicare patients, respectively. AChEI use decreased in patients with multiple exacerbations, while intravenous immunoglobulin use increased with multiple exacerbations. Conclusion: Despite utilization of current treatments for MG, MG exacerbations are associated with a high clinical and economic burden in both commercial and Medicare patients. Additional treatment options and improved disease management may help to reduce exacerbations and disease burden.

Myasthenia gravis-Pathophysiology, diagnosis, and treatment

Myasthenia gravis (MG) is an autoimmune disease characterized by dysfunction of the neuromuscular junction resulting in skeletal muscle weakness. It is equally prevalent in males and females, but debuts at a younger age in females and at an older age in males. Ptosis, diplopia, facial bulbar weakness, and limb weakness are the most common symptoms. MG can be classified based on the presence of serum autoantibodies. Acetylcholine receptor (AChR) antibodies are found in 80%-85% of patients, muscle-specific kinase (MuSK) antibodies in 5%-8%, and <1% may have low-density lipoprotein receptor-related protein 4 (Lrp4) antibodies. Approximately 10% of patients are seronegative for antibodies binding the known disease-related antigens. In patients with AChR MG, 10%-20% have a thymoma, which is usually detected at the onset of the disease. Important differences between clinical presentation, treatment responsiveness, and disease mechanisms have been observed between these different serologic MG classes. Besides the typical clinical features and serologic testing, the diagnosis can be established with additional tests, including repetitive nerve stimulation, single fiber EMG, and the ice pack test. Treatment options for MG consist of symptomatic treatment (such as pyridostigmine), immunosuppressive treatment, or thymectomy. Despite the treatment with symptomatic drugs, steroid-sparing immunosuppressants, intravenous immunoglobulins, plasmapheresis, and thymectomy, a large proportion of patients remain chronically dependent on corticosteroids (CS). In the past decade, the number of treatment options for MG has considerably increased. Advances in the understanding of the pathophysiology have led to new treatment options targeting B or T cells, the complement cascade, the neonatal Fc receptor or cytokines. In the future, these new treatments are likely to reduce the chronic use of CS, diminish side effects, and decrease the number of patients with refractory disease.

Depression: A Contributing Factor to the Clinical Course in Myasthenia Gravis Patients

Background and Objectives: The association between myasthenia gravis (MG) and depression is intricate and characterized by bidirectional causality. In this regard, MG can be a contributing factor to depression and, conversely, depression may worsen the symptoms of MG. This study aimed to identify any differences in the progression of the disease among patients with MG who were also diagnosed with depression as compared to those without depression. Our hypothesis focused on the theory that patients with more severe MG symptoms may have a higher likelihood of suffering depression at the same time. Materials and Methods: One hundred twenty-two male and female patients (N = 122) aged over 18 with a confirmed diagnosis of autoimmune MG who were admitted to the Neurology II department of Myasthenia Gravis, Clinical Institute Fundeni in Bucharest between January 2019 and December 2020, were included in the study. Patients were assessed at baseline and after six months. The psychiatric assessment of the patients included the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale-17 items (HAM-D), and neurological status was determined with two outcome measures: Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis (QMG) and Myasthenia Gravis Activities of Daily Life (MG-ADL). The patients were divided into two distinct groups as follows: group MG w/dep, which comprised 49 MG patients diagnosed with depressive disorder who were also currently receiving antidepressant medication, and group MG w/o dep, which consisted of 73 patients who did not have depression. Results: In our study, 40.16% of the myasthenia gravis (MG) patients exhibited a comorbid diagnosis of depression. Among the MG patients receiving antidepressant treatment, baseline assessments revealed a mean MG-ADL score of 7.73 (SD = 5.05), an average QMG score of 18.40 (SD = 8.61), and a mean Ham-D score of 21.53 (SD = 7.49). After a six-month period, a statistically significant decrease was observed in the MG-ADL (2.92, SD = 1.82), QMG (7.15, SD = 4.46), and Ham-D scores (11.16, SD = 7.49) (p < 0.0001). These results suggest a significant correlation between MG severity and elevated HAM-D depression scores. Regarding the MG treatment in the group with depression, at baseline, the mean dose of oral corticosteroids was 45.10 mg (SD = 16.60). Regarding the treatment with pyridostigmine, patients with depression and undergoing antidepressant treatment remained with an increased need for pyridostigmine, 144.49 mg (SD = 51.84), compared to those in the group without depression, 107.67 mg (SD = 55.64, p < 0.001). Conclusions: Our investigation confirms that the occurrence of depressive symptoms is significantly widespread among individuals diagnosed with MG. Disease severity, along with younger age and higher doses of cortisone, is a significant factor associated with depression in patients with MG. Substantial reductions in MG-ADL and QMG scores were observed within each group after six months, highlighting the effectiveness of MG management. The findings suggest that addressing depressive symptoms in MG patients, in addition to standard MG management, can lead to improved clinical outcomes.

Successful Emergency Management of a Dog with Ventilator-Dependent Acquired Myasthenia Gravis with Immunoadsorption

A one-year-old, female intact Samoyed, 12.5 kg, was presented with coughing for 2 weeks, progressive appendicular and axial muscle weakness, megaesophagus and labored breathing for 5 days. There was no improvement with standard treatment. Acquired myasthenia gravis was suspected and the dog was referred with increasing dyspnea. At presentation, the dog showed a severely reduced general condition, was non-ambulatory and showed abdominal and severely labored breathing. A marked hypercapnia (PvCO2 = 90.1 mmHg) was present in venous blood gas analysis. The serum anti-acetylcholine receptor antibody test was consistent with acquired myasthenia gravis (2.1 nmol/L). The dog was anesthetized with propofol and mechanically ventilated with a Hamilton C1 ventilator. Immunoadsorption was performed with the COM.TEC® and ADAsorb® platforms and a LIGASORB® adsorber to eliminate anti-acetylcholine receptor antibodies. Local anticoagulation was performed with citrate. Treatment time for immunoadsorption was 1.5 h with a blood flow of 50 mL/min. A total plasma volume of 1.2 L was processed. Further medical treatment included intravenous fluid therapy, maropitant, esomeprazole, antibiotic therapy for aspiration pneumonia and neostigmine 0.04 mg/kg intramuscularly every 6 h for treatment of acquired myasthenia gravis. Mechanical ventilation was stopped after 12 h. A percutaneous gastric feeding tube was inserted under endoscopic control on day 2 for further medical treatment and nutrition. A second treatment with immunoadsorption was performed on day 3. Again, a total plasma volume of 1.2 L was processed. Immediately after this procedure, the dog regained muscle strength and was able to stand and to walk. After 6 days, the dog was discharged from the hospital. This is the first report of immunoadsorption for emergency management of a dog with acute-fulminant acquired myasthenia gravis. Immunoadsorption may be an additional option for emergency treatment in dogs with severe signs of acquired myasthenia gravis.

Serum metabolomics of treatment response in myasthenia gravis

OBJECTIVE

High-dose prednisone use, lasting several months or longer, is the primary initial therapy for myasthenia gravis (MG). Upwards of a third of patients do not respond to treatment. Currently no biomarkers can predict clinical responsiveness to corticosteroid treatment. We conducted a discovery-based study to identify treatment responsive biomarkers in MG using sera obtained at study entry to the thymectomy clinical trial (MGTX), an NIH-sponsored randomized, controlled study of thymectomy plus prednisone versus prednisone alone.

METHODS

We applied ultra-performance liquid chromatography coupled with electro-spray quadrupole time of flight mass spectrometry to obtain comparative serum metabolomic and lipidomic profiles at study entry to correlate with treatment response at 6 months. Treatment response was assessed using validated outcome measures of minimal manifestation status (MMS), MG-Activities of Daily Living (MG-ADL), Quantitative MG (QMG) score, or a strictly defined composite measure of response.

RESULTS

Increased serum levels of phospholipids were associated with treatment response as assessed by QMG, MMS, and the Responders classification, but all measures showed limited overlap in metabolomic profiles, in particular the MG-ADL. A panel including histidine, free fatty acid (13:0), γ-cholestenol and guanosine was highly predictive of the strictly defined treatment response measure. The AUC in Responders' prediction for these markers was 0.90 irrespective of gender, age, thymectomy or baseline prednisone use. Pathway analysis suggests that xenobiotic metabolism could play a major role in treatment resistance. There was no association with outcome and gender, age, thymectomy or baseline prednisone use.

INTERPRETATION

We have defined a metabolomic and lipidomic profile that can now undergo validation as a treatment predictive marker for MG patients undergoing corticosteroid therapy. Metabolomic profiles of outcome measures had limited overlap consistent with their assessing distinct aspects of treatment response and supporting unique biological underpinning for each outcome measure. Interindividual variation in prednisone metabolism may be a determinate of how well patients respond to treatment.

The Glucocorticoid Toxicity Index-Metabolic Domains, an abridged version of the Glucocorticoid Toxicity Index: post-hoc analysis of data from the ADVOCATE trial

BACKGROUND

Quantifying glucocorticoid toxicity is crucial to efforts to reduce it. The Glucocorticoid Toxicity Index (GTI) measures toxicity effectively in clinical trials by calculating two scores: the cumulative worsening score (CWS) and the aggregate improvement score (AIS). However, in clinical practice, high patient volumes limit the time available for standardised assessments. We aimed to compare the GTI with an abbreviated version of the GTI, the GTI-Metabolic Domains (GTI-MD), which could help to address this issue by using data that are collected easily at routine visits and do not require additional effort from clinicians.

METHODS

We did a post-hoc analysis of data from ADVOCATE, a randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, phase 3 trial in which avacopan replaced a standard prednisone taper in patients with antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody-associated vasculitis. We calculated the cumulative worsening score (CWS) and aggregate improvement score (AIS) for each domain of the GTI-MD-comprising the BMI, glucose tolerance, blood pressure, and lipid metabolism domains of the GTI-to test its ability to differentiate the avacopan and prednisone groups by glucocorticoid toxicity. Data from two additional disease cohorts, one comprising patients with asthma and the other comprising patients with autoimmune blistering disease, constituted the validation set.

FINDINGS

Complete data were available for 321 (97%) of the 330 participants comprising the intention-to-treat population in the ADVOCATE trial at week 13, and 307 (93%) at week 26; data from these individuals were included in our post-hoc analysis. In ADVOCATE, 98 (59%) of 166 participants in the avacopan group were men and 68 (41%) were women, 88 (54%) of 164 in the prednisone group were men and 76 (46%) were women; the mean age of participants was 61·2 years [SD 14·6] in the avacopan group and 60·5 years [14·5] in the prednisone group. The validation cohort included 159 patients (89 with glucocorticoid-dependent asthma, of whom 40 [45%] were men and 49 [55%] were women, and 70 with autoimmune blistering disease of the skin, of whom 30 [43%] were men and 40 [57%] were women). The Spearman's rank correlation coefficient in ADVOCATE for the GTI-MD CWS with the GTI CWS for the treatment groups combined was 0·78 (95% CI 0·75-0·81; p<0·0001). The corresponding correlation for the AIS was 0·73 (0·69-0·77, p<0·0001). The GTI-MD distinguished the groups by glucocorticoid toxicity at both 13 weeks and 26 weeks. The mean GTI-MD CWS was lower in the avacopan group than in the prednisone group, consistent with less toxicity (15·9 vs 23·0 at 13 weeks [p=0·0010]; 26·7 vs 31·7 at 26 weeks [p=0·0092]). The GTI-MD AIS values were also consistent with less toxicity in the avacopan group (2·5 vs 13·0 at 13 weeks [p=0·0003], 4·4 vs 10·1 at 26 weeks [p=0·027]). A GTI-MD score of 0 corresponded to a low likelihood of toxicity in the other GTI domains. In the validation set, the Spearman's rank correlation coefficient for the GTI-MD CWS with the GTI CWS was 0·61 (95% CI 0·50-0·70; p<0·0001) and the corresponding correlation for the AIS was 0·58 (0·47-0·68; p<0·0001).

INTERPRETATION

The GTI-MD correlates well with the full GTI and could be incorporated readily into routine clinic workflows without additional input from the clinician. Using the GTI-MD on the background of electronic medical records systems could help clinicians to monitor glucocorticoid toxicity longitudinally, with the goals of preventing the burden of chronic, treatment-related harms and reducing long-term costs to health systems.

FUNDING

ChemoCentryx.

Glucocorticoid Toxicity Index scores by domain in patients with antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody-associated vasculitis treated with avacopan versus standard prednisone taper: post-hoc analysis of data from the ADVOCATE trial

BACKGROUND

The ADVOCATE trial, in which the complement C5a receptor inhibitor avacopan was compared with a standard prednisone taper in patients with antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitis, used the Glucocorticoid Toxicity Index (GTI) to measure glucocorticoid toxicity change. We set out to do a post-hoc analysis of the ADVOCATE data to evaluate changes in individual GTI domains and their ability to differentiate treatment groups.

METHODS

The ADVOCATE trial was a phase 3, double-blind, double-dummy, randomised trial comparing oral avacopan (30 mg) twice daily for 52 weeks plus a prednisone-matching placebo for 20 weeks with oral prednisone tapered over 20 weeks plus an avacopan-matching placebo for 52 weeks in patients with ANCA-associated vasculitis. GTI data were collected within each of the included domains (BMI, blood pressure, glucose tolerance, lipid metabolism, glucocorticoid myopathy, skin toxicity, neuropsychiatric effects, and infections) at baseline, 13 weeks, and 26 weeks. In this post-hoc analysis, we calculated the cumulative worsening score (CWS) and aggregate improvement score (AIS) for each GTI domain, assessed to what extend each domain contributed to the GTI score, and which domains differentiated between the avacopan and prednisone groups. Differences in domain scores between the two groups were compared using Mantel-Haenszel χ2 tests.

FINDINGS

Among the 330 patients included in the intention-to-treat population of the ADVOCATE trial, 321 (97%) had complete data at week 13 (160 in the avacopan group, and 161 in the prednisone group), and 307 (93%) had complete data at week 26 (154 in the avacopan group, and 153 in the prednisone group) and were assessed in this post-hoc study. In ADVOCATE, mean age in both groups was 61 years (61·2 years [SD 14·6] in the avacopan group; 60·5 years [14·5] in the prednisone group); 98 (59%) of 166 patients in the avacopan group were men and 68 (41%) were women; 88 (54%) of 164 patients in the prednisone group were men and 76 (46%) were women. 278 (84%) of 330 patients were White. The mean glucocorticoid use over 26 weeks was lower in the avacopan group than the prednisone group (1073 mg [SD 1669] vs 3192 mg [1174]). Significantly less glucocorticoid toxicity was observed in the avacopan group than the prednisone group by week 13 in four domains of the GTI (BMI, glucose tolerance, lipid metabolism, and skin toxicity), based on both the CWS and AIS. CWS values in the BMI, lipid metabolism, and skin toxicity domains were significantly lower in the avacopan group than the prednisone group at 26 weeks. No domain favoured the prednisone group for glucocorticoid toxicity reduction. 280 (91%) of 307 patients had glucocorticoid toxicity at 26 weeks. Blood pressure (35% in the avacopan group vs 25% in the prednisone group), infection (22% vs 24%), and lipid metabolism (20% vs 15%) contributed the most weight toward CWS values at 26 weeks. 128 (42%) of 307 patients had combinations of improvement and worsening in different domains at 26 weeks.

INTERPRETATION

Replacing a standard prednisone taper with avacopan in patients with ANCA-associated vasculitis reduced glucocorticoid toxicity in multiple GTI domains. For individual patients, glucocorticoid toxicity was often nuanced, improving in some domains while worsening in others. These findings emphasise the value of a composite measure of glucocorticoid toxicity that quantifies cumulative worsening and aggregate change directly.

FUNDING

ChemoCentryx.

The best and worst of times in therapy development for myasthenia gravis

Within the last 5 years, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved complement and neonatal Fc receptor (FcRN) inhibitors for treatment of generalized myasthenia gravis, and several other therapies are in late-stage clinical trials or under regulatory review. However, questions about which patients are most likely to benefit from which therapies, and the relative effectiveness of these very expensive drugs, has resulted in uncertainty around the place that they should occupy in the existing therapeutic armamentarium. MGNet (a Rare Diseases Clinical Research Consortium funded by the National Institute of Neurological Diseases and Stroke) held two meetings during the 14th International Conference of the Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America to discuss the most critical needs for clinical trial readiness and biomarker development in the context of therapy development for myasthenia gravis. Herein we provide a summary of these discussions, but not a consensus opinion, and offer a series of recommendations to guide focused research in the most critical areas. We welcome ongoing discussion through comments on this work.