Efficacy and safety of immunosuppressants and monoclonal antibodies in adults with myasthenia gravis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

• Published in: Journal of translational medicine Vol. 22; no. 1; pp. 955 - 13
• Main Authors: Gu, Jian, Qiao, Yue, Huang, Rui, Cong, Shuyan
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England BioMed Central Ltd 21.10.2024; BioMed Central; BMC
• Subjects: Adult; Adults; Antibodies, Monoclonal - adverse effects; Antibodies, Monoclonal - therapeutic use; B cells; Biological products; Comparative analysis; Complement inhibitor; Complications and side effects; Dosage and administration; Drug therapy; FcRn inhibitor; Generalized myasthenia gravis; Humans; Immunosuppressants; Immunosuppressive agents; Immunosuppressive Agents - adverse effects; Immunosuppressive Agents - therapeutic use; Meta-analysis; Monoclonal antibodies; Monoclonal antibody; Myasthenia gravis; Myasthenia Gravis - drug therapy; Myasthenia Gravis - immunology; Network Meta-Analysis; Patient outcomes; Pharmacology, Experimental; Physiological aspects; Publication Bias; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Review; Treatment Outcome; China; Immunosuppressants; FcRn inhibitor; Monoclonal antibody; Generalized myasthenia gravis; Complement inhibitor; Meta-analysis
• ISSN: 1479-5876; 1479-5876
• DOI: 10.1186/s12967-024-05751-1

Numerous clinical trials for myasthenia gravis (MG) treatment have been conducted recently, with satisfactory cognitive and clinical results. However, due to the limited evidence for direct comparison of the safety and effectiveness of various drugs, there is a need for further exploration of the advantages and disadvantages of different monoclonal antibodies and immunosuppressants. Thus, in the present network meta-analysis (NMA), we aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of immunosuppressants and monoclonal antibodies in treating MG. We systematically searched for randomized controlled trials published in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library between January 1, 2000 and March 6, 2024. Statistical analyses were performed using R software (version 4.2.3), JAGS, and STATA (version 15.0). The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) value was calculated to assess the potential efficacy of each drug and the likelihood of adverse events (AEs), with higher SUCRA values indicating better efficacy or a lower likelihood of AEs. This NMA included 21 randomized controlled trials involving 13 drugs and 1,657 patients. Based on changes in Quantitative MG and MG Composite scores, batoclimab was most likely to exert the best therapeutic effects, with SUCRA values of 99% and 92%, respectively. Rozanolixzumab performed better than the other drugs in terms of the MG Activities of Daily Living score (85%). Eculizumab exhibited the highest potential in reducing the 15-item revised version of the MG Quality of Life score (96%). Regarding safety, belimumab had the highest SUCRA value (85%), demonstrating the lowest likelihood of AEs. In conclusion, all immunosuppressants and monoclonal antibodies analyzed in this study were more effective than the placebo in treating MG, with rozanolixzumab and batoclimab potentially being the most effective. Regarding safety, rozanolixzumab exhibited a higher likelihood of AEs than did placebo. The conclusions guide the clinical selection of effective drugs and offer insights for future drug experiments.