Addressing Outcome Measure Variability in Myasthenia Gravis Clinical Trials

An increasing number of clinical trials are enrolling patients with myasthenia gravis (MG). A lack of standardization in the performance of outcome measures leads to confusion among site research teams and is a source of variability in clinical trial data. MGNet, the NIH-supported Rare Disease Clinical Research Network for MG, views standardization of MG outcome measures as a critical need. To address this issue, a group of experts summarized key outcome measures used in MG clinical trials and a symposium was convened to address issues contributing to outcome measure variability. Consensus recommendations resulted in changes to outcome measure instructions and, in some cases, modifications to specific instruments. Recommended changes were posted for public commentary before finalization. Changes to the MG-Activities of Daily Living, MG-Quality of Life-15r, and MG-Impairment Index were limited to adding details to the administration instructions. Recommendations for proper positioning of participants and how to score items that could not be performed because of non-MG reasons were provided for the MG Composite. The Quantitative MG (QMG) score required the most attention, and changes were made both to the instructions and the performance of certain items resulting in the QMG-Revised. The Postintervention Status was believed to have a limited role in clinical trials, except for the concept of minimal manifestation status. As a next step, training materials and revised source documents, which will be freely available to study teams, will be created and posted on the MGNet website. Further studies are needed to validate changes made to the QMG-Revised

Addressing Outcome Measure Variability in Myasthenia Gravis Clinical Trials.

An increasing number of clinical trials are enrolling patients with myasthenia gravis (MG). A lack of standardization in the performance of outcome measures leads to confusion among site research teams and is a source of variability in clinical trial data. MGNet, the NIH-supported Rare Disease Clinical Research Network for MG, views standardization of MG outcome measures as a critical need. To address this issue, a group of experts summarized key outcome measures used in MG clinical trials and a symposium was convened to address issues contributing to outcome measure variability. Consensus recommendations resulted in changes to outcome measure instructions and, in some cases, modifications to specific instruments. Recommended changes were posted for public commentary before finalization. Changes to the MG-Activities of Daily Living, MG-Quality of Life-15r, and MG-Impairment Index were limited to adding details to the administration instructions. Recommendations for proper positioning of participants and how to score items that could not be performed because of non-MG reasons were provided for the MG Composite. The Quantitative MG (QMG) score required the most attention, and changes were made both to the instructions and the performance of certain items resulting in the QMG-Revised. The Postintervention Status was believed to have a limited role in clinical trials, except for the concept of minimal manifestation status. As a next step, training materials and revised source documents, which will be freely available to study teams, will be created and posted on the MGNet website. Further studies are needed to validate changes made to the QMG-Revised

Addressing Outcome Measure Variability in Myasthenia Gravis Clinical Trials

An increasing number of clinical trials are enrolling patients with myasthenia gravis (MG). A lack of standardization in the performance of outcome measures leads to confusion amongst site research teams and is a source of variability in clinical trial data. MGNet, the NIH-supported Rare Disease Clinical Research Network for MG, views standardization of MG outcome measures as a critical need. To address this issue, a group of experts summarized key outcome measures used in MG clinical trials and a symposium was convened to address issues contributing to outcome measure variability. Consensus recommendations resulted in changes to outcome measure instructions, and in some cases, modifications to specific instruments. Recommended changes were posted for public commentary prior to finalization. Changes to the MG-Activities of Daily Living, MG-Quality of Life-15r, and MG-Impairment Index were limited to adding details to the administration instructions. Recommendations for proper positioning of subjects and how to score items that could not be performed due to non-MG reasons were provided for the MG Composite. The Quantitative MG (QMG) Score required the most attention, and changes were made both to the instructions and the performance of certain items resulting in the QMG-Revised (QMG-R). The Post-Intervention Status was felt to have a limited role in clinical trials, except for the concept of minimal manifestation status. As a next step training materials and revised source documents, which will be freely available to study teams, will be created and posted on the MGNet website. Further studies are needed to validate changes made to the QMG-R

Addressing Outcome Measure Variability in Myasthenia Gravis Clinical Trials

An increasing number of clinical trials are enrolling patients with myasthenia gravis (MG). A lack of standardization in the performance of outcome measures leads to confusion among site research teams and is a source of variability in clinical trial data. MGNet, the NIH-supported Rare Disease Clinical Research Network for MG, views standardization of MG outcome measures as a critical need. To address this issue, a group of experts summarized key outcome measures used in MG clinical trials and a symposium was convened to address issues contributing to outcome measure variability. Consensus recommendations resulted in changes to outcome measure instructions and, in some cases, modifications to specific instruments. Recommended changes were posted for public commentary before finalization. Changes to the MG-Activities of Daily Living, MG-Quality of Life-15r, and MG-Impairment Index were limited to adding details to the administration instructions. Recommendations for proper positioning of participants and how to score items that could not be performed because of non-MG reasons were provided for the MG Composite. The Quantitative MG (QMG) score required the most attention, and changes were made both to the instructions and the performance of certain items resulting in the QMG-Revised. The Postintervention Status was believed to have a limited role in clinical trials, except for the concept of minimal manifestation status. As a next step, training materials and revised source documents, which will be freely available to study teams, will be created and posted on the MGNet website. Further studies are needed to validate changes made to the QMG-Revised

Addressing Outcome Measure Variability in Myasthenia Gravis Clinical Trials.

An increasing number of clinical trials are enrolling patients with myasthenia gravis (MG). A lack of standardization in the performance of outcome measures leads to confusion among site research teams and is a source of variability in clinical trial data. MGNet, the NIH-supported Rare Disease Clinical Research Network for MG, views standardization of MG outcome measures as a critical need. To address this issue, a group of experts summarized key outcome measures used in MG clinical trials and a symposium was convened to address issues contributing to outcome measure variability. Consensus recommendations resulted in changes to outcome measure instructions and, in some cases, modifications to specific instruments. Recommended changes were posted for public commentary before finalization. Changes to the MG-Activities of Daily Living, MG-Quality of Life-15r, and MG-Impairment Index were limited to adding details to the administration instructions. Recommendations for proper positioning of participants and how to score items that could not be performed because of non-MG reasons were provided for the MG Composite. The Quantitative MG (QMG) score required the most attention, and changes were made both to the instructions and the performance of certain items resulting in the QMG-Revised. The Postintervention Status was believed to have a limited role in clinical trials, except for the concept of minimal manifestation status. As a next step, training materials and revised source documents, which will be freely available to study teams, will be created and posted on the MGNet website. Further studies are needed to validate changes made to the QMG-Revised

Thymectomy may not be associated with clinical improvement in MuSK myasthenia gravis

INTRODUCTION: A randomized trial demonstrated benefit from thymectomy in nonthymomatous acetylcholine receptor (AChR)-antibody positive myasthenia gravis (MG). Uncontrolled observational and histologic studies suggest thymectomy may not be efficacious in anti-muscle-specific kinase (MuSK)-MG. METHODS: The therapeutic impact of thymectomy was evaluated from data collected for a multicenter, retrospective blinded review of rituximab in MuSK-MG. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were similar between thymectomy (n = 26) and nonthymectomy (n = 29) groups, including treatment with rituximab (42% vs. 45%). At last visit, 35% of thymectomy subjects reached the primary endpoint, a Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America (MGFA) post-intervention status (PIS) score of minimal manifestations (MM) or better, compared with 55% of controls (P = 0.17). After controlling for age at onset of MG, rituximab, prednisone, and intravenous immunoglobulin/plasma exchange treatment, thymectomy was not associated with greater likelihood of favorable clinical outcome (odds ratio = 0.43, 95% confidence interval 0.12-1.53, P = 0.19). DISCUSSION: Thymectomy was not associated with additional clinical improvement in this multicenter cohort of MuSK-MG patients. Muscle Nerve 59:404-410, 2019

Rituximab as treatment for anti-MuSK myasthenia gravis: Multicenter blinded prospective review

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of rituximab in treatment of anti-muscle-specific kinase (MuSK) myasthenia gravis (MG). METHODS: This was a multicenter, blinded, prospective review, comparing anti-MuSK-positive patients with MG treated with rituximab to those not treated with rituximab. The primary clinical endpoint was the Myasthenia Gravis Status and Treatment Intensity (MGSTI), a novel outcome that combines the Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America (MGFA) postintervention status (PIS) and the number and dosages of other immunosuppressant therapies used. A priori, an MGSTI of level ≤2 was used to define a favorable outcome. Secondary outcomes included modified MGFA PIS of minimal manifestations or better, mean/median prednisone dose, and mean/median doses of other immunosuppressant drugs. RESULTS: Seventy-seven of 119 patients with anti-MuSK MG evaluated between January 1, 2005, and January 1, 2015, at 10 neuromuscular centers were selected for analysis after review of limited clinical data by a blinded expert panel. An additional 22 patients were excluded due to insufficient follow-up. Baseline characteristics were similar between the rituximab-treated patients (n = 24) and the controls (n = 31). Median follow-up duration was \u3e3.5 years. At last visit, 58% (14/24) of rituximab-treated patients reached the primary outcome compared to 16% (5/31) of controls ( = 0.002). Number needed to treat for the primary outcome is 2.4. At last visit, 29% of rituximab-treated patients were taking prednisone (mean dose 4.5 mg/day) compared to 74% of controls (mean dose 13 mg/day) ( 0.001 and = 0.005). CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class IV evidence that for patients with anti-MuSK MG, rituximab increased the probability of a favorable outcome