6 results on '"Sanders, Donald B."'
Search Results
2. International Consensus Guidance for Management of Myasthenia Gravis: 2020 Update.
- Author
-
Narayanaswami P, Sanders DB, Wolfe G, Benatar M, Cea G, Evoli A, Gilhus NE, Illa I, Kuntz NL, Massey J, Melms A, Murai H, Nicolle M, Palace J, Richman D, and Verschuuren J
- Subjects
- Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized therapeutic use, Consensus, Disease Management, Humans, Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors therapeutic use, Methotrexate therapeutic use, Myasthenia Gravis drug therapy, Myasthenia Gravis surgery, Rituximab therapeutic use, Thymectomy, Immunosuppressive Agents therapeutic use, Myasthenia Gravis therapy
- Abstract
Objective: To update the 2016 formal consensus-based guidance for the management of myasthenia gravis (MG) based on the latest evidence in the literature., Methods: In October 2013, the Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America appointed a Task Force to develop treatment guidance for MG, and a panel of 15 international experts was convened. The RAND/UCLA appropriateness method was used to develop consensus recommendations pertaining to 7 treatment topics. In February 2019, the international panel was reconvened with the addition of one member to represent South America. All previous recommendations were reviewed for currency, and new consensus recommendations were developed on topics that required inclusion or updates based on the recent literature. Up to 3 rounds of anonymous e-mail votes were used to reach consensus, with modifications to recommendations between rounds based on the panel input. A simple majority vote (80% of panel members voting "yes") was used to approve minor changes in grammar and syntax to improve clarity., Results: The previous recommendations for thymectomy were updated. New recommendations were developed for the use of rituximab, eculizumab, and methotrexate as well as for the following topics: early immunosuppression in ocular MG and MG associated with immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment., Conclusion: This updated formal consensus guidance of international MG experts, based on new evidence, provides recommendations to clinicians caring for patients with MG worldwide., (Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Academy of Neurology.)
- Published
- 2021
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
3. Randomized study of adjunctive belimumab in participants with generalized myasthenia gravis.
- Author
-
Hewett K, Sanders DB, Grove RA, Broderick CL, Rudo TJ, Bassiri A, Zvartau-Hind M, and Bril V
- Subjects
- Activities of Daily Living psychology, Aged, Antibodies blood, Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized pharmacokinetics, Double-Blind Method, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Immunosuppressive Agents pharmacokinetics, International Cooperation, Male, Middle Aged, Myasthenia Gravis blood, Myasthenia Gravis psychology, Receptor Protein-Tyrosine Kinases immunology, Receptors, Cholinergic immunology, Time Factors, Treatment Outcome, Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized therapeutic use, Immunosuppressive Agents therapeutic use, Myasthenia Gravis drug therapy
- Abstract
Objective: To investigate the efficacy and safety of belimumab, a fully human immunoglobulin G1λ monoclonal antibody against B-lymphocyte stimulator, in participants with generalized myasthenia gravis (MG) who remained symptomatic despite standard of care (SoC) therapy., Methods: Eligible participants with MG were randomized 1:1 to receive IV belimumab 10 mg/kg or placebo in this phase II, placebo-controlled, multicenter, double-blind study (NCT01480596; BEL115123). Participants received SoC therapies throughout the 24-week treatment phase and 12-week follow-up period. The primary efficacy endpoint was mean change from baseline in the Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis (QMG) scale at week 24; safety assessments included the frequency and severity of adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs., Results: Forty participants were randomized (placebo n = 22; belimumab n = 18). The mean change in QMG score from baseline at week 24 was not significantly different for belimumab vs placebo ( p = 0.256). There were no statistically significant differences between treatment groups for secondary endpoints, including the MG Composite and MG-Activity of Daily Living scores. Acetylcholine receptor antibody levels decreased over time in both treatment groups. No unexpected AEs were identified and occurrence was similar in the belimumab (78%) and placebo (91%) groups. One participant receiving placebo died (severe sepsis) during the treatment phase., Conclusions: The primary endpoint was not met for belimumab in participants with generalized MG receiving SoC. There was no significant difference in mean change in the QMG score at week 24 for belimumab vs placebo. The safety profile of belimumab was consistent with previous systemic lupus erythematosus studies., Classification of Evidence: This study provides Class I evidence that for participants with generalized MG, belimumab did not significantly improve QMG score compared with placebo., (Copyright © 2018 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Academy of Neurology.)
- Published
- 2018
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
4. Comparative effectiveness clinical trials to advance treatment of myasthenia gravis.
- Author
-
Guptill JT, Raja S, Sanders DB, and Narayanaswami P
- Subjects
- Humans, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Treatment Outcome, Comparative Effectiveness Research methods, Immunosuppressive Agents therapeutic use, Myasthenia Gravis drug therapy, Observational Studies as Topic methods, Research Design
- Abstract
Myasthenia gravis (MG) presents many challenges for establishing treatment efficacy through clinical trials. Among these are the rarity and heterogeneity of the disease, spontaneous fluctuations, prolonged latency to effect for many immunosuppressive drugs, and the uncertain generalizability of results from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Prospective observational study designs may overcome some of these limitations, but attention is required to ensure that internal validity is not compromised. Observational comparative effectiveness research (CER) utilizes data obtained during routine clinical care to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions in real-life practice conditions, thereby improving generalizability to the clinic. Compared with RCTs, observational CER studies may be less resource intensive and costly. Recent advances that have improved the feasibility of CER studies for MG are (1) the development of MG common data elements, (2) the publication of international consensus guidance for MG treatment, and (3) the development of a web-based REDCap database that can be shared and adapted to standardize data collection. This infrastructure could be used for multisite comparisons of commonly used therapies and provides longitudinal information on patient- and clinician-centered MG outcome measures. A challenge is to design studies that address the potential limitations of observational trials, such as confounding and selection and information bias., (© 2018 New York Academy of Sciences.)
- Published
- 2018
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
5. Immunosuppressive therapies in myasthenia gravis.
- Author
-
Sanders DB and Evoli A
- Subjects
- Antibodies, Monoclonal, Murine-Derived therapeutic use, Apoptosis drug effects, Cholinesterase Inhibitors therapeutic use, Humans, Immunosuppression Therapy, Myasthenia Gravis immunology, Myasthenia Gravis therapy, Rituximab, T-Lymphocytes drug effects, Thymoma surgery, Adrenal Cortex Hormones therapeutic use, Immunosuppressive Agents therapeutic use, Myasthenia Gravis drug therapy
- Abstract
Immunosuppression is the mainstay of treatment for myasthenia gravis (MG). In this paper, we review the mechanisms of action and clinical application of corticosteroids and different classes of immunosuppressive drugs that are currently used in MG patients, and present the results of their use in more than 1000 patients with MG seen at our two centers. Immunosuppressive treatment was considered along with, or as an alternative to thymectomy in MG patients with disabling weakness, not adequately controlled with anticholinesterase drugs. Overall, 82% of our patients received immunosuppressants for at least 1 year, with frequencies varying according to disease severity, from 93-95% of those with thymoma or MuSK antibodies to 72% in ocular myasthenia. Prednisone was used in the great majority of patients, azathioprine was the first-choice immunosuppressant; mycophenolate mofetil and cyclosporine were used as second-choice agents. All clinical forms of MG benefited from immunosuppression: the rate of remission or minimal manifestations ranged from 85% in ocular myasthenia to 47% in thymoma-associated disease. Treatment was ultimately withdrawn in nearly 20% of anti-AChR positive early-onset patients, but in only 7% of thymoma cases. The risk of complications appears to depend on drug dosage, treatment duration, and patient characteristics, the highest rate of serious side effects (20%) having been found in late-onset MG and the lowest (4%) in early-onset disease. Although nonspecific, current immunosuppressive treatment is highly effective in most MG patients. Lack of randomized evidence, the need for prolonged administration, and unwanted effects are still relevant limitations to its use.
- Published
- 2010
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
6. International consensus guidance for management of myasthenia gravis
- Author
-
Sanders, Donald B, Wolfe, Gil I, Benatar, Michael, Evoli, Amelia, Gilhus, Nils E, Illa, Isabel, Kuntz, Nancy, Massey, Janice M, Melms, Arthur, Murai, Hiroyuki, Nicolle, Michael, Palace, Jacqueline, Richman, David P, Verschuuren, Jan, and Narayanaswami, Pushpa
- Subjects
Biomedical and Clinical Sciences ,Oncology and Carcinogenesis ,Myasthenia Gravis ,Rare Diseases ,Neurosciences ,Autoimmune Disease ,Adult ,Child ,Consensus ,Female ,Goals ,Humans ,Immunoglobulins ,Intravenous ,Immunosuppressive Agents ,Plasma Exchange ,Pregnancy ,Thymectomy ,Clinical Sciences ,Cognitive Sciences ,Neurology & Neurosurgery ,Clinical sciences - Abstract
ObjectiveTo develop formal consensus-based guidance for the management of myasthenia gravis (MG).MethodsIn October 2013, the Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America appointed a Task Force to develop treatment guidance for MG, and a panel of 15 international experts was convened. The RAND/UCLA appropriateness methodology was used to develop consensus guidance statements. Definitions were developed for goals of treatment, minimal manifestations, remission, ocular MG, impending crisis, crisis, and refractory MG. An in-person panel meeting then determined 7 treatment topics to be addressed. Initial guidance statements were developed from literature summaries. Three rounds of anonymous e-mail votes were used to attain consensus on guidance statements modified on the basis of panel input.ResultsGuidance statements were developed for symptomatic and immunosuppressive treatments, IV immunoglobulin and plasma exchange, management of impending and manifest myasthenic crisis, thymectomy, juvenile MG, MG associated with antibodies to muscle-specific tyrosine kinase, and MG in pregnancy.ConclusionThis is an international formal consensus of MG experts intended to be a guide for clinicians caring for patients with MG worldwide.
- Published
- 2016
Catalog
Discovery Service for Jio Institute Digital Library
For full access to our library's resources, please sign in.