Efficacy and Safety of Double-Filtration Plasmapheresis Versus Efgartigimod in Generalized Myasthenia Gravis: A Single-Center Retrospective Study

IF 2.8 4区医学 Q4 HEMATOLOGY

Journal of Clinical Apheresis Pub Date : 2026-09-20 DOI:10.1002/jca.70176

Jingwen Li, Wenbin Wan, Jun Wu, Yufang Mei, Liping Ni, Huiying Qiu, Yan Zhou, Ying Zhang, Bei Zhang, Gang Wang, Yunlan Du, Jieli Geng

{"title":"Efficacy and Safety of Double-Filtration Plasmapheresis Versus Efgartigimod in Generalized Myasthenia Gravis: A Single-Center Retrospective Study","authors":"Jingwen Li, Wenbin Wan, Jun Wu, Yufang Mei, Liping Ni, Huiying Qiu, Yan Zhou, Ying Zhang, Bei Zhang, Gang Wang, Yunlan Du, Jieli Geng","doi":"10.1002/jca.70176","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>Myasthenia gravis (MG) is an autoimmune neuromuscular disorder characterized by fluctuating muscle weakness. Double-filtration plasmapheresis (DFPP) and efgartigimod are commonly used therapeutic strategies for patients with generalized MG (gMG). This single-center retrospective study aimed to evaluate and compare the efficacy and safety of DFPP and efgartigimod in the management of gMG. We retrospectively reviewed clinical records of gMG patients who received either DFPP or efgartigimod at our hospital. This was not a crossover study, and no patient received both treatments during the study period. Collected data included demographic and clinical characteristics, antibody titers, Myasthenia Gravis Activities of Daily Living (MG-ADL) scores, Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis (QMG) scores, and treatment-related adverse events. Immunoglobulin and antibody levels before and after therapy were analyzed to assess treatment responses. A total of 31 patients with gMG were included, comprising 17 who underwent DFPP and 14 who received efgartigimod. The participants ranged from 25 to 79 years of age, and 74.2% were female. Anti-acetylcholine receptor antibodies were detected in 25 patients. Both DFPP and efgartigimod significantly reduced immunoglobulin and pathogenic antibody levels and improved MG-ADL and QMG scores. Between-group differences in the observed short-term changes were not statistically significant. Mild adverse events, including catheter-site bleeding and transient limb weakness, occurred in the DFPP group, whereas no adverse events were reported among efgartigimod-treated patients. Both DFPP and efgartigimod effectively reduced antibody levels and improved clinical symptoms in patients with gMG after a single treatment course. Efgartigimod showed favorable tolerability in this cohort, although this finding should be interpreted cautiously given the small sample size and retrospective design.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":15390,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Apheresis","volume":"41 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Apheresis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jca.70176","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Myasthenia gravis (MG) is an autoimmune neuromuscular disorder characterized by fluctuating muscle weakness. Double-filtration plasmapheresis (DFPP) and efgartigimod are commonly used therapeutic strategies for patients with generalized MG (gMG). This single-center retrospective study aimed to evaluate and compare the efficacy and safety of DFPP and efgartigimod in the management of gMG. We retrospectively reviewed clinical records of gMG patients who received either DFPP or efgartigimod at our hospital. This was not a crossover study, and no patient received both treatments during the study period. Collected data included demographic and clinical characteristics, antibody titers, Myasthenia Gravis Activities of Daily Living (MG-ADL) scores, Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis (QMG) scores, and treatment-related adverse events. Immunoglobulin and antibody levels before and after therapy were analyzed to assess treatment responses. A total of 31 patients with gMG were included, comprising 17 who underwent DFPP and 14 who received efgartigimod. The participants ranged from 25 to 79 years of age, and 74.2% were female. Anti-acetylcholine receptor antibodies were detected in 25 patients. Both DFPP and efgartigimod significantly reduced immunoglobulin and pathogenic antibody levels and improved MG-ADL and QMG scores. Between-group differences in the observed short-term changes were not statistically significant. Mild adverse events, including catheter-site bleeding and transient limb weakness, occurred in the DFPP group, whereas no adverse events were reported among efgartigimod-treated patients. Both DFPP and efgartigimod effectively reduced antibody levels and improved clinical symptoms in patients with gMG after a single treatment course. Efgartigimod showed favorable tolerability in this cohort, although this finding should be interpreted cautiously given the small sample size and retrospective design.

查看原文本刊更多论文

双滤过血浆置换与Efgartigimod治疗广泛性重症肌无力的疗效和安全性：一项单中心回顾性研究。

重症肌无力（MG）是一种以波动性肌肉无力为特征的自身免疫性神经肌肉疾病。双滤过血浆置换（DFPP）和埃加替吉莫是治疗广泛性MG （gMG）患者常用的治疗策略。本单中心回顾性研究旨在评价和比较DFPP和艾加替莫德治疗gMG的疗效和安全性。我们回顾性地回顾了在我院接受DFPP或efgartigimod治疗的gMG患者的临床记录。这不是一项交叉研究，在研究期间没有患者同时接受两种治疗。收集的数据包括人口统计学和临床特征、抗体滴度、重症肌无力日常生活活动（MG-ADL）评分、定量重症肌无力（QMG）评分和治疗相关不良事件。分析治疗前后的免疫球蛋白和抗体水平，以评估治疗反应。共纳入31例gMG患者，其中17例接受DFPP治疗，14例接受依加替莫德治疗。参与者的年龄从25岁到79岁不等，其中74.2%为女性。25例患者检测到抗乙酰胆碱受体抗体。DFPP和efgartigimod均可显著降低免疫球蛋白和致病抗体水平，改善MG-ADL和QMG评分。观察到的短期变化组间差异无统计学意义。DFPP组出现了轻微的不良事件，包括导管部位出血和短暂性肢体无力，而efgartigimod治疗的患者没有报告不良事件。DFPP和efgartigimod均可有效降低gMG患者单疗程后的抗体水平，改善临床症状。Efgartigimod在该队列中显示出良好的耐受性，尽管考虑到样本量小和回顾性设计，这一发现应谨慎解释。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of Clinical Apheresis 医学-血液学

CiteScore

2.80

自引率

13.30%

发文量

审稿时长

>12 weeks

期刊介绍： The Journal of Clinical Apheresis publishes articles dealing with all aspects of hemapheresis. Articles welcomed for review include those reporting basic research and clinical applications of therapeutic plasma exchange, therapeutic cytapheresis, therapeutic absorption, blood component collection and transfusion, donor recruitment and safety, administration of hemapheresis centers, and innovative applications of hemapheresis technology. Experimental studies, clinical trials, case reports, and concise reviews will be welcomed.