BRIV_adv
Annals of Indian Academy of Neurology
  Users Online: 170 Home | About the Journal | InstructionsCurrent Issue | Back IssuesLogin      Print this page Email this page  Small font size Default font size Increase font size

Table of Contents
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Year : 2021  |  Volume : 24  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 300
 

Subgroup classification of myasthenia gravis


Sr. Consultant Neurologist and Academic Coordinator, Institute of Neurosciences, Indraprastha Apollo Hospitals, Delhi, India

Date of Submission01-Apr-2020
Date of Acceptance13-Apr-2020
Date of Web Publication05-Jun-2020

Correspondence Address:
Pushpendra N Renjen
C-85, Anand Niketan, New Delhi - 110 021
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/aian.AIAN_237_20

Rights and Permissions

 



How to cite this article:
Renjen PN. Subgroup classification of myasthenia gravis. Ann Indian Acad Neurol 2021;24:300

How to cite this URL:
Renjen PN. Subgroup classification of myasthenia gravis. Ann Indian Acad Neurol [serial online] 2021 [cited 2021 Jun 13];24:300. Available from: https://www.annalsofian.org/text.asp?2021/24/2/300/289310




Sir,

I read the article by Samal and colleagues in the Annals of Indian Academy of Neurology, Jan-Feb issue 2020, Vol. 23, Issue 1, entitled “MuSK (Muscle Specific Kinase) Positive Myasthenia: Grave Prognosis or undue Prejudice”[1] wherein the authors have compared the demographic and clinical characteristics, treatment response, and outcome of myasthenia gravis (MG) with MuSK antibodies with anti-acetylcholine receptor (AChR) antibodies and seronegative MG (SNMG).

The authors found no differences in the three subtypes in all parameters. Besides, I am sorry to say that to draw such a conclusion from this study, which is a retrospective study, a small sample size in which different treatment modalities are used, would not be appropriate. Autoantibodies against acetylcholine receptors (AChR), MuSK, and lipoprotein-related protein 4 (LRP4) are well-established as sensitive and specific diagnostic markers and pathogenic factors, and these autoantibodies are instrumental for subgrouping patients with MG. A prerequisite for optimum diagnosis and treatment, therefore, is access to antibodies testing.

The thymus is thought to play an important pathogenetic role in AChR antibody-positive (AChr +) in younger patients, whose myasthenia often improves with early thymectomy.[2] In these cases, muscle like myeloid cells in the thymic medulla are implicated in the perivascular infiltration by lymph node T-cell areas and germinal centers, however, in SNMG the thymic histology is frequently reported within “involuted” or “atrophic.”[3]

MuSK antibodies are mainly IgG4 unlike the IgG1 and IgG3 AChR antibodies and are not complement activating. The observations of the present study are not in line with the previously published studies.[2],[4],[5] Clifford and his colleagues in their study have provided enough evidence that thymectomy may not be associated with an increased likelihood of a favorable outcome in MuSK positive MG.[6] Given the low likelihood that a future randomized, controlled trial will be performed in MuSK-MG, the data from this study may help to inform treatment decisions. A study by Samal and colleagues,[1] has not even reviewed the literature extensively and skipped certain major studies that have contributed to the understanding of the abovementioned research.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.



 
   References Top

1.
Samal P, Goyal V, Singh MB, Padma Srivastava MV. MuSK (Muscle Specific Kinase) positive myasthenia: Grave prognosis or undue prejudice? Ann Indian Acad Neurol 2020;23:32-7.  Back to cited text no. 1
  [Full text]  
2.
Gilhus NE, Verschuuren JJ. Myasthenia gravis: Subgroup classification and therapeutic strategies. Lancet Neurol 2015;14:1023-36.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Berrih S, Morel E, Gaud C, Raimond F, Le Brigand H, Bach JF. Anti-AChR antibodies, thymic histology, and T cell subsets in myasthenia gravis. Neurology 1984;34:66-71.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Hatanaka Y, Hemmi S, Morgan MB, Scheufele ML, Claussen GC, Wolfe GI, et al. Non-responsiveness to anticholinesterase agents in patients with MuSK-antibody-positive MG. Neurology 2005;65:1508-9.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Leite MI, Ströbel P, Jones M, Micklem K, Moritz R, Gold R, et al. Fewer thymic changes in MuSK antibody-positive than in MuSK antibody-negative MG. Ann Neurol 2005;57:444-8.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
Clifford KM, Hobson-Webb LD, Benatar M, Burns TM, Barnett C, et al. Thymectomy may not be associated with clinical improvement in MuSK myasthenia gravis. Muscle Nerve 2019;59:404-10.  Back to cited text no. 6
    




 

Top
Print this article  Email this article

    

 
   Search
 
  
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
    Article in PDF (301 KB)
    Citation Manager
    Access Statistics
    Reader Comments
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  


    References

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed363    
    Printed16    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded20    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal