Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 12, 2025

Assessment of Antibody-based Drugs Effects on Murine Bone Marrow and Peritoneal Macrophage Activation
Published on: December 26, 2017
Immunoadsorption apheresis versus intravenous immunoglobulin therapy for exacerbation of myasthenia gravis
Manato Yasuda1, Akiyuki Uzawa1, Yukiko Ozawa1,2
1Department of Neurology, Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, Chiba, Japan.
Immunoadsorption apheresis (IA) or intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) is used to treat exacerbation of myasthenia gravis (MG). This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety between IA and IVIg for MG patients with anti-acetylcholine receptor (AChR) antibodies. We retrospectively studied 19 AChR antibody-positive generalized MG patients who underwent IA (n = 9) or IVIg treatment (n = 10). We reviewed the MG activities of daily living profile (MG-ADL) scores at baseline, 1 and 3 months after the treatment. Adverse events during the treatment period were also reviewed. The MG-ADL scores showed significantly greater improvement from the baseline in the IA group than in the IVIg group (1 month: -7 vs -3, P = .035; 3 months -9 vs -2.5, P = .016). An adverse event that led to the discontinuation of the treatment was observed in only one patient in the IVIg group (anaphylactic reaction). Our data suggest that the IA treatment is safe and more efficacious than the IVIg treatment for aggravation of anti-AChR-positive MG. Larger prospective studies are required to confirm the finding.
Immunoadsorption apheresis (IA) or intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) is used to treat exacerbation of myasthenia gravis (MG). This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety between IA and IVIg for MG patients with anti-acetylcholine receptor (AChR) antibodies. We retrospectively studied 19 AChR antibody-positive generalized MG patients who underwent IA (n = 9) or IVIg treatment (n = 10). We reviewed the MG activities of daily living profile (MG-ADL) scores at baseline, 1 and 3 months after the treatment. Adverse events during the treatment period were also reviewed. The MG-ADL scores showed significantly greater improvement from the baseline in the IA group than in the IVIg group (1 month: -7 vs -3, P = .035; 3 months -9 vs -2.5, P = .016). An adverse event that led to the discontinuation of the treatment was observed in only one patient in the IVIg group (anaphylactic reaction). Our data suggest that the IA treatment is safe and more efficacious than the IVIg treatment for aggravation of anti-AChR-positive MG. Larger prospective studies are required to confirm the finding.
Related Concept Videos
Myasthenia Gravis: Overview and Treatment
These antibodies interfere with the function of the nicotinic receptors in three ways: by binding to the receptor and disrupting acetylcholine binding; by causing cross-linking of receptors which...
Myasthenia Gravis: Diagnostic Tests
The edrophonium test is a diagnostic tool for myasthenia gravis. It involves...
Myocarditis III: Medical Management

