Methodological Gaps in Myasthenia Gravis Clinical Practice Guidelines: A Scoping Review of Global Recommendations
Christoper A. Alarcon Ruiz1, Gerardo Luna-Peralta2, Isabel Beatriz Tagle Lostaunau3, Juan Manuel Sifuentes Monge3, Maria Alfaro-Olivera3, Víctor Andrés Arias Hancco3, Diego Gabriel Flores Quinteros3, Henry Palomino Lescano3, María Marcelina Pacheco Vargas3, Nestor Carlos Flores-Rodríguez3, Erasmo Francisco Aquino Peña3
1Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Neurológicas; Universidad Científica del Sur, 2Sociedad Científica de San Fernando, Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos, 3Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Neurológicas
Objective:

To describe the characteristics and assess the quality of clinical practice guidelines (CPG) for diagnosis and treatment in adult myasthenia gravis (MG) patients.

Background:

MG is a rare autoimmune neuromuscular disease with heterogeneous clinical presentation and treatment response. These characteristics and the rapid development of new therapies are approached by evidence-based MG CPG. However, their methodological quality and consistency remain uncertain.

Design/Methods:

We conducted a scoping review of CPG offering specific recommendations for MG diagnostic and/or treatment in adults. On July 9th, 2025, we searched seven databases and repositories, including PubMed and TripDatabase, for CPGs published or updated in the last six years. We used the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation II (AGREE-II) tool to assess methodological quality, focusing on Domain 3 (Rigor of Development).

Results:

Ten CPG met inclusion criteria. Guidelines originated from the United States (n=3), Asia (n=3), Europe (n=3), and Latin-America (n=1). The median AGREE-II Domain 3 score was 52.5% (IQR: 31%-60%). Five CPG achieved ≥60% in AGREE-II Domain 3, reporting systematic reviews during development. Among their 112 recommendations, 11 from 1 CPG addressed MG diagnosis. Other two CPG formulated 21 and 5 recommendations for clinical assessment and therapeutic goals in MG patients, respectively. Only one CPG gave two recommendations for pyridostigmine. Three CPG presented 16 recommendations for classic immunosuppressants (oral corticosteroids, cyclosporine, tacrolimus, azathioprine, mycophenolate, and methotrexate) and 9 recommendations for biologics (rituximab, eculizumab, ravulizumab, and efgartigimod) with limited consensus between them. Thymectomy age-indications were conflicted (less than 50, 60 and 65 years old). Finally, 23 recommendations for myasthenic crisis or symptoms exacerbation focused on intensive care, intravenous immunoglobulin, and plasmapheresis.

Conclusions:
Half of the MG guidelines meet adequate methodological standards with inconsistent evidence synthesis and heterogeneous recommendations. Standardized and transparent updated international CPG are needed to support evidence-based care for MG patients worldwide.
10.1212/WNL.0000000000217471
Disclaimer: Abstracts were not reviewed by Neurology® and do not reflect the views of Neurology® editors or staff.