The Duke myasthenia gravis clinic registry: I. Description and demographics

Introduction The Duke Myasthenia Gravis (MG) Clinic Registry is a disease‐specific database containing physician‐derived data from patients seen in the Duke MG Clinic since 1980. Methods Data from 1060 MG patients initially seen between 1980 and 2008 were reviewed. Results Fifty‐four percent were ma...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Muscle & nerve 2021-02, Vol.63 (2), p.209-216
Hauptverfasser: Sanders, Donald B., Raja, Shruti M., Guptill, Jeffrey T., Hobson‐Webb, Lisa D., Juel, Vern C., Massey, Janice M.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Introduction The Duke Myasthenia Gravis (MG) Clinic Registry is a disease‐specific database containing physician‐derived data from patients seen in the Duke MG Clinic since 1980. Methods Data from 1060 MG patients initially seen between 1980 and 2008 were reviewed. Results Fifty‐four percent were male. Symptoms began after age 50 in 66% of males and 42% of females. Peak onset age in males was in their 60's; females had no predominant onset age. Onset age for both sexes increased from 1980 to 2008. Thymoma was present in 8.5%. Weakness was limited to ocular muscles for at least 2 y in 22% and became generalized later in 8.3% of these. Acetylcholine receptor antibodies were present in 78% overall, 82% with generalized MG and 52% with ocular MG (OMG). The distribution of MG disease class was similar in males and females, except that a greater proportion of women experienced myasthenic crisis and men were more likely to have OMG. Discussion Data in the Registry permit comprehensive and longitudinal analysis of a validated MG population. Analysis of Registry data shows that the frequency of AChR antibody negative MG, ocular MG, and thymoma are similar to other reports, but the onset age and proportion of males have progressively increased compared to studies published more than 20 y ago. These observations demonstrate the value of collecting comprehensive clinical information and comparing historic and contemporary populations. Other potential uses of Registry data include comparison of outcome measures in different disease subgroups and the response to specific treatments.
ISSN:0148-639X
1097-4598
DOI:10.1002/mus.27120