Non-Surgical Treatment Landscape in MG

Written by Margaret Anne Rockwood | Last updated March 13, 2026
Medically reviewed by Nizar Souayah, MD

Pharmaceutical and other treatments for myasthenia gravis (MG) can improve symptoms, reduce autoimmune attack, and prevent complications such as myasthenic crisis. Treatment selection is guided by antibody subtype (AChR, MuSK, LRP4, or seronegative), disease severity, and individual patient factors.

Approaches range from anti-inflammatory therapies, either systemic or targeted, to newer biologic immunotherapies such as monoclonal antibodies that interfere with specific immune mechanisms involved in the disease process.

Background: From Immunosuppression to Targeted Molecular Therapy

Although clinical descriptions of myasthenia gravis date back to the seventeenth century, modern pharmacologic treatment began in the early twentieth century with the use of acetylcholinesterase inhibitors such as pyridostigmine, which improve neuromuscular transmission but do not affect the underlying autoimmune process.

As MG became recognized as an antibody-mediated autoimmune disorder, broader immunotherapies emerged. Corticosteroids became widely used because of their ability to suppress immune activity and reduce autoantibody production.

Later, in the 1970s and 1980s, steroid-sparing agents like azathioprine and mycophenolate began to be used as primary or adjunctive therapies.

During this period, thymectomy also became an important therapeutic option. It is indicated for patients with thymoma regardless of antibody status, and the MGTX randomized trial (Wolfe et al., NEJM 2016) demonstrated benefit in non-thymomatous AChR-positive generalized MG.

In the past two decades, treatment has shifted toward targeted biologic therapies.

1. Complement inhibitors block the complement cascade at the level of the C5 protein. In AChR-positive MG, pathogenic antibodies activate complement, leading to formation of the membrane attack complex (MAC) and structural injury to the postsynaptic membrane at the neuromuscular junction. By inhibiting C5, these drugs prevent complement-mediated damage and are often the treatment of choice for AChR-positive generalized MG.
2. FcRn inhibitors reduce circulating pathogenic IgG antibodies. By inhibiting the neonatal Fc receptor (FcRn), these therapies prevent IgG recycling and accelerate degradation of circulating antibodies, including pathogenic autoantibodies. Clinical trials have demonstrated reductions in total IgG levels of approximately 60–70%. Current approvals include AChR-positive generalized MG (efgartigimod, rozanolixizumab), with rozanolixizumab also studied in MuSK-positive disease.
3. B-cell–directed therapies further refine immune targeting by depleting the B-cellsthat produce the antibodies in the first place. This is the treatment of choice for MuSK-positive patients, where it has shown particularly strong efficacy. Many MuSK-positive patients achieve sustained remission after a single treatment course, and B-cell depletion is also used when conventional immunosuppression fails in other subtypes.

Broadly, drug therapy acts as either an immunosuppressant or a targeted intervention.

In addition, intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) and plasma exchange (PLEX) are essential rapid-acting therapies used for myasthenic crisis and as bridge treatments during transitions between chronic immunotherapies.

Immunosuppressive Therapies

1. Acetylcholinesterase Inhibitors

   Pyridostigmine (Mestinon) and other AChE inhibitors are first-line symptomatic agents that enhance neuromuscular transmission by slowing the breakdown of acetylcholine. They do not alter underlying autoimmunity, but improve strength.

   In the Clinic: Typically, this is the first medication started for all MG subtypes. It provides relatively rapid relief (within 30–60 minutes). Effectiveness can be limited by cholinergic side effects (e.g., GI cramping, diarrhea, or muscle twitching). Because it only treats symptoms and not the source of the attack, it is often used as a “bridge” while waiting for the slower-acting immunosuppressants to take effect.

2. Corticosteroids

   Prednisone and other corticosteroids are widely used to suppress immune activity and reduce autoantibody production.

   In the Clinic: Corticosteroids represent one of the most effective therapies for inducing clinical improvement in MG. Improvement typically occurs over several weeks, and a transient worsening may occur early in treatment, particularly at high initial doses. They are often used in combination with acetylcholinesterase (AChE) inhibitors and may be combined with steroid-sparing agents to reduce long-term corticosteroid toxicity.

3. Non-Steroidal Immunosuppressants

   Common agents include azathioprine, mycophenolate mofetil, cyclosporine A, and tacrolimus.

   These suppress T-cell and/or B-cell activity, reducing autoantibody production, allowing for steroid-sparing, and improving long-term disease control. They do not act immediately but are essential for chronic management and minimizing steroid complications.

   Specifically, they:

• • Reduce Autoantibody Levels: By inhibiting lymphocyte proliferation or function, these drugs lower the volume of pathogenic antibodies circulating and attacking the neuromuscular junction. The result is a modulation of the immune system without broadly suppressing every immune function like high-dose steroids do. 
  • Decrease Complement-Mediated Damage: Less antibody binding means less activation of the complement cascade, which typically damages postsynaptic folds.
  • Stabilize the Neuromuscular Junction: With fewer antibodies, acetylcholine receptor density can recover somewhat, and neuromuscular transmission improves.
• Unlike corticosteroids, these drugs take weeks to months to show full effect, because they gradually reduce the immune system’s production of autoantibodies.In the Clinic: Often used in combination with corticosteroids early in treatment for long-term control and steroid-tapering. Some are used long-term as maintenance therapy to minimize relapses and keep disease under control.Choice of agent depends on:

  • Antibody type (AChR+ vs. MuSK+)

  • Age and comorbidities

  • Side effect profile

• Monitoring:

  Requires regular bloodwork because of risks like:

  • Bone marrow suppression (azathioprine)

  • Liver toxicity

  • Kidney function changes (calcineurin inhibitors)

  • Infection risk

Targeted Therapies

1. Complement Inhibitors

• • Eculizumab (Soliris): An anti-C5 monoclonal antibody that blocks complement-mediated damage; effective in refractory AChR-positive MG.
  • Ravulizumab (Ultomiris): A long-acting C5 inhibitor with sustained efficacy and a more convenient dosing schedule.
  • Zilucoplan: A subcutaneous complement C5 inhibitor administered by subcutaneous self-injection.

Important: All complement inhibitors carry an increased risk of Neisseria meningitidis infection. Vaccination (both MenACWY and MenB) is required at least two weeks prior to initiating therapy.

2. FcRn Modulators

• • Efgartigimod (Vyvgart): Reduces pathogenic IgG autoantibodies by blocking the neonatal Fc receptor. Approved for AChR-positive MG.
  • Rozanolixizumab (Rystiggo): A subcutaneous FcRn antagonist demonstrating clinical benefit in generalized MG, including both AChR-positive and MuSK-positive disease.
  • Nipocalimab (Imaavy): An FcRn-blocking monoclonal antibody approved in some jurisdictions and under ongoing regulatory evaluation in others.

3. B-Cell Targeted Therapies

• • Rituximab: An anti-CD20 agent that has shown high efficacy in MuSK-positive MG based on retrospective studies and case series, and is frequently used in refractory disease. Large randomized controlled trial data are limited compared with FDA-approved targeted therapies.
  • Inebilizumab (Uplizna): A CD19/B-cell depleting therapy approved for some MG patients; broadens B-cell targeted strategies.

Important: Patients on B-cell depleting therapies require monitoring of immunoglobulin levels due to the risk of hypogammaglobulinemia, and infection prophylaxis should be considered in patients with sustained low immunoglobulin levels.

Comparison of MG Drug Therapies

Note: Response rates below are derived from individual clinical trials with differing patient populations, inclusion criteria, and endpoint definitions. No head-to-head trials exist between complement inhibitors and FcRn inhibitors. Cross-trial comparison of these percentages is not scientifically valid and they should be interpreted as approximate estimates.

In the Clinic:  In MG, the “art of medicine” is in full play for treating physicians. In 60-80% of moderate-to-severe cases, physicians typically combine therapies, and which therapies and which combinations typically change over time.

The rationale for combination therapy is to provide rapid symptom relief with acetylcholinesterase inhibitors or corticosteroids while achieving long-term immune control through steroid-sparing or targeted therapies. For example:

• Early/moderate MG: AChE inhibitor + low-dose prednisone; add azathioprine/mycophenolate after 3–6 months for steroid taper.
• Refractory MG: Steroids + non-steroidal (e.g., azathioprine) + targeted (e.g., rituximab for MuSK+ or efgartigimod for AChR+).
• Calcineurin inhibitors (tacrolimus and cyclosporine): generally not administered together due to overlapping nephrotoxicity unless careful monitoring is performed.
• Myasthenic crisis: Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) and plasma exchange (PLEX) are essential therapies for acute exacerbations and myasthenic crisis. These rapid-acting treatments serve as bridge therapies while longer-acting immunotherapies take effect and are a critical component of any MG treatment protocol.

In summary, the treatment of MG is nuanced and influenced by multiple factors, including antibody subtype, disease severity, comorbidities, and patient tolerance for immunosuppressive therapy. Modern treatment paradigms increasingly target minimal manifestation status (MMS) or pharmacological remission as explicit treatment goals. With the expansion of targeted immunotherapies, most patients can now achieve good functional outcomes, sustained quality of life, and near-normal life expectancy.

References

1. Myasthenia gravis in 2025: Five new things and four hopes for the future. Binks, S. N. M., et al. (2025). Journal of Neurology, 272(3), 226.
2. Myasthenia gravis. Drachman, D. B. (1994). New England Journal of Medicine, 330(25), 1797–1810.
3. Myasthenia gravis. Gilhus, N. E. (2016). New England Journal of Medicine, 375(26), 2570–2581.
4. Post-intervention status in patients with refractory myasthenia gravis treated with eculizumab during REGAIN and its open-label extension. Mantagazza, R., et al. (2021). Neurology, 96(5), e635–e644.
5. Safety, efficacy, and tolerability of efgartigimod in patients with generalised myasthenia gravis (ADAPT): A multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Howard, J. F., et al. (2021). The Lancet Neurology, 20(7), 526–536.
6. Rozanolixizumab for myasthenia gravis: A breakthrough treatment option. Matic, A., & Bril, V. (2025). Immunotherapy, 17(5), 309–316.
7. Meningococcal meningitis (Neisseria meningitidis). World Health Organization. (n.d.). Retrieved March 13, 2026.
8. Efficacy and safety of rozanolixizumab in patients with muscle-specific kinase antibody–positive generalized myasthenia gravis. Habib, A. A., Bril, V., et al. (2024). Therapeutic Advances in Neurological Disorders, 17.
9. Long-term safety, tolerability, and efficacy of efgartigimod (ADAPT+). Howard, J. F., Jr., et al. (2024). Frontiers in Neurology, 14, 1284444.
10. Response to eculizumab in patients with myasthenia gravis with anti-acetylcholine receptor antibodies: A subanalysis of REGAIN. Jacob, S., et al. (2020). Muscle & Nerve, 62(2), 173–180.
11. International consensus guidance for management of myasthenia gravis: Executive summary. Narayanaswami, P., et al. (2021). Neurology, 96(3), 114–122.
12. Myasthenia gravis treatments. Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America. (2025). (B-cell therapies incl. rituximab MuSK+, inebilizumab; emerging satralizumab)
13. Risk factors of myasthenic crisis after thymectomy in patients with myasthenia gravis. Yu, S., Zhang, W., Wei, B., & Wang, X. (2014). Journal of Thoracic Disease, 6(9), 1339–1345.
14. The Duke Myasthenia Gravis Patient Registry III: Comparative effectiveness of azathioprine and mycophenolate mofetil. Sanders, D. B., et al. (2026). Muscle & Nerve.
15. Myasthenia gravis – An updated review. Bindignivile, S. H. (2026). Journal of Clinical Neuroscience. (Multimodal: AChE + steroids + steroid-sparing)