MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415077098 · doi:10.1007/s00415-025-13420-6

Self-administration of rozanolixizumab via manual push and infusion pump methods in patients with generalised myasthenia gravis: a randomised, phase 3, open-label, crossover study

2025· article· en· W4415077098 on OpenAlexaff
Vera Bril, Carlo Antozzi, Tomasz Berkowicz, Artur Drużdż, Rachana Gandhi, Zabeen Mahuwala, Jana Zschüntzsch, Marion Boehnlein, Virginie Kerbusch, Andreea Lavrov, M. Morris, Maria Isabel Leite

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMyasthenia Gravis and Thymoma
Canadian institutionsToronto General Hospital
FundersUCB Pharma
KeywordsCrossover studyNeurologyNeuroradiologyPhase (matter)Infusion pumpCrossover

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The phase 3, open-label, randomised, crossover MG0020 study investigated rozanolixizumab self-administration, efficacy, and safety in patients with generalised myasthenia gravis (gMG) using infusion pump and manual push methods. METHODS: Adults with gMG received once-weekly rozanolixizumab for 18 weeks, comprising a 6-week Training Period and two 6-week Self-Administration Periods where patients were randomised 1:1 to Sequence 1 (infusion pump then manual push) or Sequence 2 (manual push then infusion pump). The primary endpoint was successful rozanolixizumab self-administration (choosing correct infusion site, administering subcutaneously, delivering intended dose), evaluated by a healthcare professional (HCP) at weeks 12 and 18. Secondary endpoints included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Additional endpoints included change from baseline in total immunoglobulin G (IgG) and Myasthenia Gravis Activities of Daily Living (MG-ADL) score, and patients' administration method preference. RESULTS: Sixty-two patients received treatment; 55 were randomised (Sequence 1: n = 28; Sequence 2: n = 27). The self-administration success rate was 100% with both methods. Decreases from baseline in IgG and MG-ADL score were maintained during self-administration with both methods. TEAEs occurred in 47/62 (75.8%) patients; most events (161/165 [97.6%]) were mild or moderate. Incidence was comparable for both methods. Most patients (35/55 [63.6%]) preferred self-administration to HCP administration (5/55 [9.1%]); more preferred manual push (25/55 [45.5%]) to infusion pump (17/55 [30.9%]). CONCLUSIONS: All patients successfully self-administered rozanolixizumab; more patients preferred manual push. Efficacy and safety were consistent with the known HCP-administered profile. These results support rozanolixizumab self-administration and manual push administration in patients with gMG. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05681715 (registered 4 January 2023).

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.361 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeurologySame topicMyasthenia Gravis and ThymomaFrench-language works237,207