Historical note Several students of medical history affirm that Willis, in 1672, gave an account of a disease that could be none other than myasthenia gravis. Others give credit to Wilks (1877) for the first description and for having noted that the medulla was free of disease, in distinction to other types of bulbar paralyses. The first reasonably complete accounts were those of Erb (1878), who characterized the disease as a bulbar palsy without an anatomic lesion, and of Goldflam (1893); for many years thereafter, the disorder was referred to as the Erb-Goldflam syndrome. Jolly (1895) was the first to use the name myasthenia gravis, to which he added the term pseudoparalytica to indicate the lack of structural changes at autopsy. Also it was Jolly who demonstrated that myasthenic weakness could be reproduced in affected patients by repeated faradic stimulation of the motor nerve and that the “fatigued” muscle would still respond to direct galvanic stimulation of its membrane. Interestingly, he suggested the use of physostigmine as a form of treatment but there the matter rested until Reman, in 1932, and Walker, in 1934, demonstrated the therapeutic value of the drug. The relationship between myasthenia gravis and tumors of the thymus gland was first noted by Laquer and Weigert in 1901, and in 1949, Castleman and Norris gave the first detailed account of the pathologic changes in the gland.
In 1905, Buzzard published a careful clinicopathologic analysis of the disease, commenting on both the thymic abnormalities and the infiltrations of lymphocytes (called lymphorrhages) in muscle. In 1973 and subsequently, the autoimmune nature of myasthenia gravis was established through a series of investigations by Patrick and Lindstrom, Fambrough, Lennon, and A.G. Engel (1977) and their colleagues (see in the following text). These and other references to the historical features of the disease can be found in the reviews by Viets and by Kakulas and Adams; A.G. Engel’s monograph (1999) is an excellent comprehensive reference.
The clear demonstration of an immunologic mechanism operative at the neuromuscular junction was the most significant development in our understanding of myasthenia gravis. Patrick and Lindstrom discovered that repeated immunization of rabbits with AChR protein obtained from the electric eel caused a muscular weakness (contrary to what is stated in some books, their discovery was not accidental). Lennon and colleagues recognized this model as being similar to that of myasthenia gravis. Soon thereafter, Fambrough and coworkers demonstrated that the basic defect in myasthenia gravis was a marked reduction in the number of ACh receptors on the postsynaptic membrane of the neuromuscular junction. These observations were followed by the creation of an experimental model of the disease and the demonstration that experimentally induced myasthenia had clinical, pharmacologic, and electrophysiologic properties identical with those of human myasthenia gravis (Engel et al, 1976). It was also shown that humoral antibodies directed against protein components of AChR could transfer the myasthenic weakness to normal animals, and that the weakness as well as the physiologic abnormalities could be reversed by the administration of anticholinesterase drugs. Thus, the accumulated evidence satisfied the criteria for the diagnosis of an autoantibody-mediated disorder (Drachman, 1990).