← Back
NeuroTrials.ai
Neurology Clinical Trial Database

LEARN

Long-term maintenance of mycophenolate mofetil in anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis (LEARN): a multicentre, open-label, blinded-endpoint, randomised controlled trial

Year of Publication: 2025

Authors: Xue Gong, Yue Liu, Yaru Ma, ..., Zhen Hong

Journal: Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry

Citation: J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2025;0:1-10. doi:10.1136/jnnp-2024-335400

Link: https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp-2024-335400

PDF: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PM.../jnnp-96-10.pdf


Clinical Question

Does adding long-term mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) maintenance therapy to first-line treatment reduce relapse rates and improve outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis compared to first-line treatment alone?

Bottom Line

Long-term adjunctive MMF therapy significantly reduced relapse risk by 78% (5.9% vs 26.5%, HR 4.2, p=0.006) and improved early treatment response compared to first-line treatment alone. While long-term functional outcomes were similar between groups, MMF-treated patients showed benefits in fatigue, depression, cognition, and seizure freedom. MMF was well-tolerated with no serious drug-related adverse events.

Major Points

  • First randomized controlled trial evaluating MMF maintenance therapy for NMDARE
  • Relapse occurred in 5.9% (3/51) of MMF+ patients vs 26.5% (13/49) of MMF- patients (HR 4.2, p=0.006)
  • Treatment response (≥1 point mRS improvement within 4 weeks) was higher with MMF (84.3% vs 65.3%, RR 1.8, p=0.03)
  • Need for rescue immunotherapy was significantly lower with MMF (5.9% vs 26.5%, RR 0.3, p=0.006)
  • No significant difference in long-term functional outcomes (mRS ≤2) at 12 or 24 months between groups
  • MMF patients showed significantly better outcomes in CASE, MFIS (fatigue), and BD-II (depression) scores over 24 months
  • Higher seizure freedom rate at 6 months with MMF (76.5% vs 53.1%, p=0.02)
  • Patients with age <30 years, female sex, CASE score >20, timely first-line treatment, or higher antibody titers showed greater MMF responsiveness
  • Safety profile comparable between groups; no deaths or serious adverse events attributable to MMF
  • Study provides Class II evidence supporting MMF as maintenance therapy for high-risk NMDARE patients

Design

Study Type: Phase 3, multicenter, randomized, open-label, blinded-endpoint trial

Randomization: 1

Blinding: Open-label treatment assignment; outcome assessors and site staff masked to treatment assignment; relapses confirmed by blinded central review committee

Enrollment Period: March 15, 2021 to June 30, 2022

Follow-up Duration: Minimum 24 months treatment period + extended follow-up; median follow-up 30 months (MMF+) and 36 months (MMF-)

Centers: 4

Countries: China

Sample Size: 100

Analysis: Intention-to-treat; Kaplan-Meier analysis with log-rank test for primary outcome; Cox proportional hazards model for HR; Fisher's exact test for categorical outcomes; Student's t-test for continuous variables; mixed-effects model for repeated measures; multiple imputation for missing data; prespecified sensitivity analyses; R software version 4.3.1


Inclusion Criteria

  • New acute onset of ≥1 of 8 major manifestations within <3 months: psychosis, memory deficit, speech disturbance, seizures, movement disorder, disturbance of consciousness, autonomic dysfunction, central hypoventilation
  • Positive CSF test for NMDAR antibodies (cell-based assay)
  • Age ≥14 years
  • Received ≥1 first-line treatment within 2 weeks of hospitalization before randomization
  • Modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score ≥2 for at least 24 hours before assessment

Exclusion Criteria

  • Pregnancy or breastfeeding
  • Reproductive potential patients not agreeing to effective contraception through 24 months post-treatment
  • Clinically significant infection (bacterial, fungal, parasitic, TB, HSV, VZV, CMV, EBV, HIV, hepatitis, syphilis)
  • Encephalopathy secondary to sepsis or systemic inflammatory response syndrome
  • Pre-existing epilepsy, cerebral trauma, or other nervous system diseases
  • Positive tests for other neuronal surface or intracellular antigens
  • Untreated teratoma before randomization
  • History or current presence of cancer or malignancy
  • Surgical procedure within 4 weeks prior to baseline (excluding teratoma resection)
  • Insufficient heart, liver, kidney, or bone marrow function (WBC <3.0×10^9/L, ANC <2.0×10^9/L, ALC <0.5×10^9/L, platelets <100×10^9/L, AST/ALT >1.5× ULN)
  • Previous treatment with anti-CD20, anti-CD19, anti-IL6R, T-cell depletion, complement inhibitors, Fc receptor antagonists, anti-BLyS, cyclophosphamide, azathioprine, or bortezomib
  • Lack of key clinical data
  • Contraindications to MMF
  • Inability to give informed consent
  • Participation in another interventional trial within 3 months

Baseline Characteristics

CharacteristicFirst-line treatment only (MMF-)MMF + first-line treatment (MMF+)
N4951
Age - Mean (range)28.5 (14-55) years30.9 (14-60) years
Age - <18 years14.3%5.9%
Age - 18-40 years71.4%72.5%
Age - ≥40 years14.3%21.6%
Sex - Male47.1%57.1%
Sex - Female52.9%42.9%
Symptoms - Cognitive disorder87.8%82.4%
Symptoms - Disturbance of consciousness59.2%54.9%
Symptoms - Speech disturbance81.6%76.5%
Symptoms - Dyskinesias/movement disorders38.8%27.5%
Symptoms - Seizures79.6%74.5%
Symptoms - Psychosis87.8%86.3%
Symptoms - Central hypoventilation10.2%11.7%
ICU admission22.4%21.6%
ICU stay - Median (IQR) days12 (9-24)14 (7-22)
Teratoma4.1%5.9%
Abnormal MRI30.6%35.3%
Abnormal EEG77.6%82.4%
Abnormal CSF26.5%25.5%
Treatment - IVIg93.9%86.3%
Treatment - IVMP91.8%84.3%
Treatment - PLEX4.1%7.8%
mRS on admission - Median (IQR)5 (3-5)4 (4-5)
CASE on admission - Median (IQR)19 (16-22)19 (17-23)
NEOS score - Median (IQR)1 (0-1)1 (0-2)
First-line treatment delay >30 days24.5%21.6%
Length of hospital stay - Median (IQR) days16 (13-28)20 (14-28)

Arms

FieldMMF + First-line treatment (MMF+)Control
InterventionMycophenolate mofetil 500mg orally twice daily for 24 months, added to first-line treatment. First-line: IVMP 1000mg/day IV for 5 days → oral prednisone 1mg/kg/day tapering over 3-6 months; IVIg 0.4g/kg/day for 5 days; PLEX 5-7 sessions over 7-10 days if used. After 24 months, MMF tapered by 250mg/month in responders (mRS ≤2).First-line treatment without MMF maintenance: IVMP 1000mg/day IV for 5 days → oral prednisone 1mg/kg/day tapering over 3-6 months; IVIg 0.4g/kg/day for 5 days; PLEX 5-7 sessions over 7-10 days if used.
Duration24 months treatment period + extended follow-upStandard first-line treatment with extended follow-up

Outcomes

OutcomeTypeControlInterventionHR / OR / RRP-value
Number of patients with relapse and time to relapse. Relapse defined as new onset or worsening of symptoms after initial improvement/stabilization of ≥2 months with elevated CSF/serum antibody titers at relapse.Primary13/49 (26.5%)3/51 (5.9%)4.20.006
Treatment response: ≥1 point mRS improvement within 4 weeksSecondary32/49 (65.3%)43/51 (84.3%)RR 1.8 (95% CI 1.1-3.4)0.03
≥2 points mRS improvement within 4 weeksSecondary12/49 (24.5%)14/51 (27.5%)RR 1.1 (95% CI 0.7-1.6)0.8
Median time to 1-point mRS improvement (days)Secondary10 (IQR 6-21)10 (IQR 7-19)0.7
Patients receiving rescue immunotherapySecondary13/49 (26.5%)3/51 (5.9%)RR 0.3 (95% CI 0.1-0.7)0.006
Favorable outcome (mRS ≤2) at 12 monthsSecondary79.6%92.1%0.08
Favorable outcome (mRS ≤2) at 24 monthsSecondary89.7%98.0%0.11
CSF NMDAR1-IgG negative at 6 monthsSecondary5/39 (12.8%)6/36 (16.7%)RR 1.2 (95% CI 0.6-1.9)0.7
CSF NMDAR1-IgG negative at 12 monthsSecondary10/35 (28.6%)10/32 (31.2%)RR 1.2 (95% CI 0.7-2.0)0.5
Seizure freedom at 6 monthsSecondary53.1%76.5%0.02
CASE score improvement over 24 monthsSecondarySignificantly higher (worse) scores at multiple timepointsLower (better) CASE scores at 9, 12, 18, 24 monthsSignificant at marked timepoints
MFIS (fatigue) improvement over 24 monthsSecondaryHigher (worse) fatigue scoresLower (better) fatigue scores at 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 monthsSignificant at marked timepoints
BD-II (depression) improvement over 24 monthsSecondaryHigher (worse) depression scoresLower (better) depression scores at 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 24 monthsSignificant at marked timepoints
MOCA (cognition) improvement over 24 monthsSecondaryLower cognitive scoresHigher cognitive scores (significant at 3 months)Significant at 3 months
InfectionsAdverse3/49 (6.1%)5/51 (9.8%)RR 1.3 (95% CI 0.6-1.9)0.7
Gastrointestinal symptomsAdverse8/49 (16.3%)13/51 (25.5%)RR 1.3 (95% CI 0.8-1.8)0.3
NeutropeniaAdverse0/49 (0%)0/51 (0%)1.0
TumorsAdverse0/49 (0%)0/51 (0%)1.0
Deaths (MMF-related)Adverse00 (1 death from motor vehicle accident, unrelated)
Anaphylactic reactionsAdverse00
Glucocorticoid-related side effectsAdverseMost common AEs in both groupsMost common AEs: metabolic disorders, sleep difficulty, weight gain

Subgroup Analysis

Prespecified sensitivity analyses supported the primary outcome across all subgroups. Patients with onset age <30 years, female sex, CASE score >20, timely first-line treatment, or higher CSF/serum NMDAR-IgG titers showed greater responsiveness to MMF. Subgroup analysis of non-relapsing patients showed no treatment benefit from MMF maintenance, suggesting MMF is most beneficial for high-risk patients.


Criticisms

  • Open-label design may introduce observer bias and placebo effects, though blinded endpoint adjudication mitigates this
  • Study conducted only in China - generalizability to other populations uncertain
  • Did not reach planned sample size (100 vs target 118) due to interim analysis showing significant effect and low NMDARE prevalence
  • Strict exclusion criteria (no patients <14 years, severe infections, untreated teratomas) limit real-world representativeness
  • Unexpected early benefit at 4 weeks is atypical for MMF mechanism (usually slow-acting) - may reflect non-immunological factors
  • No significant difference in long-term functional outcomes (mRS ≤2) despite relapse prevention benefit
  • MOCA may lack sensitivity/specificity for detecting cognitive deficits in this population
  • MMF benefit may be limited to high-risk/relapsing patients; subgroup analysis showed no benefit in non-relapsing patients
  • Cost-effectiveness of 24-month maintenance therapy not evaluated
  • No comparison with other maintenance agents (rituximab, azathioprine, cyclophosphamide)
  • Control group had higher proportion of patients receiving both IVIg and IVMP (85.7% vs 70.5%)
  • Class II evidence only due to open-label design

Funding

National Key R&D Program of China (2022YFC2503800), National Science Foundation of China (82471388), Clinical Research Incubation Program West China Hospital, Sichuan University (2022HXFH022), Postdoctoral Fellowship Program of CPSF (GZC20241130), China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (2024M752236), Postdoctor Research Fund of West China Hospital (2024HXBH053), Natural Science Foundation of Sichuan Province (2025ZNSFSC1635), Sichuan Science and Technology Program (2024YFHZ0056). Funders had no role in design, conduct, analysis, or decision to publish.

Based on: LEARN (Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry, 2025)

Authors: Xue Gong, Yue Liu, Yaru Ma, ..., Zhen Hong

Citation: J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2025;0:1-10. doi:10.1136/jnnp-2024-335400

Content summarized and formatted by NeuroTrials.ai.