Machine Learning in Myasthenia Gravis: A Systematic Review of Prognostic Models and AI-Assisted Clinical Assessments

<b>Background</b>: Myasthenia gravis (MG), a chronic autoimmune disorder with variable disease trajectories, presents considerable challenges for clinical stratification and acute care management. This systematic review evaluated machine learning models developed for prognostic assessment in patients with MG. <b>Methods</b>: Following PRISMA guidelines, we systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and Scopus for relevant articles published from January 2010 to May 2025. Studies using machine learning techniques to predict MG-related outcomes based on structured or semi-structured clinical variables were included. We extracted data on model targets, algorithmic strategies, input features, validation design, performance metrics, and interpretability methods. The risk of bias was assessed using the Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. <b>Results</b>: Eleven studies were included, targeting ICU admission (<i>n</i> = 2), myasthenic crisis (<i>n</i> = 1), treatment response (<i>n</i> = 2), prolonged mechanical ventilation (<i>n</i> = 1), hospitalization duration (<i>n</i> = 1), symptom subtype clustering (<i>n</i> = 1), and artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted examination scoring (<i>n</i> = 3). Commonly used algorithms included extreme gradient boosting, random forests, decision trees, multivariate adaptive regression splines, and logistic regression. Reported AUC values ranged from 0.765 to 0.944. Only two studies employed external validation using independent cohorts; others relied on internal cross-validation or repeated holdout. Of the seven prognostic modeling studies, four were rated as having high risk of bias, primarily due to participant selection, predictor handling, and analytical design issues. The remaining four studies focused on unsupervised symptom clustering or AI-assisted examination scoring without predictive modeling components. <b>Conclusions</b>: Despite promising performance metrics, constraints in generalizability, validation rigor, and measurement consistency limited their clinical application. Future research should prioritize prospective multicenter studies, dynamic data sharing strategies, standardized outcome definitions, and real-time clinical workflow integration to advance machine learning-based prognostic tools for MG and support improved patient care in acute settings.