Opinion
Video
Modes of Administration for Targeted Treatment in MG
Experts in neurology review the varied routes of administration of targeted treatment in MG, highlighting intravenous and subcutaneous formulations and how they can provide more patient-centric care.
This is a video synopsis/summary of a panel discussion involving James Howard, MD; Nicholas Silvestri, MD, FAAN; Tuan Vu, MD; Ali Habib, MD; and Beth Stein, MD.
The discussion revolves around the different routes of administration for new therapeutics, specifically intravenous (IV) and subcutaneous (sub-Q) methods. The choice between these methods often depends on the patient's preferences and lifestyle. Some patients prefer IV therapy due to the social aspect of visiting an infusion center or having infusion providers come to their home. Others, especially those with busy schedules or full-time jobs, may prefer sub-Q therapy as it allows them to administer the treatment on their own time. It's essential to discuss these options with patients and find what works best for them. If one method doesn't suit a patient, switching to another route is often possible.
There was a mention of regulatory decisions regarding sub-Q options and the involvement of healthcare providers in administering treatments. Despite the need for healthcare provider administration, sub-Q injections at home are often seen as more convenient than IV treatments. Additionally, there are differences between sub-Q preparations, including storage requirements. Some require refrigeration, while others can be stored at room temperature, making them more convenient for travel.
Lastly, the discussion touched upon the potential for using different drugs in combination to treat conditions like myasthenia gravis (MG), which has multiple disease mechanisms. Treating both antibody-driven and complement-driven aspects of the disease might require a multimodality therapy approach, similar to oncology treatments.
Video synopsis is AI-generated and reviewed by NeurologyLive editorial staff.
