PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
April 11, 20260 citationsOpen Access

A Delphi consensus on integrating novel therapies into the management of generalized myasthenia gravis.

View Full Paper
JVJohn VissingFZFritz ZimprichSASari Atula

Key Points

  • The aim was to develop consensus on integrating novel therapies in managing myasthenia gravis (MG) by addressing gaps in current guidelines.
  • Mixed-method design combining qualitative and quantitative phases.
  • Qualitative phase involved discussions among healthcare professionals and patient advocates.
  • Delphi survey conducted with healthcare professionals to reach consensus on treatment guidelines.
  • 65% of consensus statements were agreed upon.
  • Key findings highlighted the discrepancies between ideal guidelines and actual practices.
  • Agreement was found on the importance of quality of life in treatment decisions, and criteria for treatment-switching.

Abstract

Background The treatment landscape for myasthenia gravis (MG) has evolved with the introduction of novel therapies. An international consensus on patient selection criteria and optimal time to initiate these therapies could improve clinical outcomes and reduce delays for likely beneficiaries.Objective This Delphi consensus was undertaken by MG specialists from selected European countries to explore gaps in the application of national guidelines and elicit expert opinion in practice.Design A mixed-method approach was used; qualitative and quantitative study phases were combined to explore key concepts and reach consensus.Methods The qualitative first phase involved seven healthcare professionals (HCPs) and two patient advocacy group representatives who participated in idea generation. Findings from this phase supported the development of a Delphi survey, which was completed by 16 HCPs in two rounds. This constituted the quantitative second phase of the study. Consensus was defined as ⩾70% agreement or disagreement on a 6-point Likert scale.Results In total, 65% of statements achieved consensus. Key findings include-HCPs highly regard international guidelines but find critical discrepancies between the "ideal" scenario and current clinical practices. Consensus was achieved on the importance of incorporating patient-related quality of life in decision-making, despite limited current methods. Consensus was obtained on steroid tapering and treatment-switch criteria based on steroid dose and duration. Consensus was also achieved on suitable patient profiles, including those with persistent symptoms, severe side effects, or needing rapid control.Conclusion This study recognized that guidelines offer valuable direction but do not replace individualized treatment decisions. This study identified the areas of alignment and opportunities to refine patient selection criteria and treatment-switch categories, particularly to integrate novel therapy use in MG management, highlighting a path to a more patient-centric approach.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Vissing et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69d9e67a78050d08c1b76da7https://doi.org/10.48620/96766
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper