Hitting a Nerve

When Does a Disease Become Its Own Specialty?


 

Once upon a time, treating multiple sclerosis (MS) was easy — steroids.

Then, in the 1990s, came Betaseron, then Avonex, then Copaxone. Suddenly we had three options to choose from, though overall roughly similar in efficacy (yeah, I’m leaving Novantrone out; it’s a niche drug). Treatment required some decision making, though not a huge amount. I usually laid out the different schedules and side effect to patients and let them decide.

Dr. Allan M. Block, a neurologist in Scottsdale, Ariz.

Dr. Allan M. Block

MS treatment was uncomplicated enough that I knew family doctors who treated MS patients on their own, and I can’t say I could have done any better. If you’ve got a clear MRI, then prescribe Betaseron and hope.

Then came Rebif, then Tysabri, and then pretty much an explosion of new drugs which hasn’t slowed down. Next up are the BTK agents. An embarrassment of riches, though for patients, their families, and neurologists, a very welcome one.

But as more drugs come out, with different mechanisms of action and monitoring requirements, the treatment of MS becomes more complicated, slowly moving from the realm of a general neurologist to an MS subspecialist.

At some point it raises the question of when does a disease become its own specialty? Perhaps this is a bit of hyperbole — I’m pretty sure I’ll be seeing MS patients for a long time to come — but it’s a valid point. Especially as further research may subdivide MS treatment by genetics and other breakdowns.

Alzheimer’s disease may follow a similar (albeit very welcome) trajectory. While nothing really game-changing has come out in the 20 years, the number of new drugs and different mechanisms of action in development is large. Granted, not all of them will work, but hopefully some will. At some point it may come down to treating patients with a cocktail of drugs with separate ways of managing the disease, with guidance based on genetic or clinical profiles.

And that’s a good thing, but it may, again, move the disease from the province of general neurologists to subspecialists. Maybe that would be a good, maybe not. Probably will depend on the patient, their families, and other factors.

Of course, I may be overthinking this. The number of drugs we have for MS is nothing compared with the available treatments we have for hypertension, yet it’s certainly well within the capabilities of most internists to treat without referring to a cardiologist or nephrologist.

Perhaps the new drugs won’t make a difference except in a handful of cases. As new drugs come out we also move on from the old ones, dropping them from our mental armamentarium except in rare cases. When was the last time you prescribed Betaseron?

These drugs are very welcome, and very needed. I will be happy if we can beat back some of the diseases neurologist see, regardless of whom the patients and up seeing.

Dr. Block has a solo neurology practice in Scottsdale, Ariz.

Recommended Reading

The Power of Patient-Reported Outcomes Is Inhibited by Multiple Barriers
MDedge Neurology
Stem Cell Extension Study Reinforces Signal of Benefit for Progressive MS
MDedge Neurology
Neurological Disorders Now Top Global Cause of Illness, Disability
MDedge Neurology
Not Even Secondary Endpoints Support BTK Inhibitor in Phase 3 MS Trial
MDedge Neurology
An Easy, Effective Solution to Exercise-Induced Heat Sensitivity in RRMS?
MDedge Neurology
In Unexpected Finding, Clemastine Fumarate Linked to Worsening Symptoms in MS
MDedge Neurology
Multiple Sclerosis Highlights From ACTRIMS 2024
MDedge Neurology
Infant Exposure to MS Drugs via Breastfeeding: New Data
MDedge Neurology
Improved Communication Center Stage in Multiple Sclerosis
MDedge Neurology
Autoimmunity’s Female Bias and the Mysteries of Xist
MDedge Neurology