Originally posted by Cindarelly
View Post
Even with an incidence as low as 0.4%, someone is going to develop it, and it isn't always going to be someone else.
In treating macular edema, the first step taken by prudent practitioners is to treat the underlying cause, if one can be identified and if it can be reasonably accomplished. In cases of macular edema believed to be due to Gilenya, the first step, then, is to discontinue Gilenya. There are many medical professionals who will argue that, when trying to save someone's vision, stopping Gilenya immediately is not "too soon." Macular edema can resolve if addressed quickly. If not, it can leave permanent damage.
Many people with MS are aware of the permanent damage to vision that optic neuritis can cause. It's fairly well-known that the outcome can be bad. The effects of long-term, untreated macular edema can be just as bad for central vision as some cases of ON. For comparison, it might be helpful to imagine that Gilenya can cause a visual outcome that is as bad for central vision as optic neuritis. How soon would be "too soon" to stop the medication and try to get the eye to heal and return vision to normal ASAP? How soon is "too soon" if, the longer the person is on Gilenya and the longer vision is reduced, the greater the chances are that vision will not return to normal?
Comment