Abstract:Abstract Background Since 2022, subcutaneous (SC) formulations of infliximab (IFX) and vedolizumab (VDZ) became available. This study aims to assess patients’ perspectives on potential switch to SC administration. Methods A prospective observational, nurse-led study was performed at the Ghent University Hospital. Patients treated with IV IFX or VDZ, deemed suitable by the treating physician based on the DIAMOND multi-stakeholder position statement of the Belgian IBD Research and Development group (BIRD), were offered switch to SC administration between 01/01/2022-30/06/2023. Participants were asked to fill out questionnaires regarding personal perspective on a potential switch to SC administration. Data was collected using REDCap®. Descriptive and univariate analyses were performed with Excel ®. The study was approved by the Ethical committee of UZ Ghent (ONZ-2022-0296). Results In total 404 patients receiving IV IFX or VDZ were identified within the inclusion period. Of those, 196 received 8-weekly treatment. After screening by the treating physician, 157 patients met the inclusion criteria of whom 84 agreed to participate (Figure 1). Questionnaires were filled out completely by 70 of the included patients. Fourty patients were treated with VDZ (57.1%) and 42.9% with IFX. Fourty-three patients (61.40%) had Crohn’s disease, 26 (37.1 %) had ulcerative colitis and 1 (1.4 %) indeterminate colitis. Fifteen patients (21.4%) had previous experience with SC self-injections. Thirty-four participants (48.6%) chose to switch to SC administration of their current treatment, 36 refused (51.4%). In general, patients were aware of the possibility to switch to SC administration before entering the study as 71% knew this formulation was available. Main information channels were: treating physician (56%) and/or IBD nurse (58%). Univariate analyses comparing switchers versus non-switchers are shown in Table 1. Patients who refused switch were more concerned about potential adverse events (agree: 61.1% vs 23.5%), loss of response (agree: 41.4% vs 11.4%) or incompliance (agree: 47.2% vs 14.7%) with SC formulations. Furthermore, the associated physician visit at the IV-administration unit was deemed more important to non-switchers (agree: 88.9% vs 55.9%). Patients who switched were less concerned about potential differences in healthcare costs (disagree: 70.6 vs 36.1%) and felt that regular visits to the IV-administration unit had big impact on QoL (agree: 64.7% vs 11.2%). Conclusion Patient’s perspectives differed significantly between those who chose to switch to SC IFX/VDZ and those who remained under the IV formulation. This should be considered when discussing treatment options with the patients and confirms the importance of patient engagement in managing IBD.

Patient Preference for Subcutaneous Versus Intravenous Administration with Every-6-Week Natalizumab (Tysabri®) Dosing: NOVA Phase IIIb Extension Study (Part 2)

Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Natalizumab 6-Week Dosing vs Continued 4-Week Dosing for Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis

Real-world evidence and patient preference for subcutaneous versus intravenous natalizumab in the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis – initial results from the observational SISTER study

Intravenous or subcutaneous natalizumab in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: investigation on efficiency and savings-the EASIER study

Long-term clinical outcomes in patients with multiple sclerosis who are initiating disease-modifying therapy with natalizumab compared with BRACETD first-line therapies

Phase 2 study of natalizumab plus standard corticosteroid treatment for high-risk acute graft-versus-host disease

Safety and Tolerability of Suprachoroidal Axitinib Injectable Suspension, for Neovascular Age-related Macular Degeneration; Phase I/IIa Open-Label, Dose-Escalation Trial

Long-term effectiveness of natalizumab in secondary progressive multiple sclerosis: A propensity-matched study

Literature review and meta-analysis of natalizumab therapy for the treatment of highly active relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis in the 'suboptimal therapy' patient population

Comparative Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Natalizumab and Fingolimod in Patients with Inadequate Response to Disease-Modifying Therapies in Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis in the United Kingdom

N26 Disease outcomes and patient’s perspectives after switching biologics from intravenous to subcutaneous administration. A real-world experience in a tertiary IBD-unit

Subcutaneous nivolumab (NIVO SC) vs intravenous nivolumab (NIVO IV) in patients with previously treated advanced or metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC): Pharmacokinetics (PK), efficacy, and safety results from CheckMate 67T.

Brief Report: Updated Data From IMscin001 Part 2, a Randomized Phase III Study of Subcutaneous Versus Intravenous Atezolizumab in Patients With Locally Advanced/Metastatic NSCLC

Évolution de la prise en charge des patients atteints de la sclérose en plaques rémittente-récurrente et traités par natalizumab (TYSABRI, forme intra-veineuse et sous-cutanée) en France : une analyse du PMSI sur la période 2019/2022

Phase 3 Study of Subcutaneous Versus Intravenous Ravulizumab in Eculizumab-Experienced Adult Patients with PNH: Primary Analysis and 1-Year Follow-Up

Risk of secondary progression in patients with highly active multiple sclerosis treated with natalizumab: a real-life study

Subcutaneous versus intravenous nivolumab for renal cell carcinoma

Cladribine tablets after treatment with natalizumab (CLADRINA) – rationale and design

Duration of natalizumab therapy and reasons for discontinuation in a multiple sclerosis population

P989 Switching from intravenous to subcutaneous vedolizumab in patients with inflammatory bowel disease in clinical remission: a multicenter study from GETECCU

P674 Real-world experiences of switching to subcutaneous formulation in IBD patients on maintenance vedolizumab treatment