Dataset Information

Efficacy and tolerability of oral versus injectable disease-modifying therapies for multiple sclerosis in clinical practice.

ABSTRACT: The advent of oral disease-modifying therapies fundamentally changed the treatment of multiple sclerosis. Nevertheless, impressions of their relative efficacy and tolerability are primarily founded on expert opinion.The purpose of this study was to determine whether oral disease-modifying therapies were better tolerated and/or more effective for controlling multiple sclerosis compared to injectable therapies in clinical practice.Single-center, retrospective cohort study. 480 patients initiated oral (fingolimod, teriflunomide, or dimethyl fumarate) or injectable therapy between March 2013-March 2015 and follow-up data was collected for 5-31 months. Outcomes included on-drug multiple sclerosis activity and drug discontinuation. Cox proportional hazards models were used to control for baseline differences and sensitivity analyses using propensity-weighted matching were performed.A higher proportion of teriflunomide-treated patients experienced multiple sclerosis activity compared to those treated with injectable therapies (p = 0.0053) in the adjusted model. Breakthrough multiple sclerosis was equally prevalent among fingolimod and dimethyl fumarate-treated compared to injectable therapy-treated patients. Of patients initiating a disease-modifying therapy, 32-46% discontinued or switched treatments during the study. After controlling for baseline differences, discontinuation rates were comparable across treatment groups.In this cohort, oral and injectable disease-modifying therapies were equally well tolerated, but teriflunomide appeared less effective for controlling multiple sclerosis activity than injectable therapies. Further study is needed.

SUBMITTER: Longbrake EE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5340186 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Jan-Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Efficacy and tolerability of oral versus injectable disease-modifying therapies for multiple sclerosis in clinical practice.

Longbrake Erin E EE Cross Anne H AH Salter Amber A

Multiple sclerosis journal - experimental, translational and clinical 20160101

<h4>Background</h4>The advent of oral disease-modifying therapies fundamentally changed the treatment of multiple sclerosis. Nevertheless, impressions of their relative efficacy and tolerability are primarily founded on expert opinion.<h4>Objective</h4>The purpose of this study was to determine whether oral disease-modifying therapies were better tolerated and/or more effective for controlling multiple sclerosis compared to injectable therapies in clinical practice.<h4>Methods</h4>Single-center, ...[more]

PMID: 28280599

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundTreatment satisfaction in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) may impact adherence and thus clinical outcomes. The objective of this study was to measure the satisfaction of patients with RRMS with injectable disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) and to evaluate the factors associated with treatment satisfaction.Material and methodsIn this observational retrospective study conducted in the neurology departments of 35 hospitals throughout Spain, demographic data, disease characteristics, and information on treatment with injectable DMTs were collected at a single scheduled visit. Treatment satisfaction was assessed using the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM), version 1.4. Patients also answered complementary questions about the factors that might affect treatment satisfaction. The data collected were analyzed descriptively. A regression model was used to explore the factors associated with treatment satisfaction.ResultsThe study included 445 patients (mean±SD age, 41±10.2 years; two-thirds women). The percentages treated with each DMT were Avonex 28.5%, Rebif 44 μg 24.5%, Copaxone 22.5%, Betaferon 13.0%, Rebif22 μg 8.3% and Extavia 3.1%. The mean±SD overall satisfaction according to the TSQM was 68.8±18.6 and the highest overall satisfaction was reported for Rebif 22 μg (72.4±20.3) and the lowest for Extavia (61.7±23.7). In the regression analysis, rehabilitation, interference with social life, pain on injection and number of MS treatments received were significantly associated with a decrease in overall TSMQ score. A small but significant negative correlation was found between EDSS scores and TSMQ scores (rho = -0.11, p = 0.02) and effectiveness (rho = -0.17, p<0.001). A perceived inconvenience of injections was reflected by the stated preference of 83% for once-daily oral treatment over other administration routes.ConclusionsPatients on stable injectable DMT therapy were reasonably satisfied with their treatment. Our results suggest that the main source of dissatisfaction with the current treatment is the inconvenience of the administration regimen.

Project description:Background: Nine oral disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) have been approved for the treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS) in the United States. Few studies have examined self-reported quality of life (QoL) and functional status outcomes among patients who switch to oral medications from injectable MS therapies. This study compares self-reported QoL and disability status between participants switching from injectable to oral DMTs, to those who stay on injectable DMTs continuously for the same time period.Methods: Longitudinal data were assessed from relapsing MS participants in the Pacific Northwest MS Registry completing a minimum of two surveys between 2012 and 2018 with a maximum of 36?months between surveys. Stayers were defined as those who remained on injectable DMTs continuously from Time 1 to Time 2; switchers were those who switched from injectable to either fingolimod, teriflunomide or dimethyl fumarate during the same time interval. Outcomes of interest were physical and psychological QoL, measured by the Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale (MSIS-29), and disability, measured by the Patient Determined Disease Steps (PDDS). To analyze the effect of switching to oral DMT on outcomes at Time 2, a one-to-two propensity score matching (PSM) was used to match switchers to stayers. Outcomes at Time 2 were analyzed using paired t-test for QoL scores, and Stuart Maxwell test for PDDS as a categorical variable.Results: Among 2385 participants who returned consecutive yearly surveys, 413 met the inclusion criteria for stayers and 66 for switchers. After one-to-two PSM, 124 stayers were matched to 62 switchers. Paired t-test showed no differences between switchers and stayers for physical (mean difference: -?0.41; [95% confidence interval CI: -?3.3-2.4]; p?= 0.78) or psychological (mean difference: -?0.23; [95% CI, -?1.6- 1.1]; p?= 0.74) QoL. Additionally, no differences were seen between switchers and stayers in self-reported disability status.Conclusions: MS registry participants who switched to an oral DMT from injectable showed no significant differences in QoL or self-reported disability status compared to those remaining on injectable DMT continuously in the same time period.

Dataset Information

Efficacy and tolerability of oral versus injectable disease-modifying therapies for multiple sclerosis in clinical practice.

Publications

Efficacy and tolerability of oral versus injectable disease-modifying therapies for multiple sclerosis in clinical practice.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets