Real-World Comparison of High-Efficacy Versus Non-High-Efficacy Therapies in Multiple Sclerosis

3Citations
Citations of this article
9Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Objective: The choice of the first disease modifying treatment (DMT) in multiple sclerosis (MS) is a topic of great interest, and whether high-efficacy DMTs should be the first choice remains debated. We compared treatment outcomes (no evidence of disease activity [NEDA] and its components) between treatment-naïve relapsing–remitting MS (RRMS) patients commencing high-efficacy therapies (HET) and non-high-efficacy therapies (non-HET), using propensity score matching. Methods: This is an observational prospective study of two real-world, single-centre, longitudinal cohorts: (1) Relapsing–remitting MS (RRMS) patients initiated dimethyl fumarate, fingolimod, glatiramer acetate and natalizumab between 2002 and 2020; (2) RRMS patients initiated ocrelizumab between 2019 and 2021. We selected treatment-naïve patients and had at least 2 years of follow-up. We compared the two groups at years 1 and 2 using Cox and Logistic regression models as appropriate. Results: After propensity score matching, we included 448 patients: 110 HET and 338 non-HET. The probability of losing NEDA was 57% and 39% lower in the HET group at year 1 and 2 (HR = 0.43; 95% CI = 0.35, 0.52; p < 0.01 and HR = 0.61; 95% CI = 0.45, 0.84; p < 0.01, respectively). The probability of relapse in the HET group was 94% and 71% lower at year 1 and 2 (OR = 0.06; 95% CI = 0.01, 0.28; p < 0.01 and OR = 0.29; 95% CI = 0.10, 0.84; p < 0.02, respectively). The EDSS in the HET group was 30% and 18% lower at year 1 and 2 (Coeff = −0.30; 95% CI = −0.42, −0.18; p < 0.01 and Coeff = −0.16; 95% CI = −0.34, 0.02; p < 0.09, respectively). The probability of MRI activity in the HET group was 82% lower at year 1 (OR = 0.18; 95% CI = 0.04, 0.86; p < 0.03). Interpretation: This study demonstrated that treatment-naïve RRMS patients should be considered for high-efficacy therapies based on a greater suppression of disease activity at 2 years.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Al-Araji, S., Moccia, M., Bianchi, A., Yam, C., Hamed, W., Mohamud, S., … Ciccarelli, O. (2025). Real-World Comparison of High-Efficacy Versus Non-High-Efficacy Therapies in Multiple Sclerosis. Annals of Clinical and Translational Neurology, 12(10), 2077–2085. https://doi.org/10.1002/acn3.70130

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free