Affiliation:
1. Neurology Clinic and Policlinic, Department of Head, Spine and Neuromedicine, MS Center and Translational Imaging in Neurology (ThINk) Basel, Department of Biomedical Engineering University Hospital Basel and University of Basel Basel Switzerland
2. Department of Clinical Research, Clinical Trial Unit University Hospital Basel Basel Switzerland
3. Swiss Federation for Common Tasks of Health Insurances (SVK) Solothurn Switzerland
Abstract
AbstractBackground and purposeIn relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS), analyses from observational studies comparing dimethyl fumarate (DMF) and teriflunomide showed conflicting results. We aimed to compare the effectiveness of DMF and teriflunomide in a real‐world setting, where both drugs are licensed as first‐line therapies for RRMS.MethodsWe included all patients who initiated DMF or teriflunomide between 2013 and 2022, listed in the Swiss National Treatment Registry. Coarsened exact matching was applied using age, gender, disease duration, baseline Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score, time since last relapse, and relapse rate in the previous year as matching variables. Time to relapse and time to 12‐month confirmed EDSS worsening were compared using Cox proportional hazard models.ResultsIn total, 2028 patients were included in this study, of whom 1498 were matched (DMF: n = 1090, 69.6% female, mean age 45.1 years, median EDSS score 2.0; teriflunomide: n = 408, 68.9% female, mean age 45.1 years, median EDSS score 2.0). Time to relapse and time to EDSS worsening was longer in the DMF than the teriflunomide group (hazard ratio 0.734, p = 0.026 and hazard ratio 0.576, p = 0.003, respectively).ConclusionAnalysis of real‐world data showed that DMF treatment was associated with more favorable outcomes than teriflunomide treatment.
Subject
Neurology (clinical),Neurology