Contributions
Abstract: EP1548
Type: ePoster
Abstract Category: Therapy - disease modifying - Others
Background: Disease Modifying Treatments (DMTs) to manage Relapsing Remitting Multiple Sclerosis (RRMS) patients have traditionally been injectables. With the introduction of new oral DMTs, a shift in the treatment paradigm has happened.
Objectives: To assess the patterns of use of DMTs between 2012 and 2015 among RRMS patients in Europe (EU).
Methods: Multi-year, multi-center retrospective chart-review study of RRMS patients is ongoing in big-5-EU (5EU: UK/Germany/France/Italy/Spain) since 1997 to collect de-identified data on diagnosis, clinical status, and treatment patterns. Neurologists are screened for practice duration (≥3yrs) and patient volume (≥15 MS patients/mo) and recruited from a large panel to be geographically representative within respective countries. Neurologists collect de-identified anonymous data from next 10 consecutive MS patients within the respective study windows. RRMS patients taking injectable (INJ), ORAL, or infusible (INF) DMTs were analysed across four time-periods since 2012: 4Q2012/4Q2013/4Q2014/4Q2015.
Results: In total, 1395(4Q2012)/1465(4Q2013)/1601(4Q2014)/1586(4Q015) eligible RRMS patient charts were included in the analyses. Over the 2012/2015 time period, top-3 reasons for choosing DMTs were: efficacy factors (74.2%/54.0%), convenience factors (8.0%/18.6%) and patient decision (5.5%/8.0%). Overall % patients on INJ decreased from 73.5% (4Q2012) to 40.7% (4Q2015), and those on ORAL increased from 11.3% (4Q2012) to 44.1% (4Q2015), while INF use remained stable (14.6%/14.5% in 4Q2012/4Q2015). Within 1st-line, changes in drug utilization from 4Q2012/4Q2015 were: INJ:93.5%/56.8%, ORAL:2.0%/32.3%, INF:4.2%/10.5%; within 2nd-line, INJ:51.8%/19.4%, ORAL:18.9%/59.2%, INF:28.6%/20.3%; within 3rd and later lines, INJ:17.8%/9.9%, ORAL:44.1%/68.0%, INF:36.2%/21.0%. Among the overall cohort, mean EDSS scores at the time of study data collection remained stable from 4Q2012/4Q2015 for INJ (2.08/2.00) & INF (3.63/3.65), while EDSS scores decreased for ORAL (3.18/2.35).
Conclusions: In this study cohort, adoption of oral DMTs increased dramatically; displacing the use of injectables and corresponding to a shift in prescription driver trends. Most recent EDSS scores indicated lower disease severity among users of oral DMTs, a likely consequence of their 1st line penetration. Impact of observed treatment patterns and treatment sequencing strategies on patient outcomes warrant further scrutiny.
Disclosure:
Siva Narayanan: nothing to disclose
Simone Gabriele: nothing to disclose
Rachael Hooper: nothing to disclose
Joanna White: nothing to disclose
Abstract: EP1548
Type: ePoster
Abstract Category: Therapy - disease modifying - Others
Background: Disease Modifying Treatments (DMTs) to manage Relapsing Remitting Multiple Sclerosis (RRMS) patients have traditionally been injectables. With the introduction of new oral DMTs, a shift in the treatment paradigm has happened.
Objectives: To assess the patterns of use of DMTs between 2012 and 2015 among RRMS patients in Europe (EU).
Methods: Multi-year, multi-center retrospective chart-review study of RRMS patients is ongoing in big-5-EU (5EU: UK/Germany/France/Italy/Spain) since 1997 to collect de-identified data on diagnosis, clinical status, and treatment patterns. Neurologists are screened for practice duration (≥3yrs) and patient volume (≥15 MS patients/mo) and recruited from a large panel to be geographically representative within respective countries. Neurologists collect de-identified anonymous data from next 10 consecutive MS patients within the respective study windows. RRMS patients taking injectable (INJ), ORAL, or infusible (INF) DMTs were analysed across four time-periods since 2012: 4Q2012/4Q2013/4Q2014/4Q2015.
Results: In total, 1395(4Q2012)/1465(4Q2013)/1601(4Q2014)/1586(4Q015) eligible RRMS patient charts were included in the analyses. Over the 2012/2015 time period, top-3 reasons for choosing DMTs were: efficacy factors (74.2%/54.0%), convenience factors (8.0%/18.6%) and patient decision (5.5%/8.0%). Overall % patients on INJ decreased from 73.5% (4Q2012) to 40.7% (4Q2015), and those on ORAL increased from 11.3% (4Q2012) to 44.1% (4Q2015), while INF use remained stable (14.6%/14.5% in 4Q2012/4Q2015). Within 1st-line, changes in drug utilization from 4Q2012/4Q2015 were: INJ:93.5%/56.8%, ORAL:2.0%/32.3%, INF:4.2%/10.5%; within 2nd-line, INJ:51.8%/19.4%, ORAL:18.9%/59.2%, INF:28.6%/20.3%; within 3rd and later lines, INJ:17.8%/9.9%, ORAL:44.1%/68.0%, INF:36.2%/21.0%. Among the overall cohort, mean EDSS scores at the time of study data collection remained stable from 4Q2012/4Q2015 for INJ (2.08/2.00) & INF (3.63/3.65), while EDSS scores decreased for ORAL (3.18/2.35).
Conclusions: In this study cohort, adoption of oral DMTs increased dramatically; displacing the use of injectables and corresponding to a shift in prescription driver trends. Most recent EDSS scores indicated lower disease severity among users of oral DMTs, a likely consequence of their 1st line penetration. Impact of observed treatment patterns and treatment sequencing strategies on patient outcomes warrant further scrutiny.
Disclosure:
Siva Narayanan: nothing to disclose
Simone Gabriele: nothing to disclose
Rachael Hooper: nothing to disclose
Joanna White: nothing to disclose