Objective: Disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) can reduce multiple sclerosis (MS) relapse rates; however, effectiveness of treatments may vary. It is important to understand real-world treatment patterns in the context of MS relapses. We describe MS relapses related to treatment patterns among patients who switch treatment after their first DMT. Methods: IBM MarketScan research databases were used to identify adult patients with MS who switched DMTs (index-first switch) after being newly treated with a DMT from January 2009 through March 2017, with 12 months of continuous enrollment pre-and post-index. Non-persistence was defined as discontinuing (at least 60 days without DMT) or switching DMTs. MS relapses were defined using a validated claims-based algorithm. Multivariable analysis was used to examine odds of 12-month persistence, odds of post-index relapse, and number of relapses. Results: In total, 4121 patients with MS met all inclusion criteria (mean age 46.4 years; female 76.2%). Overall, 49.6% switched to an oral DMT, 36.5% to an injectable DMT, and 13.9% to an infusion DMT. Switching DMTs resulted in a 32.4% reduction in relapses between preand post-index. Only 54.6% of patients were persistent throughout the first year. Patients who switched to oral DMTs had 95% higher adjusted odds of persistence and 18% lower adjusted odds of a post-index period relapse than patients who switched to injectable DMTs. The number of baseline relapses was not associated with persistence but with 68% higher odds of a post-index relapse, with each additional baseline relapse associated with a 44% increase in number of post-index relapses. Conclusions: Among patients with MS who switched DMTs, persistence was consistently low regardless of treatment. Although persistence with oral DMTs was slightly higher than with injectable DMTs, overall results indicate poor persistence to second-line therapy and highlight the need to improve long-term persistence with DMTs.
Background Real-world studies of disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) in multiple sclerosis (MS) have reported suboptimal adherence. Objective We aimed to describe treatment patterns, relapses, healthcare resource utilization, and costs in MS patients experiencing their first observed DMT switch. Methods In this retrospective, claims database study, adult patients were selected if they had an MS diagnosis and DMT claim during the study period (1 January 2009-31 March 2019). Patients who switched to a new DMT between 1 January 2010 and 31 March 2018 were included. Adherence, persistence, relapses, and all-cause and MS-related healthcare utilization and costs were reported pre-and post-index. Results In total, 1554 MS patients were identified; the mean age was 46 years and most (74%) were female. The majority of patients switched from an injectable DMT (n = 1116; 71.8%), and patients generally switched to an oral DMT (n = 878; 57%). Among patients who switched DMTs, 46.0% (n = 715) were nonadherent, 42% (n = 645) were nonpersistent, and 21.5% (n = 334) relapsed in the 12 months post-switch. An increase in all-cause and MS-related healthcare costs was observed pre-to post-index for all patients. Cost drivers included outpatient visit costs and pharmacy prescriptions. Compared with patients who switched to an injectable DMT, those who switched to an oral DMT had significantly higher persistence and adherence. No significant difference was observed in post-index relapse or all-cause and MS-related total cost of care. Conclusion Low adherence and poor persistence remain following an initial DMT switch; however, patients who switched to oral DMTs had higher persistence and adherence.
Plain Language SummaryMultiple sclerosis (MS) is a disabling disease that is treated with disease-modifying therapies (DMTs). Little is known about how patients with MS take their medication, how disease progression may change with treatment, or what the impact of switching to a new DMT is on the cost of care. In an analysis of commercially insured individuals, patients with MS were examined before and after switching to a new DMT. Results showed that the patients most often switched from an injectable medication to an oral DMT; however, a large proportion of patients did not take the prescription as directed by their physician. Additionally, a large proportion of patients did not stay on their new therapy. Nearly one-third of patients experienced an MS relapse after they switched to a new treatment, and healthcare costs increased following the treatment switch. A higher proportion of patients switching to an oral DMT took their medication as prescribed by their physicians, stayed on therapy, and incurred smaller increases in cost compared with patients switching to injectable medications. Despite such improvements, additional treatments are needed for patients with MS.
Introduction: We compared treatment switch patterns and healthcare costs among biologicnaive patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) who initiated apremilast or biologics. Methods: A 1:2 propensity score match was used to adjust administrative claims data for adults initiating apremilast or biologics from January 1, 2014, to September 30, 2016, for possible selection bias. Patients had at least 12 months of pre-and post-index continuous enrollment in the Optum Clinformatics TM Data Mart database. Outcomes included switch frequency, days to switch, adherence on index treatment, and healthcare costs (total and per patient per month). Switch rate was defined as the proportion of patients who switched to a new treatment after initiation of the index Enhanced Digital Features To view enhanced digital features for this article go to https://doi.org/10.6084/ m9.figshare.11830302.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.