Search

Background: We aim to provide up-to-date real-world evidence on the persistence, adherence, healthcare resource utilization, and costs of multiple sclerosis (MS) by comparing ocrelizumab to other disease-modifying treatments (DMTs) and within different DMT sequences. Methods: We included 3371 people with MS who first received or switched DMT prescriptions from January 2018 to December 2022; they were identified through hospital discharge records, drug prescriptions, and exemption codes from the Campania Region (South Italy). We calculated persistence (time from the first prescription to discontinuation or switching to another DMT), adherence (proportion of days covered (PDC)), DMT costs, and MS hospital admissions and related costs. Results: The most frequently prescribed DMT was dimethyl fumarate (n = 815; age 38.90 ± 11.91 years; 69.5% females), followed by ocrelizumab (n = 682; age 46.46 ± 11.29 years; 56.3%); 28.8% of the patients treated with ocrelizumab were naïve to DMTs. Using ocrelizumab as a statistical reference, the risk of discontinuation was higher for other highly active (HR = 6.32; 95%CI = 3.16, 12.63; p < 0.01) and low-/medium-efficacy DMTs (HR = 10.10; 95%CI = 5.10, 19.77; p < 0.01); adherence was lower for other highly active DMTs (Coeff = −0.07; 95%CI = −0.10, −0.04; p < 0.01) and low-/medium-efficacy DMTs (Coeff = −0.16; 95%CI = −0.19, −0.14; p < 0.01). monthly DMT costs were higher for other highly active DMTs (Coeff = 77.45; 95%CI = 29.36, 125.53; p < 0.01) but lower for low-/medium-efficacy DMTs (Coeff = −772.31; 95%CI = −816.95, −727.66; p < 0.01). The hospital admissions and related costs of MS were similar between ocrelizumab, other highly active DMTs, and other low-/medium-efficacy DMTs, and with ocrelizumab as the first-line DMT after other highly active DMTs and after low-/medium-efficacy DMTs, which was possibly due to the low number of observations. Conclusions: From 2018 to 2022, ocrelizumab was among the most frequently prescribed DMTs, with 28.8% prescriptions to incident MS patients, confirming its relevance in clinical practice. Ocrelizumab was associated with the highest persistence and adherence, pointing towards its favorable benefit–risk profile. The costs of ocrelizumab were lower than those of other highly active DMTs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: We aim to provide real-world evidence on the use of ocrelizumab for treating multiple sclerosis (MS), with specific regard to prescription pattern, adherence, persistence, healthcare resource utilization and related costs, also in relation to other disease-modifying treatments (DMTs). Methods: We included 2495 people with MS from the Campania Region (South Italy) who received first or switch DMT prescription from Jan 2018 to Dec 2020, and with at least 6-month follow-up. We collected hospital discharge records, drug prescriptions, and related costs, and calculated persistence (time from first prescription to discontinuation or switch to other DMT), adherence (proportion of days covered (PDC)), annualized hospitalization rate (AHR) for MS-related hospital admissions, and DMT costs. Results: Ocrelizumab was the most commonly prescribed DMT (n = 399; age = 45.74 ± 10.98 years; females = 224), after dimethyl fumarate (n = 588) and fingolimod (n = 401); 26% patients treated with ocrelizumab were naïve. When compared with ocrelizumab, the risk of discontinuation was higher for other highly active DMTs (HR = 3.78; p = 0.01), and low/medium efficacy DMTs (HR = 7.59; p < 0.01). When compared with ocrelizumab, PDC was similar to other highly active DMTs (Coeff = 0.01; p = 0.31), but higher for low/medium efficacy DMTs (Coeff = 0.09; p < 0.01). When compared with ocrelizumab, AHR was similar to other highly active DMTs (Coeff = 0.01; p = 0.51), and low/medium efficacy DMTs (Coeff = 0.01; p = 0.55). When compared with ocrelizumab, DMT monthly costs were higher for other highly active DMTs (Coeff = 92.30; p < 0.01), but lower for low/medium efficacy DMTs (Coeff = − 1043.61; p < 0.01). Discussion: Ocrelizumab was among the most frequently prescribed DMTs, with 26% prescriptions to treatment-naïve patients, suggesting its relevance in addressing unmet clinical needs (e.g., first approved treatment for primary progressive MS). Ocrelizumab was associated with the highest persistence, confirming its favorable benefit-risk profile. Costs for ocrelizumab were lower than those associated to similarly effective DMTs, in absence of changes in healthcare resource utilization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Emergency hospital admissions are common in multiple sclerosis (MS), and can highlight unmet medical needs. Objectives: To evaluate burden, predictors and outcomes of MS emergency admissions. Methods: This is a population-based study, conducted in the Campania Region (South Italy) from 2015 to 2019, using hospital discharge records, drug prescriptions and outpatients. The risk of emergency hospital admissions and the likelihood of worse outcomes were evaluated using the Cox regression and multinomial logistic regression models, respectively, in relation to age, sex, disease-modifying treatments (DMTs), comorbidities and adherence. Results: We recorded 1225 emergency admissions for 1001 patients (out of 5765 prevalent MS patients), overall costing 4,143,764.67 EUR. The risk of emergency admissions increased with age (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.02; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.01, 1.03; p < 0.01) and comorbidities (HR = 1.62; p < 0.01), and decreased in patients using DMTs (interferon beta/peg-interferon beta/glatiramer acetate HR = 0.19; p < 0.01; teriflunomide/dimethyl-fumarate/fingolimod HR = 0.18; p < 0.01, and alemtuzumab/cladribine/natalizumab/ocrelizumab HR = 0.21; p < 0.01), and with higher adherence (HR = 0.18; 95% CI = 0.13, 0.26; p < 0.01). Following emergency admission, older age was associated with probability of death (n = 63) (odds ratio (OR) = 1.06; p < 0.01) and discharge to long-term facility (n = 65) (OR = 1.03; p = 0.01). Conclusion: With 17% people with MS requiring emergency medical care over 5 years, improved management of DMTs and comorbidities could potentially reduce their medical, social and financial burden. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]