A comparison of clinical, utilization, and cost outcomes between oral treatments for multiple sclerosis.

BACKGROUND: Multiple sclerosis (MS) affects nearly 1 million people in the United States and causes significant disability and economic loss. Among the first available oral MS treatment options, clinical outcome comparisons and associated health care resource utilization are not clearly defined. OBJECTIVE: To compare MS outcomes, health care resource utilization, and relative costs across treatment with dimethyl fumarate (DMF), fingolimod (FG), or teriflunomide (TERI) among Medicare Advantage Prescription Drug (MAPD) plan and commercially insured beneficiaries. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used the Humana Research Database. Eligible study patients had their first MS medication claim for oral DMG, FG, or TERI between January 1, 2013, and December 31, 2018. Patients were followed for a minimum of 12 months (mean follow-up = 3.8 years), until the earliest of the following occurred: health plan disenrollment, the end of the study period, or death. Study cohorts were balanced with inverse probability of treatment weighting. All-cause and MS-related health care resource utilization, time on therapy, and time after therapy were compared using inverse probability of treatment-adjusted multivariate generalized linear models across treatment groups. Relative costs were compared using a generalized linear model with a gamma distribution and log link. RESULTS: We identified 1,442 patients in 3 medication groups: DMF (n = 843), FG (n = 213), and TERI (n = 386). After weighting, there were no significant differences between the medication groups on demographic and clinical characteristics. Time on therapy (days) was significantly different across medication groups (P < 0.001). Time on therapy was longest for FG compared with the DM and TERI groups (644 vs 462 vs 521). The number discontinuing the index medication was significantly different for FG vs DMF vs TERI (74.7% vs 85.3% vs 80.7%; P < 0.001). FG had the lowest discontinuation rate. The mean (SD) annualized relapse rates (ARRs) were 0.47 (0.80), 0.42 (1.3), and 0.53 (1.3) (P = 0.037) for DMF, FG, and TERI, respectively. The percentage of those experiencing inpatient stays and the number of stays (mean [SD]) were significantly different among the FG group vs DMF vs TERI (29.9% vs 34.1% vs 40.9%; P < 0.001) and (0.57 [2.9] vs 0.74 [1.9] vs 0.91 [3.5]; P = 0.007), respectively. All-cause emergency department visits and the number of visits (mean [SD]) were significantly different for the FG cohort vs DMF vs TERI (46% vs 54.3% vs 61%; P < 0.001) and (1.84 [7.7] vs 2.38 [5.9] vs 2.87 [8.8]; P = 0.002), respectively. FG had the lowest impatient stays and emergency department visits of the 3 groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with MS initiated on FG used fewer health care resources and experienced lower ARR compared with patients on DMF and TERI.

Comparative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of natalizumab and fingolimod in rapidly evolving severe relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis in the United Kingdom.

AIM: To evaluate the real-world comparative effectiveness and the cost-effectiveness, from a UK National Health Service perspective, of natalizumab versus fingolimod in patients with rapidly evolving severe relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RES-RRMS). METHODS: Real-world data from the MSBase Registry were obtained for patients with RES-RRMS who were previously either naive to disease-modifying therapies or had been treated with interferon-based therapies, glatiramer acetate, dimethyl fumarate, or teriflunomide (collectively known as BRACETD). Matched cohorts were selected by 3-way multinomial propensity score matching, and the annualized relapse rate (ARR) and 6-month-confirmed disability worsening (CDW6M) and improvement (CDI6M) were compared between treatment groups. Comparative effectiveness results were used in a cost-effectiveness model comparing natalizumab and fingolimod, using an established Markov structure over a lifetime horizon with health states based on the Expanded Disability Status Scale. Additional model data sources included the UK MS Survey 2015, published literature, and publicly available sources. RESULTS: In the comparative effectiveness analysis, we found a significantly lower ARR for patients starting natalizumab compared with fingolimod (rate ratio [RR] = 0.65; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.57-0.73) or BRACETD (RR = 0.46; 95% CI, 0.42-0.53). Similarly, CDI6M was higher for patients starting natalizumab compared with fingolimod (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.25; 95% CI, 1.01-1.55) and BRACETD (HR = 1.46; 95% CI, 1.16-1.85). In patients starting fingolimod, we found a lower ARR (RR = 0.72; 95% CI, 0.65-0.80) compared with starting BRACETD, but no difference in CDI6M (HR = 1.17; 95% CI, 0.91-1.50). Differences in CDW6M were not found between the treatment groups. In the base-case cost-effectiveness analysis, natalizumab dominated fingolimod (0.302 higher quality-adjusted life-years [QALYs] and £17,141 lower predicted lifetime costs). Similar cost-effectiveness results were observed across sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: This MSBase Registry analysis suggests that natalizumab improves clinical outcomes when compared with fingolimod, which translates to higher QALYs and lower costs in UK patients with RES-RRMS.

There are several medications used to treat people with relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis, such as interferon-based therapies (Betaferon/Betaseron (US), Rebif, Avonex, Extavia), glatiramer acetate (Copaxone), teriflunomide (Aubagio), and dimethyl fumarate (Tecfidera), collectively named BRACETD. Other treatments for multiple sclerosis (MS) have a narrower use, such as natalizumab (Tysabri) or fingolimod (Gilenya), among others.This study objective was to assess how well natalizumab and fingolimod helped treating MS (clinical effectiveness) and subsequently estimate what the cost of these treatments is in comparison to the benefit they bring to people with rapidly evolving severe MS that use them in the United Kingdom (UK) (cost-effectiveness).We used an international disease registry (MSBase), which collects clinical data from people with MS in various centers around the world to compare the effectiveness of natalizumab, fingolimod and BRACETD treatments. We used a technique called propensity score matching to obtain results from comparable patient groups. People treated with natalizumab had better disease control, namely with fewer relapses and higher improvement on their disability level, than patients on fingolimod or BRACETD. Conversely, there were no differences between each group of people on a measure called disability worsening.Based on these clinical results, we built an economic model that simulates the lifetime costs and consequences of treating people with MS with natalizumab in comparison with fingolimod. We found that using natalizumab was less costly and was more effective compared to using fingolimod in UK patients.

The disease-modifying therapy utilisation and cost trend for multiple sclerosis in Australia between 2013 and 2022.

BACKGROUND: The MS disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) prescribing landscape in Australia have changed over time. OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the utilisation and cost trends of MS-related DMTs in Australia over 10 years and investigated differences between States/Territories. METHODS: The prescription and costs of 16 DMTs were extracted from the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme for 2013-2022. Descriptive approaches analysed the total number of people prescribed DMTs and total DMT costs per 10,000 population, proportions of prescriptions/costs by DMT groups and the number of people prescribed each individual DMT and costs of each DMT over the 10-year period. All estimates were for Australia and each State/Territory individually. RESULTS: The number of people prescribed DMT and costs per 10,000 population had substantial growth between 2013 and 2022: 125%/164% for Australia, and 94%-251%/129%-373% for individual States/Territories. Higher efficacy group accounted for 54% of total people prescribed DMTs in 2013 and 75% in 2022. Fingolimod was the most popular DMT until 2020, then was dominated by ocrelizumab. The trends of individual DMT prescriptions and costs differed between states particularly in Western Australia (WA), Tasmania and Northern Territory (NT). CONCLUSION: DMT prescriptions and costs continuously increased over the last decade, particularly for higher efficacy DMTs, and their trends differed between States/Territories.

Benefits of sphingosine-1-phosphate receptor modulators in relapsing MS estimated with a treatment sequence model.

BACKGROUND: Three sphingosine-1-phosphate receptor (S1PR) modulators are currently available as disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) for relapsing MS in the Netherlands (i.e. fingolimod, ozanimod and ponesimod). We aimed to identify which S1PR modulator yields the highest benefit from a health-economic and societal perspective during a patient's lifespan. METHODS: Incorporating Dutch DMT list prices, we used the ErasmusMC/iMTA MS model to compare DMT sequences, including S1PR modulators and eight other DMT classes, for treatment-naïve patients with relapsing MS in terms of health outcomes (number of lifetime relapses, time to Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) 6, lifetime quality-adjusted life years (QALYs)) and cost-effectiveness (net health benefit (NHB)). We estimated the influence of list price and EDSS progression on cost-effectiveness outcomes. RESULTS: In deterministic and probabilistic analysis, DMT sequences with ponesimod have lower lifetime costs and higher QALYs resulting in a higher average NHB compared to sequences with other S1PR modulators. Ponesimod remains the most cost-effective S1PR modulator when EDSS progression is class-averaged. Given the variable effects on disability progression, list price reductions could make fingolimod but not ozanimod more cost-effective than ponesimod. CONCLUSION: Our model favours ponesimod among the S1PR modulators for the treatment of relapsing MS. This implies that prioritizing ponesimod over other S1PR modulators translates into a more efficacious spending of national healthcare budget without reducing benefit for people with MS. Prioritizing cost-effective choices when counselling patients contributes to affordable and accessible MS care.

Assessment of Functional Capacity of Immune System in Patients with Multiple Sclerosis using QuantiFERON Monitor.

Background: The QuantiFERON®-Monitor (QFM) is an assay that measures interferon-γ production and was developed to provide an objective marker of complex immune response. In this study, we evaluated the use of the QFM test in patients with two forms of multiple sclerosis (MS), relapsing-remitting form treated with fingolimod (fMS) and secondarily progressive form not treated pharmacologically (pMS), and in healthy controls (HC). We hypothesized that IFN-γ levels would be lower in those subjects who are relatively more immunosuppressed and higher in those with normal or activated immune function. Methods: This single-center observational study was conducted from November 2020 to October 2021 and compared results in three groups of patients: 86 healthy controls, 96 patients with pMS, and 78 fMS. Combination of lyophilized stimulants was added to 1 ml heparinized whole blood within 8 hr of collection. Plasmatic IFN-γ was measured using the ELISA kit for the QFM and data were obtained in IU/ml. Results: The results showed that controls had nearly 2-fold higher levels of IFN-γ (QFM score) in median (q25, q75) 228.00 (112.20, 358.67) than the MS patient groups: pMS 144.80 (31.23, 302.00); fMS 130.50 (39.95, 217.07) which is statistically significant difference P-value: HC vs. pMS = 0.0071; HC vs. fMS = 0.0468. This result was also confirmed by a validation analysis to exclude impact of variable factors, such as disease duration and Expanded Disability Status Scale scores. Conclusions: Results showed that controls had higher levels of IFN-γ production than the MS patient groups and suggest that MS patients included in this study have a lower ability of immune system activation than HC. Results confirm that fingolimod is able to suppress production of IFN-γ. The fact that the QFM score of MS patients is significantly lower than that of HC may indicate a dysfunctional state of the immune system in baseline conditions.

The Patient and Clinician Assessment of Gastrointestinal (GI) Related Adverse Events Associated with Oral Disease-Modifying Therapies in Multiple Sclerosis: A Qualitative Study.

INTRODUCTION: Current guidelines for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) call for treatment with disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) early in the disease to prevent relapses and accumulation of neurologic impairment and disability. However, patients taking certain oral DMTs may experience gastrointestinal (GI)-related adverse events (AEs), particularly at dose titration. We conducted qualitative research with healthcare professionals (HCPs) and patients in Canada to contextualize their experiences with three oral DMTs: dimethyl fumarate (Tecfidera®), fingolimod (Gilenya®), and teriflunomide (Aubagio®). The objectives of this study were to (1) gather qualitative data to better understand the patient and HCP experience of GI AEs in oral MS DMT treatment in Canada and (2) determine to what extent two patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments used in recent oral DMT trials capture what is important to patients regarding GI AEs in oral MS DMT treatment (content validity) and to provide qualitative data to help interpret PRO scores. METHODS: This was a qualitative, non-interventional, descriptive, cross-sectional study comprising HCP and patient interviews conducted in English and French, using a 1:1 semi-structured interview approach. RESULTS: Patients reported 16 unique GI AE concepts related to oral DMTs. The most commonly reported symptoms were diarrhea, indigestion, and nausea. While patients acknowledged the negative impact associated with GI-related AEs, most characterized the treatment experience as positive, focusing on preference for oral administration, perceived efficacy of DMTs in terms of lack of MS relapses, slowed progression of their disease, and improvement in MS symptoms. Results supported the content validity (relevance, comprehension, and comprehensiveness) of the two PROs assessed. HCP feedback reinforced patient perspectives on both GI concepts and the two PRO instruments. CONCLUSION: Outcomes of these research activities include experiential data on the symptom and impact experience of oral DMTs in MS from both patients and HCPs that contribute to the process of determining therapeutic value.

Persistence, adherence, healthcare resource utilization and costs for ocrelizumab in the real-world of the Campania Region of Italy.

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.

Ofatumumabe em primeira linha de terapia modificadora do curso da doença para o tratamento da esclerose múltipla recorrente / First-line ofatumumab therapy disease course modifier for the treatment of recurrent multiple sclerosis

INTRODUÇÃO: A Esclerose Múltipla (EM) é uma doença imunogênica, inflamatória, desmielinizante e neurodegenerativa que acomete a substância branca e a cinzenta do sistema nervoso central (SNC). O quadro clínico se manifesta, na maior parte das vezes, por surtos ou ataques agudos, podendo entrar em remissão de forma espontânea ou com o uso de medicamentos. Denomina-se esclerose múltipla recorrente (EMR) o agrupamento das formas clínicas ativas esclerose múltipla remitente recorrente (EMRR); esclerose múltipla secundária progressiva (EMSP) e síndrome clinicamente isolada (Clinically Isolated Syndrome - CIS), com presença de recorrências ou sinais radiológicos de atividade de doença, ou seja, as formas que são caracterizadas pela ocorrência de surtos inflamatórios. O tratamento da EM pode ser complexo, com o uso de condutas medicamentosas e não medicamentosas. O objetivo do tratamento medicamentoso é a melhora clínica, o aumento da capacidade funcional, a redução de comorbidades e a atenuação de sintomas. As terapias modificadoras do curso da doença (TMCD) visam a reduzir as células imunogênicas circulantes, suprimir a adesão destas ao epitélio e, consequentemente, reduzir a sua migração para o parênquima e a resposta inflamatória decorrente. As seguint

Comparative Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Natalizumab and Fingolimod in Patients with Inadequate Response to Disease-Modifying Therapies in Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis in the United Kingdom.

BACKGROUND: Patients with highly active relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis inadequately responding to first-line therapies (interferon-based therapies, glatiramer acetate, dimethyl fumarate, and teriflunomide, known collectively as "BRACETD") often switch to natalizumab or fingolimod. OBJECTIVE: The aim was to estimate the comparative effectiveness of switching to natalizumab or fingolimod or within BRACETD using real-world data and to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of switching to natalizumab versus fingolimod using a United Kingdom (UK) third-party payer perspective. METHODS: Real-world data were obtained from MSBase for patients relapsing on BRACETD in the year before switching to natalizumab or fingolimod or within BRACETD. Three-way-multinomial-propensity-score-matched cohorts were identified, and comparisons between treatment groups were conducted for annualised relapse rate (ARR) and 6-month-confirmed disability worsening (CDW6M) and improvement (CDI6M). Results were applied in a cost-effectiveness model over a lifetime horizon using a published Markov structure with health states based on the Expanded Disability Status Scale. Other model parameters were obtained from the UK MS Survey 2015, published literature, and publicly available UK sources. RESULTS: The MSBase analysis found a significant reduction in ARR (rate ratio [RR] = 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.57-0.72; p < 0.001) and an increase in CDI6M (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.67; 95% CI 1.30-2.15; p < 0.001) for switching to natalizumab compared with BRACETD. For switching to fingolimod, the reduction in ARR (RR = 0.91; 95% CI 0.81-1.03; p = 0.133) and increase in CDI6M (HR = 1.30; 95% CI 0.99-1.72; p = 0.058) compared with BRACETD were not significant. Switching to natalizumab was associated with a significant reduction in ARR (RR = 0.70; 95% CI 0.62-0.79; p < 0.001) and an increase in CDI6M (HR = 1.28; 95% CI 1.01-1.62; p = 0.040) compared to switching to fingolimod. No evidence of difference in CDW6M was found between treatment groups. Natalizumab dominated (higher quality-adjusted life-years [QALYs] and lower costs) fingolimod in the base-case cost-effectiveness analysis (0.453 higher QALYs and £20,843 lower costs per patient). Results were consistent across sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: This novel real-world analysis suggests a clinical benefit for therapy escalation to natalizumab versus fingolimod based on comparative effectiveness results, translating to higher QALYs and lower costs for UK patients inadequately responding to BRACETD.

Assessment of Macular Function by Multifocal Electroretinogram in Patients with Multiple Sclerosis Treated with Fingolimod.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to evaluate whether treatment with fingolimod (FTY) may induce functional changes on the macular pre-ganglionic retinal elements in patients affected by relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RR-MS) without optic neuritis (ON). METHODS: This case-control observational and retrospective study assessed multifocal electroretinogram (mfERG) responses from 35 healthy controls (mean age 43.58 ± 5.76 years), 41 patients with RR-MS without ON (mean age 40.64 ± 4.83 years, MS-noFTY group), and from 21 patients with RR-MS without ON (mean age 42.38 ± 12.34 years) and treated with fingolimod (Gilenya®, Novartis Europharm, 0.5 mg/day) (MS-FTY group). MfERG N1 and P1 implicit times (ITs), and N1-P1 response amplitude densities (RADs) were measured from concentric rings (R) with increasing foveal eccentricity: 0-5° (R1), 5-10° (R2), 10-15° (R3), 15-20° (R4), 20-25° (R5). We considered R1 and R2 as "central macular areas" and R3, R4 and R5 as "more eccentric retinal areas". In the MS-FTY group, mfERG recordings were performed between 6 and 12 months (mean 7.2 ± 1.5 months) from the start of FTY. RESULTS: In the MS-FTY group, the mean values of mfERG N1 and P1 ITs and RADs detected in both central macular areas (R1 and R2) and in more eccentric retinal areas (R3, R4 and R5) were not significantly different (p > 0.01) with respect to those of control and MS-noFTY groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our mfERG results suggest that the chronic use of FTY does not induce a dysfunction of pre-ganglionic retinal elements located in the 0-25° of central retina. Since FTY does not cause any retinal functional abnormality, we suggest that FTY treatment could not produce any toxic effect on pre-ganglionic retinal elements even in the absence of macular oedema.

Disease modifying therapies for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: Use and costs in Australia (1996-2019).

BACKGROUND: New disease modifying therapies (DMT) to control relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) have been introduced to the market in the past few years and are now widely used in Australia. OBJECTIVE: To analyse the dispensed use of government subsidised RRMS DMTs in Australia from 1996 to 2019. METHODS: We obtained data of dispensed use of DMTs from the Australian Government's Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) administered by Medicare Australia. We measured use as defined daily dose (DDD) per 100,000 population per day. We obtained jurisdictional population data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics. RESULTS: Total DMT use increased by an average of 18% annually, from 2.4 (in 1996) to 69.9 DDD/100,000/day in 2019. Interferon ß1B was the most commonly used medicine between 1996 and 2000, Interferon ß1A between 2001 and 2014, and fingolimod subsequently. Among Australian states, Tasmania (the southernmost state) had the highest dispensed DMT use of 94.6 DDD/100,000/day in 2019. Concession beneficiaries under the Government's PBS had both lower use and cost per patient than general beneficiaries did. Fingolimod and ocrelizumab accounted for 55% of total expenditure on MS drug therapy in 2019. CONCLUSION: The use of oral DMTs might increasingly replace parenteral treatments in the near future. Given the current substantial government expenditure on oral DMTs, it will be imperative to examine the real world effectiveness of DMTs.

Eficacia y seguridad de fingolimod en pacientes adultos con esclerosis múltiple recurrente remitente con falla al tratamiento con interferón beta / Efficacy and safety of fingolimod in adult patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis with interferon beta treatment failure

INTRODUCCIÓN: El presente dictamen expone la evaluación de la eficacia y seguridad de fingolimod en el tratamiento de pacientes adultos con esclerosis múltiple recurrente remitente con falla al tratamiento con interferón beta. La esclerosis múltiple (EM) es una enfermedad inflamatoria y neurodegenerativa del cerebro y la médula espinal, caracterizada por episodios de disfunción neurológica que usualmente presentan recuperación; aunque también puede presentar un curso progresivo gradual. La esperanza de vida de los pacientes con EM es de 7 a 14 años menos que la población general. Más de la mitad de las muertes de pacientes con EM están directamente relacionadas a complicaciones de la enfermedad. Fingolimod, producto farmacéutico de administración oral, es un modulador del receptor de la esfingosina 1-fosfato, que, al ser metabolizado, da lugar al metabolito activo fingolimod fosfato. El metabolito activo actúa como antagonista funcional del receptor S1P, bloqueando la capacidad de los linfocitos de salir de los ganglios linfáticos; lo que produce una redistribución de los linfocitos sin disminución en su número. Este efecto reduciría la infiltración de células linfocíticas patógenas al sistema nervioso central; disminuyendo así la inflamación y lesión del tejido nervioso. A pesar que en EsSalud se dispone de interferón beta-1b para el tratamiento de la EM recurrente-remitente (EMRR) y de interferón beta-1a para pacientes con EMRR que presentan eventos adversos al tratamiento previo con interferón beta-1b, existen pacientes que no logran un control adecuado de la enfermedad con la terapia basada en interferón beta. Por ello, existe el interés de brindar una terapia que disminuya la tasa de recaída anualizada por la EMRR y mejore además la calidad de vida. Así, especialistas de EsSalud consideran que el uso de fingolimod beneficiaría a los pacientes con EMRR y falla al tratamiento con interferón beta. METODOLOGÍA: Se realizó una búsqueda de la literatura científica con el objetivo de identificar evidencia sobre la eficacia y seguridad de fingolimod, comparado con la mejor terapia de soporte, en pacientes adultos con EMRR con falla al tratamiento con interferón beta. Para identificar los documentos de interés para la presente evaluación, se buscó evidencia disponible en las siguientes bases de datos bibliográficas: PubMed, The Cochrane Library y LILACS. Adicionalmente, se realizó una búsqueda en sitios web pertenecientes a grupos que realizan evaluaciones de tecnologías sanitarias y guías de práctica clínica, incluyendo The Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH), Scottish Medicines Consortium (SMC), The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG), Haute Authorité de Santé (HAS), el portal BRISA (Base Regional de Informes de Evaluación de Tecnologías en Salud de las Américas), y sitios web de organizaciones internacionales en neurología. Adicionalmente, se llevó a cabo una búsqueda manual en el portal ClinicalTrials.gov del National Institutes of Health e International Clinical Trials Registry Platform de la Organización Mundial de la Salud (http://apps.who.int/trialsearch/) para la identificación de estudios que emplearan la tecnología de interés. Finalmente, se revisaron protocolos para revisiones sistemáticas (RS) que pudieran contemplar el uso de la tecnología de interés en el portal PROSPERO del Centre for Reviews and Dissemination de la University of York (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/) y en el Systematic Review Register del Joanna Briggs Institute Centre (https://joannabriggs.org/resources/systematic_review_register). RESULTADOS: Se describe la evidencia disponible según el tipo de publicación, siguiendo lo indicado en los criterios de elegibilidad. CONCLUSIONES:  En el presente documento, se evaluó la mejor evidencia científica disponible hasta la actualidad sobre la eficacia y seguridad de fingolimod en pacientes adultos con esclerosis múltiple recurrente-remitente (EMRR) con falla al tratamiento con interferón beta.  Se incluyeron cinco documentos: dos GPC elaboradas por la AAN y la ECTRIMS/EAN, dos ETS realizadas por NICE y SMC, y el análisis post hoc del ECA FREEDOMS. Este ECA fue incluido como evidencia indirecta dado que evaluó a una población más amplia que la población de interés del presente dictamen. Las GPC de la AAN y ECTRIMS/EAN recomiendan el empleo de otra terapia modificadora de la enfermedad, incluyendo dentro las alternativas a fingolimod, en el caso de que no se presente una respuesta favorable a la terapia con una terapia modificadora de la enfermedad en pacientes con EMRR como el interferón beta. Ninguna de estas GPC establece una recomendación específica sobre el uso de fingolimod en pacientes con fallo a la terapia con interferón beta. Las ETS de NICE y SMC recomiendan fingolimod para el tratamiento de la EMRR altamente activa en adultos, solo si los pacientes tienen una tasa de recaída sin cambios o aumentada o recaídas graves en curso en comparación con el año anterior a pesar del tratamiento adecuado con interferón beta, y que la compañía fabricante proporcione fingolimod con una reducción de costo que haga costo-efectivo el empleo de fingolimod en el sistema sanitario británico y escocés. Cabe precisar que este tipo de regulaciones de costo de medicamentos no son extrapolables al sistema sanitario de EsSalud. En el análisis post hoc del ECA FREEDOMS, para el subgrupo de pacientes con EMRR previamente tratados con interferón beta, se observó menor tasa de recaída anualizada en el grupo que recibió fingolimod, comparado al que recibió placebo. No se observó diferencia en la progresión de la discapacidad para pacientes con EMRR previamente tratados con interferón beta entre los grupos de fingolimod y placebo. No se reportaron resultados sobre las pruebas para evaluar discapacidad (EDSS o MSFC), ni resultados de seguridad (eventos adversos). Entre las principales limitaciones del ECA FREEDOMS, este no fue diseñado para evaluar fingolimod en la población de interés del presente dictamen, sino para una población más amplia (pacientes con EMRR sin tratamiento o previamente tratados con interferón beta u otra terapia modificadora de la enfermedad). Dado que los resultados del ECA FREEDOMS para pacientes con EMRR previamente tratados con interferón beta provienen de un análisis post hoc, estos son de tipo exploratorio, no siendo de este modo concluyentes para determinar eficacia. Adicionalmente, el desenlace primario (tasa de recaída anualizada) presenta limitaciones, al ser un desenlace subjetivo, con la posibilidad de introducción de sesgos por parte del evaluador o el paciente. Asimismo, no se dispone de resultados específicos para pruebas de discapacidad como EDSS o MSFC, limitándose la evaluación del beneficio de esta tecnología en los pacientes de interés, siendo que se recomienda que la evaluación del beneficio de una tecnología no solo sea medida desde este desenlace, sino de la conjunción de lo observado en varios desenlaces de eficacia. En cuanto a la seguridad, la ausencia de información sobre eventos adversos en el subgrupo de pacientes con EMRR previamente tratados con interferón beta, no permite establecer conclusiones sobre la seguridad del empleo de la tecnología. Ante la limitada evidencia para la presente evaluación, se consideró la opinión del experto clínico de la institución. El clínico señala que, dado que fingolimod emplea un mecanismo de acción distinto al interferón beta, sería de utilidad para el control de la enfermedad en pacientes con EMRR y falla a interferón beta. Adicionalmente, fingolimod es fácil de administrar comparado al interferón beta, (vía oral comparada a la administración intramuscular o subcutánea del interferón beta 1a y 1b, respectivamente), lo que facilita su administración. Lo descrito por el especialista está en línea con lo descrito por las GPC, las que incluyen a fingolimod como alternativa terapéutica en pacientes con fracaso a terapia con interferón beta u otra terapia modificadora de efecto. De este modo, la evidencia científica disponible a la fecha sugiere que fingolimod tendría un beneficio en pacientes con EMRR con fallo al tratamiento con interferón beta, bajo los siguientes argumentos técnicos: 1) La evidencia indirecta procedente del ECA FREEDOMS sugiere un beneficio favorable para fingolimod en comparación con placebo en pacientes con EMRR; 2) aunque las GPC revisadas en este dictamen no generan recomendaciones para la población de interés de manera específica, se señala a fingolimod como una alternativa en pacientes con una respuesta no favorable al tratamiento previo con alguna terapia modificadora de la enfermedad (como el interferón beta) y 3) el vacío terapéutico (en el sistema sanitario de EsSalud, a la fecha, los pacientes con EMRR y fallo a la terapia con interferón beta no cuentan con una terapia específica disponible). Por lo expuesto, el IETSI aprueba el uso de fingolimod en pacientes adultos con esclerosis múltiple recurrente remitente con falla al tratamiento con interferón b. La vigencia del presente dictamen es de 1 año, según lo establecido en el Anexo N° 1. Así, la continuación de dicha aprobación estará sujeta a la evaluación de los resultados obtenidos y de nueva evidencia que pueda surgir en el tiempo.

Two-year macular volume assessment in multiple sclerosis patients treated with fingolimod.

BACKGROUND: Fingolimod (FNG) is associated with the development of symptomatic macular edema (ME) in a small subset of multiple sclerosis (MS) patients. By using spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT), an increase in the total macular volume (TMV) was rarely detected during the first months of treatment. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study is to assess whether FNG treatment leads to long-term macular changes in a real-life setting. METHODS: Sixty RRMS patients starting FNG, according to therapeutic indication, were enrolled at three Italian MS centers and followed for 2 years. RESULTS: The mean TMV did not change between baseline and the follow-up. No patients experienced visual acuity drop during the follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Initiation of FNG in MS is associated with a modest, not significant, increase in macular volume followed by no further significant changes over 2 years, highlighting the good safety profile of such treatment in MS.

Cost-effectiveness of fingolimod versus interferon-ß1a for the treatment of pediatric-onset multiple sclerosis in Canada.

AIMS: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of fingolimod versus interferon (IFN)-ß1a at a dose of 30 µg per week for the treatment of relapsing pediatric-onset multiple sclerosis (POMS) in Canada. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A discrete-time Markov model was developed to compare fingolimod with IFN ß-1a over a time horizon of two years representing patients followed up to mean age of 18 years from a Canadian health care system perspective. Twenty-one health states based on the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) were considered: EDSS 0‒9 for relapsing multiple sclerosis (MS), EDSS 0‒9 for secondary progressive MS, and "Death." Relative treatment efficacy for fingolimod versus IFN-ß1a was estimated from the PARADIGMS study. Costs and resource use were obtained from published literature and Canadian sources. Utilities were estimated by mapping the Pediatric Quality of Life inventory data onto the Child Health Utility Index-9 Dimension using a published mapping algorithm. Future costs and benefits were discounted at 1.5% per annum. RESULTS: Compared with IFN ß-1a, fingolimod led to an increase in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) (0.125) with incremental costs (Canadian dollars [CAD] 2,977) and to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of CAD 23,886/QALY over a time horizon of two years representing patients followed up to mean age of 18 years. The monetary benefits of fingolimod treatment versus IFN ß-1a at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of CAD 50,000 per QALY gained were higher than the costs. One-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) both confirmed the robustness of the results. LIMITATIONS: The main limitations of this analysis primarily stem from the limited data availability in POMS. CONCLUSIONS: Fingolimod is cost effective compared with IFN ß-1a for the treatment of POMS over a time horizon of two years representing patients followed up to a mean age of 18 years in Canada.

Informe diário de evidências COVID-19: busca realizada em 2 de julho de 2020 / COVID-19 daily evidence report: search conducted on July 2, 2020

O Informe Diário de Evidências é uma produção do Ministério da Saúde que tem como objetivo acompanhar diariamente as publicações científicas sobre tratamento farmacológico e vacinas para a COVID-19. Dessa forma, são realizadas buscas estruturadas em bases de dados biomédicas, referente ao dia anterior desse informe. Não são incluídos estudos pré-clínicos (in vitro, in vivo, in silico). A frequência dos estudos é demonstrada de acordo com a sua classificação metodológica (revisões sistemáticas, ensaios clínicos randomizados, coortes, entre outros). Para cada estudo é apresentado um resumo com avaliação da qualidade metodológica. Essa avaliação tem por finalidade identificar o grau de certeza/confiança ou o risco de viés de cada estudo. Para tal, são utilizadas ferramentas já validadas e consagradas na literatura científica, na área de saúde baseada em evidências. Cabe ressaltar que o documento tem caráter informativo e não representa uma recomendação oficial do Ministério da Saúde sobre a temática. Foram encontrados 17 artigos e 9 protocolos.

Informe diário de evidências COVID-19: busca realizada em 10 de julho de 2020 / COVID-19 daily evidence report: search conducted on July 10, 2020

O Informe Diário de Evidências é uma produção do Ministério da Saúde que tem como objetivo acompanhar diariamente as publicações científicas sobre tratamento farmacológico e vacinas para a COVID-19. Dessa forma, são realizadas buscas estruturadas em bases de dados biomédicas, referentes ao dia anterior desse informe. Não são incluídos estudos pré-clínicos (in vitro, in vivo, in silico). A frequência dos estudos é demonstrada de acordo com a sua classificação metodológica (revisões sistemáticas, ensaios clínicos randomizados, coortes, entre outros). Para cada estudo é apresentado um resumo com avaliação da qualidade metodológica. Essa avaliação tem por finalidade identificar o grau de certeza/confiança ou o risco de viés de cada estudo. Para tal, são utilizadas ferramentas já validadas e consagradas na literatura científica, na área de saúde baseada em evidências. Cabe ressaltar que o documento tem caráter informativo e não representa uma recomendação oficial do Ministério da Saúde sobre a temática. Foram encontrados 20 artigos e 16 protocolos.

Informe diário de evidências COVID-19: busca realizada em 22 de maio de 2020 / COVID-19 daily evidence report: search conducted on May 22, 2020

O Informe Diário de Evidências é uma produção do Ministério da Saúde que tem como objetivo acompanhar diariamente as publicações científicas sobre tratamento farmacológico e vacinas para a COVID-19. Dessa forma, são realizadas buscas estruturadas em bases de dados biomédicas, referente ao dia anterior desse informe. Não são incluídos estudos pré-clínicos (in vitro, in vivo, in silico). A frequência dos estudos é demonstrada de acordo com a sua classificação metodológica (revisões sistemáticas, ensaios clínicos randomizados, coortes, entre outros). Para cada estudo é apresentado um resumo com avaliação da qualidade metodológica. Essa avaliação tem por finalidade identificar o grau de certeza/confiança ou o risco de viés de cada estudo. Para tal, são utilizadas ferramentas já validadas e consagradas na literatura científica, na área de saúde baseada em evidências. Cabe ressaltar que o documento tem caráter informativo e não representa uma recomendação oficial do Ministério da Saúde sobre a temática. Foram encontrados 21 artigos e 13 protocolos.

An alternative to product-specific pregnancy registries? PRIM; PRegnancy outcomes Intensive Monitoring.

Patient safety during pregnancy is an important concern. This article presents a method of using an industry safety database to access prospective pregnancy cases. This method, termed here 'PRegnancy outcomes Intensive Monitoring' (PRIM) was developed for fingolimod (Gilenya ™), a treatment option for multiple sclerosis (MS), due to slow enrollment in the company pregnancy registry. The aim of PRIM was to enhance the process of pregnancy data collection and improve data quality, and in particular to enable estimation of the proportion of major congenital malformation and other pregnancy outcomes. To do this, the spontaneous reports of maternal exposure to fingolimod in pregnancy or in the eight weeks immediately before the last menstrual period of patients not enrolled in the pregnancy registry were identified. Follow up checklists were sent at four time points: initial pregnancy report, end of pregnancy, infant attained 3 and 12 months of age. These focused on core data required for derivation of programmed analyses. From 01 Mar 2014 to 28 Feb 2018, a total of 831 prospective maternal exposures with 843 infants were reported, with fetal outcomes reported in 459/843 (54.4 %) of those infants. This enabled the calculation of proportions of pregnancy cases with the main pregnancy outcomes and of fetal cases with malformation. The number of reported pregnancies was significantly higher in PRIM than in the registry, showing that structured use of pharmacovigilance data enables speedier assessment of risks of maternal drug exposure.

Assessment of expression profile of microRNAs in multiple sclerosis patients treated with fingolimod.

Fingolimod is an immunotherapeutic drug approved in certain countries as first-line therapy for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). The drug has been shown to alter the expression of several coding and non-coding genes. In the current study, we assessed the expression of miR-506-3p, miR-217, miR-381-3p, miR-1827, miR-449a and miR-655-3p in peripheral blood of patients with RRMS undergoing treatment with fingolimod compared with healthy controls. We also compared the expression of these miRNAs between fingolimod responders and non-responders to determine their relevance with regard to response to fingolimod. Expression of miR-381-3p was significantly higher in responders than in controls (RE difference = 3.903, P = 0.005), while expression of miR-655-3p was significantly lower in both responders and non-responders compared with controls (RE difference = -1.03, P = 0.014; RE difference = -1.41, P < 0.0001, respectively). No difference was found in the expression of other miRNAs between study subgroups. In addition, there was no significant difference in the expression of any miRNA between responders and non-responders. Although there were significant pairwise correlations between expression levels of all of the assessed miRNAs in controls, MS patients exhibited differences in correlation patterns. Expression of miR-381-3p was correlated with age in responders. However, expression of other miRNAs did not correlate with age in any study subgroup. The current study indicates a possible role for miR-655-3p and miR-381-3p in the pathogenesis of MS or possible effects of fingolimod on the expression of these miRNAs. Future studies are needed to verify these results in larger patient populations.

Cost-Effectiveness of Natalizumab Compared With Fingolimod for Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis Treatment in Colombia.

OBJECTIVES: Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a degenerative neurological disorder. Treatment aims to avoid relapses and disability progression. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of natalizumab compared with fingolimod for treating highly active relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS) patients from the Colombian third-party payer perspective. METHODS: We used a Markov economic model from the perspective of the Colombian healthcare system to estimate the cost-effectiveness of natalizumab compared with fingolimod for RRMS with high disease activity or failure of interferons as first-line therapy. This model was centered on disability progression and relapses. We considered a 5-year time horizon with a 5% discount rate. We included only direct medical costs. Local experts were consulted to obtain resource utilization estimates, and local standardized costing methodologies and sources were used. Outcome was considered in terms of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Utilities were extracted or calculated from the literature. Transition probabilities were calculated from available efficacy and safety information (1 USD = 3050.98 COP). RESULTS: Natalizumab showed lower total costs (USD 80 024 vs USD 98 137) and higher QALY yield (3.01 vs 2.94) than fingolimod, dominating it (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio = -$1861). Univariate sensitivity analysis showcased the relevance of the measures of effect on disability progression for natalizumab on model results. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis replicated base-case results in most simulations. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that natalizumab dominated fingolimod with lower costs and higher QALYs in patients with high-activity RRMS. These results are consistent with previous published international literature.