RESUMO
Correction to: European Review for Medical and Pharmacological Sciences 2024; 28 (1): 411-418. DOI: 10.26355/eurrev_202401_34930-published online on January 16, 2024. After publication, the authors have applied some corrections to the galley proof: ⢠In the Patients and Methods section of the abstract, "National Health System" is corrected to "National Health Service". ⢠In the Conclusions section of the abstract, "SC PEG-IFN-ß-1a and IFN- ß-1a" is corrected to "PEG-IFN-ß-1a and SC IFN-ß-1a". ⢠In the Population section, the study period "January 1st 2015 to December 31st 2019" was not reported; therefore, this specification has been added to the text. ⢠The legend of Figure 1 was wrongly reported as the same as Table I. The correct title of Figure 1 is "Study flow diagram". ⢠Under Tables I, II, and III, "interferon beta 1a IFN-ß-1a" is corrected to "interferon beta 1a (IFN-ß-1a)". ⢠In Table III, "CS Glatiramer acetate" is corrected to "SC Glatiramer acetate". ⢠In the Conclusions section, "SC IFN-ß-1a SC" is corrected to "SC IFN-ß-1a". ⢠The funding section has been amended as follows: "This study was sponsored by Biogen Italia (Milan, Italy)." There are amendments to this paper. The Publisher apologizes for any inconvenience this may cause. https://www.europeanreview.org/article/34930.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Peginterferon ß-1a (PEG-IFN-ß-1a) is the most recent interferon beta formulation approved for treating relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). We aim to describe the real-world utilization of PEG-IFN-ß-1a in RRMS and compare it with other injectable disease-modifying therapies (DMTs). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this population-based study, we used 2015-2019 routinely collected healthcare data of the Campania region of Italy from National Healthcare System DMT prescriptions, inpatient and outpatient clinical records of hospitals in Campania, and the Federico II University MS clinical registry for a subset of patients. We included individuals with RRMS receiving new prescriptions of PEG-IFN-ß-1a [n=281; age = 38.8±12.3 years; females=70.5%; disease duration = 8.4±8.3 years; Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) at baseline=2.0 (1.0-6.5)], glatiramer acetate [n=751; age = 46.0±11.4 years; females=67.1%; disease duration = 9.8±8.2 years; EDSS=4.0 (1.5-8.5)], and subcutaneous (SC) IFN-ß-1a [n=1,226; age = 39.7±11.7 years; females=66.5%; disease duration = 8.2±6.5 years; EDSS 2.5 (1.5-6.5)]. Adherence [medication possession ratio (MPR)], escalation to more effective DMTs, hospitalization rates and costs were measured. We used mixed-effect linear regression models (for adherence, hospitalization rates and costs) and Cox regression models (for escalation) to assess differences between PEG-IFN-ß-1a (statistical reference), glatiramer acetate, and SC IFN-ß-1a. All models included age, sex, previous treatment/untreated, year of treatment initiation, treatment duration, and adherence as covariates. RESULTS: Adherence was lower in glatiramer acetate (MPR = 0.91±0.1; Coeff=-0.11; p<0.01), and IFN-ß-1a (MPR = 0.92±0.1; Coeff=-0.08; p<0.01), compared with PEG-IFN-ß-1a (MPR = 1.01±0.1). The probability of escalating to more effective DMTs was higher for glatiramer acetate (14.9%; HR=4.09; p<0.01) and IFN-ß-1a (9.1%; HR=3.35; p=0.01), compared with PEG-IFN-ß-1a (4.9%). No differences in annualized hospitalization rates were identified between glatiramer acetate [annualized hospitalization rates (AHR) = 0.05±0.30; Coeff=0.02; p=0.31), IFN-ß-1a (AHR = 0.02±0.21; Coeff=0.01; p=0.97], and PEG-IFN-ß-1a (AHR = 0.02±0.24); however, monthly costs for MS admissions were higher for glatiramer acetate (49.45±195.27; Coeff=-29.89; p=0.03), compared with IFN-ß-1a (29.42±47.83; Coeff=6.79; p=0.61), and PEG-IFN-ß-1a (23.91±43.90). CONCLUSIONS: SC PEG-IFN-ß-1a and IFN-ß-1a were used in relatively similar populations, while glatiramer acetate was preferred in older and more disabled patients. PEG-IFN-ß-1a was associated with higher adherence and lower escalation rates toward more effective (and costly) DMTs.
