Dimethyl fumarate is associated with lower rates of infection and lower infection-related healthcare costs when compared with ocrelizumab.

BACKGROUND: Infections in people with multiple sclerosis (PwMS) may have a detrimental effect on disease progression, risk of hospitalization, and healthcare resource utilization (HRU). The infection risk and HRU costs may vary between disease-modifying therapies (DMTs); however, the individual risks and differences associated with DMTs are not well characterized. Some DMTs may increase the risk for infections in PwMS; however, previous studies have reported an intact humoral immune response in dimethyl fumarate (DMF)-treated patients. The objective was to compare infection-related HRU and healthcare costs (HCCs) between PwMS treated with DMF or ocrelizumab (OCR). METHODS: Eligible patients were identified from the Optum US claims database between April 2017 and September 2020 (DMF n = 1429; OCR n = 3170). Patients were followed from index date to first occurrence of: (1) end of study, (2) end of insurance eligibility, (3) discontinuation of index DMT, or (4) switch from index DMT to another DMT. Outcomes were annualized rate of infection encounters (defined as infection encounters [n] during follow-up window / days followed [n] × 365); annualized infection-related HCCs (defined as aggregated costs of infection encounters during follow-up window / days followed [n] × 365); location-specific infections, and overall infection-related events. Propensity score matching (PSM) 1:1 method was used; PS was calculated via logistic regression for probability of DMF treatment conditional on demographics and comorbidities. Mean differences (MD) were reported for infection encounter measures. RESULTS: After PSM, DMF and OCR cohorts (n = 1094 in each cohort) were balanced based on baseline characteristics (standardized MD of adjusted baseline characteristics <0.1). Mean (standard deviation) follow-up was 296 (244) days for DMF patients and 297 (243) for OCR patients. DMF patients experienced lower annualized rates of overall infection encounters vs OCR patients (MD -0.51 [95% confidence interval (CI): -0.92 to -0.11], p = 0.01). When stratified by type of infection encounter, DMF patients experienced significantly lower annualized rates of outpatient (MD [95% CI]: -0.44 [-0.80 to -0.08], p = 0.02) and inpatient/hospitalization infection encounters (-0.08 [-0.14 to -0.02], p<0.01) vs OCR patients. A trend towards a shorter duration of infection-related hospitalization in the DMF vs the OCR group was observed (MD [95% CI]: -2.20 [-4.73 to 0.26] days, p = 0.08). The most common infection types in both DMT groups were urinary tract infections, sepsis, and pneumonia. DMF patients experienced lower annualized infection-related HCCs (MD [95% CI]: -$3642 [-$6380 to -$904], p < 0.01) vs OCR patients, which were driven largely by infection-related hospitalization costs (-$3639 [-$6019 to -$1259], p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: DMF-treated patients PS-matched with OCR patients experienced lower annualized rates of infection encounters and lower infection-related HCCs.

Support Group Participation: Effect on Perceptions of Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Sclerosis.

BACKGROUND: Patients newly diagnosed as having multiple sclerosis (MS) face an overwhelming number of questions about how it will affect their lives. Participation in a support group is one way to obtain information and receive support from others. However, existing support groups are often attended by patients with significant disability, resulting in newly diagnosed patients being hesitant to return. METHODS: This qualitative pilot study explored perceptions of patients with newly diagnosed MS before and after participation in two monthly meetings. A support group was conducted each month using nursing staff, a physician, and a social worker. Prior to the first meeting, participants were asked to complete a questionnaire with open-ended questions to share their thoughts about how MS may affect their lives. After the two meetings, they were asked to complete the same questionnaire again. RESULTS: Eight themes were identified: uncertain disease course; insecure future; physical, emotional, and cognitive impacts; effect on relationships with family and/or spouse/significant other; ability to develop future relationship with significant other; impact on career plans; impact on ability to achieve future goals; and impact on ability to care for self and family. Five of six participants who attended both meetings and one of four who attended only the first meeting expressed a change in their perception of how MS may affect their lives. CONCLUSIONS: A support group dedicated exclusively to newly diagnosed patients may provide an opportunity for patients to experience a change in perceptions of MS.